Home/Federal/Federal Register/2024-30852

Rule2024-30852

Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Central Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps

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

January 7, 2025

Effective

February 6, 2025

Issuing agencies

Energy Department

Abstract

This final rule amends the Federal test procedure for central air conditioners and heat pumps ("CAC/HPs") to incorporate by reference the latest versions of the applicable industry standards. Specifically, DOE is incorporating by reference the latest version of the relevant industry consensus test standard, AHRI 210/240-2024 (I-P) for the current test procedure for CAC/HPs ("appendix M1") for measuring the current cooling and heating metrics--seasonal energy efficiency ratio 2 ("SEER2") and heating seasonal performance factor 2 ("HSPF2"). DOE is incorporating by reference the new industry consensus test standard, AHRI 1600-2024 (I-P), for a new test procedure ("appendix M2") for CAC/HPs that adopts two new metrics--seasonal cooling and off-mode rating efficiency ("SCORE") and seasonal heating and off-mode rating efficiency ("SHORE"). Testing to the SCORE and SHORE metrics would not be required until such time as compliance is required with any amended energy conservation standard based on the new metrics. Additionally, DOE is amending certain provisions of DOE's regulations related to representations and enforcement for CAC/HPs.

Full Text

<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 90 Issue 4 (Tuesday, January 7, 2025)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 4 (Tuesday, January 7, 2025)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 1224-1285]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2024-30852]

[[Page 1223]]

Vol. 90

Tuesday,

No. 4

January 7, 2025

Part II

Department of Energy

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

10 CFR Parts 429 and 430

Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Central Air
Conditioners and Heat Pumps; Final Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 90 , No. 4 / Tuesday, January 7, 2025 / Rules
and Regulations

[[Page 1224]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

10 CFR Parts 429 and 430

[EERE-2022-BT-TP-0028]
RIN 1904-AF49

Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Central Air
Conditioners and Heat Pumps

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This final rule amends the Federal test procedure for central
air conditioners and heat pumps (``CAC/HPs'') to incorporate by
reference the latest versions of the applicable industry standards.
Specifically, DOE is incorporating by reference the latest version of
the relevant industry consensus test standard, AHRI 210/240-2024 (I-P)
for the current test procedure for CAC/HPs (``appendix M1'') for
measuring the current cooling and heating metrics--seasonal energy
efficiency ratio 2 (``SEER2'') and heating seasonal performance factor
2 (``HSPF2''). DOE is incorporating by reference the new industry
consensus test standard, AHRI 1600-2024 (I-P), for a new test procedure
(``appendix M2'') for CAC/HPs that adopts two new metrics--seasonal
cooling and off-mode rating efficiency (``SCORE'') and seasonal heating
and off-mode rating efficiency (``SHORE''). Testing to the SCORE and
SHORE metrics would not be required until such time as compliance is
required with any amended energy conservation standard based on the new
metrics. Additionally, DOE is amending certain provisions of DOE's
regulations related to representations and enforcement for CAC/HPs.

DATES: The effective date of this rule is February 6, 2025. The
amendments will be mandatory for product testing starting July 7, 2025.
Manufacturers will be required to use the amended test procedure until
the compliance date of any final rule establishing amended energy
conservation standards based on the newly established test procedure.
At such time, manufacturers will be required to begin using the newly
established test procedure.
The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
this rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register on
February 6, 2025.

ADDRESSES: The docket, which includes Federal Register notices, public
meeting attendee lists and transcripts, 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 those containing information that is exempt from
public disclosure.
A link to the docket web page can be found at <a href="http://www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2022-BT-TP-0028">www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2022-BT-TP-0028</a>. The docket web page contains instructions
on how to access all documents, including public comments, in the
docket.
For further information on how to review the docket contact the
Appliance and Equipment Standards Program staff at (202) 287-1445 or by
email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e4a59494888d858a8781b790858a8085968097b5918197908d8b8a97a48181ca808b81ca838b92">[email&#160;protected]</a>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dr. Pradeep Prathibha, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Office, EE-5B,
1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone:
(240) 255-0630. Email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#59182929353038373a3c0a2d38373d382b3d2a082c3c2a2d3036372a193c3c773d363c773e362f">[email&#160;protected]</a>.
Mr. Pete Cochran, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General
Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121.
Telephone: (202) 586-4798. Email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#ef9f8a9b8a9dc18c808c879d8e81af879ec18b808ac1888099">[email&#160;protected]</a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE maintains previously approved
incorporations by reference and incorporates by reference the following
industry standards into 10 CFR parts 429 and 430:
AHRI Standard 210/240-2024 (I-P), Performance Rating of Unitary
Air-conditioning and Air-source Heat Pump Equipment, copyright 2024
(``AHRI 210/240-2024'').
AHRI Standard 1600-2024 (I-P), Performance Rating of Unitary Air-
conditioning and Air-source Heat Pump Equipment, copyright 2024 (``AHRI
1600-2024'').
Copies of AHRI 210/240-2024 and AHRI 1600-2024 can be obtained from
the Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI), 2311
Wilson Blvd., Suite 400, Arlington, VA 22201, (703) 524-8800, or online
at: <a href="http://www.ahrinet.org">www.ahrinet.org</a>.
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2016, Method of Testing for Rating Room Air
Conditioners, Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners, and Packaged Terminal
Heat Pumps for Cooling and Heating Capacity, ANSI approved November 1,
2016 (``ANSI/ASHRAE 16'').
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 37-2009, Methods of Testing for Rating
Electrically Driven Unitary Air-Conditioning and Heat Pump Equipment,
ANSI-approved June 25, 2009 (``ASHRAE 37-2009'').
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 116-2010, Methods of Testing for Rating
Seasonal Efficiency of Unitary Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps, ANSI
approved February 24, 2010 (``ANSI/ASHRAE 116-2010'').
Copies of ANSI/ASHRAE 16, ASHRAE 37-2009, and ANSI/ASHRAE 116-2010
can be purchased from the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating,
and Air-Conditioning Engineers (``ASHRAE'') website at <a href="http://www.ashrae.org/resources--publications">www.ashrae.org/resources--publications</a>.
See section IV.N of this document for further discussion of these
standards.

Table of Contents

I. Authority and Background
A. Authority
B. Background
II. Synopsis of the Final Rule
III. Discussion
A. Scope of Applicability
B. Updates to Industry Standards
1. AHRI 210/240-2024
2. AHRI 1600-2024
3. ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009
4. ANSI/ASHRAE 16-2016
5. ANSI/ASHRAE 116-2010
C. Revised CAC/HP Test Procedure
D. Efficiency Metrics
1. Metrics Applicable to Appendix M1
2. Metrics Applicable to Appendix M2
E. Near-Term Changes in the CAC/HP Test Procedure
1. Controls Verification Procedure for Variable Speed Systems
2. Low-Temperature Heating Performance
3. Cut-Out and Cut-In Temperature Verification
4. Low-Static Single-Split Blower-Coil System Definition and
Testing Provisions
5. Mandatory Constant Circulation Systems
6. Provisions for Outdoor Units With No Match
7. Inlet and Outlet Duct Configurations
8. Heat Comfort Controllers
F. Long-Term Changes in the CAC Test Procedure
1. Power Consumption of Auxiliary Components
2. Impact of Defrost on Performance
3. Updates to Building Load Lines and Temperature Bin Hours
4. Default Fan Power Coefficients for Coil-Only Systems
5. Air Flow Limits To Address Inadequate Dehumidification
G. General Comments Received in Response to the April 2024 NOPR
H. Represented Values
1. Represented Values for the Federal Trade Commission
2. Off-Mode Power
3. AEDM Tolerance for SCORE and SHORE
4. Removal of the AEDM Exception for Split-System CAC/HPs
I. Enforcement Provisions

[[Page 1225]]

1. Verifying Cut-Out and Cut-In Temperatures
2. Controls Verification Procedure
J. Test Procedure Costs and Impacts
1. Appendix M1
2. Appendix M2
K. Effective and Compliance Dates
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 14094
B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
1. Descriptions of Reasons for Action
2. Objectives of, and Legal Basis for, Rule
3. Description and Estimate of Small Entities Regulated
4. Description and Estimate of Compliance Requirements
5. Duplication, Overlap, and Conflict With Other Rules and
Regulations
1. Certification Statement
C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
F. Review Under Executive Order 12988
G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
H. Review Under the Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act, 1999
I. Review Under Executive Order 12630
J. Review Under Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act, 2001
K. Review Under Executive Order 13211
L. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration
Act of 1974
M. Congressional Notification
N. Description of Materials Incorporated by Reference
V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

I. Authority and Background

Central air conditioners (``CACs'') and central air conditioning
heat pumps (``HPs'') (collectively, ``CAC/HPs'') are included in the
list of ``covered products'' for which the U.S. Department of Energy
(``DOE'') is authorized to establish and amend energy conservation
standards and test procedures. (42 U.S.C. 6292 (a)(3)) DOE's test
procedure for CAC/HPs is currently prescribed at 10 CFR part 430,
subpart B, appendix M1 (``appendix M1''). The following sections
discuss DOE's authority to establish and amend the test procedure for
CAC/HPs and relevant background information regarding DOE's
consideration of the test procedure for this product.

A. Authority

The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, Pub. L. 94-163, as amended
(``EPCA''),\1\ authorizes DOE to regulate the energy efficiency of a
number of consumer products and certain industrial equipment. (42
U.S.C. 6291-6317, as codified) Title III, Part B of EPCA \2\
established the Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products Other
Than Automobiles, which sets forth a variety of provisions designed to
improve energy efficiency. These products include CAC/HPs, the subject
of this document. (42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(3))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

The energy conservation program under EPCA consists essentially of
four parts: (1) testing, (2) labeling, (3) Federal energy conservation
standards, and (4) certification and enforcement procedures. Relevant
provisions of EPCA specifically include definitions (42 U.S.C. 6291),
test procedures (42 U.S.C. 6293), labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6294),
energy conservation standards (42 U.S.C. 6295), and the authority to
require information and reports from manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6296).
The Federal testing requirements consist of test procedures that
manufacturers of covered products must use as the basis for: (1)
certifying to DOE that their products comply with the applicable energy
conservation standards adopted under EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6295(s)), and (2)
making other representations about the efficiency of those products (42
U.S.C. 6293(c)). Similarly, DOE must use these test procedures to
determine whether the products comply with any relevant standards
promulgated under EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6295(s))
Federal energy efficiency requirements for covered products
established under EPCA generally supersede State laws and regulations
concerning energy conservation testing, labeling, and standards. (42
U.S.C. 6297) DOE may, however, grant waivers of Federal preemption for
particular State laws or regulations, in accordance with the procedures
and other provisions of EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6297(d))
Under 42 U.S.C. 6293, EPCA sets forth the criteria and procedures
DOE must follow when prescribing or amending test procedures for
covered products. EPCA requires that any test procedures prescribed or
amended under this section shall be reasonably designed to produce test
results which measure energy efficiency, energy use or estimated annual
operating cost of a covered product during a representative average use
cycle (as determined by the Secretary) or period of use and shall not
be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3))
EPCA also requires that, at least once every seven years, DOE
evaluate test procedures for each type of covered product, including
CAC/HPs, to determine whether amended test procedures would more
accurately or fully comply with the requirements for the test
procedures to not be unduly burdensome to conduct and be reasonably
designed to produce test results that reflect energy efficiency, energy
use, and estimated operating costs during a representative average use
cycle or period of use. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(1)(A))
If the Secretary determines, on her own behalf or in response to a
petition by any interested person, that a test procedure should be
prescribed or amended, the Secretary shall promptly publish in the
Federal Register proposed test procedures and afford interested persons
an opportunity to present oral and written data, views, and arguments
with respect to such procedures. The comment period on a proposed rule
to amend a test procedure shall be at least 60 days and may not exceed
270 days. In prescribing or amending a test procedure, the Secretary
shall take into account such information as the Secretary determines
relevant to such procedure, including technological developments
relating to energy use or energy efficiency of the type (or class) of
covered products involved. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(2)). If DOE determines
that test procedure revisions are not appropriate, DOE must publish its
determination not to amend the test procedures.
DOE's regulations at 10 CFR 430.27 provide that any interested
person may seek a waiver from the test procedure requirements if
certain conditions are met. A waiver requires manufacturers to use an
alternate test procedure in situations in which the DOE test procedure
cannot be used to test the product or equipment, or use of the DOE test
procedure would generate unrepresentative results. 10 CFR 430.27(a)(1).
DOE's regulations at 10 CFR 430.27(l) require that as soon as
practicable after the granting of any waiver, DOE will publish in the
Federal Register a notice of proposed rulemaking (``NOPR'') to amend
its regulations so as to eliminate any need for the continuation of
such waiver. As soon thereafter as practicable, DOE will publish in the
Federal Register a final rule. 10 CFR 430.27(l).
In addition, EPCA requires that DOE amend its test procedures for
all covered products to integrate measures of standby mode and off-mode
energy consumption into the overall energy efficiency, energy
consumption, or other

[[Page 1226]]

energy descriptor, unless the current test procedure already
incorporates the standby mode and off-mode energy consumption, or if
such integration is technically infeasible. (42 U.S.C.
6295(gg)(2)(A)(i)-(ii)) If an integrated test procedure is technically
infeasible, DOE must prescribe separate standby mode and off-mode
energy use test procedures for the covered product, if a separate test
is technically feasible. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A)(ii)) Any such
amendment must consider the most current versions of the International
Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) Standard 62301 \3\ and IEC Standard
62087 \4\ as applicable. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A)) DOE is publishing
this final rule in satisfaction of the seven-year review requirement
specified in EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(1)(A))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\3\ IEC 62301, Household electrical appliances--Measurement of
standby power (Edition 2.0, 2011-01).
\4\ IEC 62087, Audio, video and related equipment--Methods of
measurement for power consumption (Edition 1.0, Parts 1-6: 2015,
Part 7: 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Background

On April 5, 2024, DOE published in the Federal Register a notice of
proposed rulemaking (``NOPR'') (``April 2024 NOPR'') proposing to
update the Federal test procedure for CAC/HPs by: (1) incorporating by
reference at appendix M1 the most recent draft version of the AHRI
Standard 210/240 industry test procedure, AHRI 210/240-202X Draft, for
measuring SEER2 and HSPF2; and (2) establishing a new test procedure at
10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix M2 (``appendix M2'') that
references the draft new industry test procedure, AHRI 1600-202X Draft,
for measuring new efficiency metrics, seasonal cooling and off mode
rating efficiency (``SCORE''), and seasonal heating and off mode rating
efficiency (``SHORE''). 89 FR 24206. Copies of the AHRI drafts were
added to the docket for this rulemaking for review by interested
parties.5 6 As stated in the April 2024 NOPR, if AHRI 210/
240-202X Draft and AHRI 1600-202X Draft were to be finalized and
formally adopted, DOE's intention would be to reference the final
published version of AHRI 210/240 and AHRI 1600 in DOE's subsequent
test procedure final rule. 89 FR 24206, 24209. DOE held a public
meeting webinar on April 25, 2024 to discuss the proposed amendments to
the CAC/HP test procedure presented in the April 2024 NOPR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\5\ The AHRI 210/240-202X Draft test procedure is available in
the docket for this rulemaking at: <a href="http://www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2022-BT-TP-0028-0017">www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2022-BT-TP-0028-0017</a>.
\6\ The AHRI 1600-202X Draft test procedure is available in the
docket for this rulemaking at: <a href="http://www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2022-BT-TP-0028-0018">www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2022-BT-TP-0028-0018</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

DOE received comments in response to the April 2024 NOPR from the
interested parties listed in table I.1.

Table I-1--List of Commenters With Written Submissions in Response to the April 2024 NOPR
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reference in this
Commenter(s) final rule Comment No. in the docket Commenter type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air-Conditioning, Heating, and AHRI.................. 25....................... Trade Association.
Refrigeration Institute.
Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San CA IOUs............... 32....................... Utilities.
Diego Gas and Electric, and Southern
California Edison; collectively, the
California Investor-Owned Utilities.
Carrier Global Corporation........... Carrier............... 29....................... Manufacturer.
Copeland LP.......................... Copeland.............. 31....................... Manufacturer.
Daikin Comfort Technologies North Daikin................ 36 and 40................ Manufacturer.
America Inc.
GE Appliances........................ GE Appliances......... 37....................... Manufacturer.
Heating, Air-conditioning & HARDI................. 26....................... Trade Association.
Refrigeration Distributors
International.
Johnson Controls..................... JCI................... 35....................... Manufacturer.
Appliance Standards Awareness Joint Advocates....... 30....................... Efficiency
Project, National Consumer Law Organization,
Center, and New York State Energy Consumer Advocacy
Research and Development Authority. Organization, and
State Agency.
Keith Rice........................... Keith Rice............ 33....................... HVAC R&D Engineer.
Lennox International Inc............. Lennox................ 24....................... Manufacturer.
LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc........... LG.................... 38....................... Manufacturer.
Mitsubishi Electric US............... Mitsubishi............ 28....................... Manufacturer.
National Comfort Products............ NCP................... 27....................... Manufacturer.
Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance. NEEA.................. 39....................... Efficiency
Organization.
Rheem Manufacturing Company.......... Rheem................. 34....................... Manufacturer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A parenthetical reference at the end of a comment quotation or
paraphrase provides the location of the item in the public record.\7\
To the extent that interested parties have provided written comments
that are substantively consistent with any oral comments provided
during the April 25, 2024 public meeting, DOE cites the written
comments throughout this final rule. DOE did not identify any oral
comments provided during the April 25, 2024, public meeting that are
not substantively addressed by written comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\7\ The parenthetical reference provides a reference for
information located in the docket of DOE's rulemaking to develop
test procedures for CAC/HPs. (Docket No. EERE-2022-BT-TP-0028, which
is maintained at: <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a>). The references are arranged
as follows: (commenter name, comment docket ID number at page of
that document).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In May 2024, AHRI finalized AHRI 210/240-202X Draft and AHRI 1600-
202X Draft without substantial change, and published AHRI Standard 210/
240-2024, ``Performance Rating of Unitary Air-conditioning and Air-
source Heat Pump Equipment'' (``AHRI 210/240-2024''), and AHRI Standard
1600-2024, ``Performance Rating of Unitary Air-conditioning and Air-
source Heat Pump Equipment'' (``AHRI 1600-2024''), respectively.

II. Synopsis of the Final Rule

In this final rule, DOE is updating its regulations for CAC/HPs by:
(1) amending appendix M1 to incorporate by reference the latest
industry standard, AHRI 210/240-2024, while maintaining the current
efficiency metrics EER2, SEER2 and HSPF2; and (2) establishing a new
appendix M2 that references the new industry test

[[Page 1227]]

procedure, AHRI 1600-2024, for measuring new efficiency metrics, EER,
SCORE and SHORE. Appendix M2 would be the applicable test method for
CAC/HPs for any standards denominated in terms of SCORE and SHORE. Use
of appendix M2 would not be required until such time as compliance is
required with any amended energy conservation standard based on the new
metrics, should DOE adopt such standards. After the date on which
compliance with appendix M2 would be required, appendix M1 would no
longer be required as part of the Federal test procedure. DOE is also
amending certain provisions within DOE's regulations for representation
and enforcement consistent with the proposed test procedure amendments.
Table II.1 summarizes the adopted changes to the amended appendix
M1 and the new appendix M2 test procedures, as well as the reason for
the adopted change.

Table II-1--Summary of Changes in Amended Appendix M1 and New Appendix M2 Test Procedures Relative to Current
Test Procedure
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix M1 test Appendix M2 test
DOE test procedure prior to amendment procedure procedure Attribution
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Incorporates by reference AHRI 210/ Incorporates by Incorporates by Updates to the
240-2008. reference AHRI 210/240- reference AHRI 1600- applicable industry
2024. 2024. test procedures.
Includes provisions for determining Maintains provisions Includes provisions for Updates to the
SEER2, HSPF2, EER2, and PW,OFF. for determining SEER2, determining SCORE and applicable industry
HPSF2, EER2, and SHORE and maintains test procedures.
PW,OFF. provisions for
determining EER (same
as EER2).
Includes certain CAC/HP provisions Includes provisions to Includes provisions to Improve
regarding determination of remove the alternative remove the AEDM representativeness of
represented values in 10 CFR 429.16. efficiency exception for split- test procedure.
determination method systems, to extend the
(``AEDM'') exception AEDM tolerance
for split-systems in requirement to SCORE
10 CFR 429.16. and SHORE, and to no
longer require
representations of the
PW,OFF metric in 10
CFR 429.16.
Does not include certain CAC/HP- Includes CAC/HP- Includes CAC/HP- Clarify how DOE will
specific enforcement provisions in specific enforcement specific enforcement conduct enforcement
10 CFR 429.134(k). provisions regarding provisions regarding testing.
verification of cut- verification of cut-
out and cut-in out and cut-in
temperatures and a temperatures and a
controls verification controls verification
procedure. procedure.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DOE has determined that the amendments to the CAC/HP test
procedures in appendix M1 and newly established appendix M2 would not
be unduly burdensome to conduct. Furthermore, DOE has determined that
the amendments to appendix M1 would not alter the measured efficiency
of CAC/HPs or require retesting or recertification solely as a result
of DOE's adoption of the amendments to the test procedure.
Additionally, DOE has determined that the amendments to appendix M1
would not increase the cost of testing. Representations of energy use
or energy efficiency would be required to be based on testing in
accordance with the amended test procedure in appendix M1 beginning 180
days after the date of publication of the test procedure final rule in
the Federal Register.
DOE has determined, however, that new appendix M2 would alter the
measured efficiency of CAC/HPs, in part because the amended test
procedure would adopt different energy efficiency metrics than in the
current test procedure. Additionally, DOE has determined that testing
according to the new appendix M2 would not increase the cost of testing
as compared to appendix M1. Cost estimates are discussed in section
III.J of this document. As discussed, use of appendix M2 would not be
required until the compliance date of amended energy conservation
standards denominated in terms of SCORE and SHORE, should DOE adopt
such standards.
The amendments to representation requirements in 10 CFR 429.16
would not be required until 180 days after publication in the Federal
Register of this final rule.
Discussion of DOE's proposed actions are addressed in further
detail in section III of this final rule.

III. Discussion

A. Scope of Applicability

This rulemaking applies to CAC/HPs. DOE defines the term central
air conditioner or central air conditioner heat pump to mean a product,
other than a packaged terminal air conditioner or packaged terminal
heat pump, single-phase single-package vertical air conditioner with
cooling capacity less than 65,000 British thermal units (``Btu'') per
hour (``Btu/h''), single-phase single-package vertical heat pump with
cooling capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h, computer room air conditioner,
or unitary dedicated outdoor air system, as these equipment categories
are defined at 10 CFR 431.92, which is powered by single-phase electric
current, air-cooled, rated below 65,000 Btu/h, not contained within the
same cabinet as a furnace, the rated capacity of which is above 225,000
Btu/h, and is a heat pump or a cooling unit only. A central air
conditioner or central air conditioning heat pump may consist of: a
single-package unit; an outdoor unit and one or more indoor units; an
indoor unit only; or an outdoor unit with no match. In the case of an
indoor unit only or an outdoor unit with no match, the unit must be
tested and rated as a system (combination of both an indoor and an
outdoor unit). For all central air conditioner and central air
conditioning heat pump-related definitions, see appendix M or M1 of
subpart B of this part. 10 CFR 430.2.
Consistent with the April 2024 NOPR, DOE is not proposing any
changes to the CAC/HP definition. However, DOE notes that the last
sentence in the CAC/HP definition includes references to see additional
definitions in appendices M and M1. As noted in section II, in this
final rule, DOE is incorporating by reference the latest industry
standards, AHRI 210/240-2024 and AHRI 1600-2024, including the relevant
definitions

[[Page 1228]]

in these standards. Therefore, references to appendices M and M1 are no
longer relevant in the CAC/HP definition. To prevent confusion, DOE is
removing the last sentence in the definition that contains these
references. 10 CFR 430.2.
The current scope of the CACs/HP test procedure includes:
(a) Split-system air conditioners, including single-split, multi-
head mini-split, multi-split (including variable refrigerant flow
(``VRF'')), and multi-circuit systems;
(b) Split-system heat pumps, including single-split, multi-head
mini-split, multi-split (including VRF), and multi-circuit systems;
(c) Single-package air conditioners;
(d) Single-package heat pumps;
(e) Small-duct, high-velocity systems (including VRF);
(f) Space-constrained products--air conditioners; and
(g) Space-constrained products--heat pumps.
See section 1.1 of appendix M1.
DOE is not amending the scope of CACs/HPs covered by the test
procedure in appendix M1 or appendix M2.

B. Updates to Industry Standards

DOE is incorporating by reference AHRI 210/240-2024 and the
relevant standards it references as the basis for the updated appendix
M1 test procedure. Similarly, DOE is incorporating by reference AHRI
1600-2024 and the relevant standards it references as the basis for the
new appendix M2 test procedure. Incorporating each industry standard in
full as the basis for each respective appendix would enable DOE to
better harmonize with the industry standard and eliminate manufacturer
burden in certifying with separate test procedures. The following
sections discuss the referenced standards for appendices M1 and M2.
1. AHRI 210/240-2024
In the April 2024 NOPR, DOE noted that AHRI and other relevant
stakeholders, including DOE, worked to develop a revised AHRI 210/240
standard, AHRI 210/240-202X Draft, that included updates to address
issues pertaining to the CAC/HP test procedure with broad stakeholder
consensus. 89 FR 24206, 24211-24212. DOE proposed to amend its test
procedure for CAC/HPs at appendix M1 by incorporating by reference AHRI
210/240-202X Draft. Id. Because AHRI 210/240-202X Draft was in draft
form at the time of the publication of the April 2024 NOPR, DOE noted
that it intended to update its incorporation by reference to the final
published version of AHRI 210/240-202X Draft in the final rule, unless
the draft version is not finalized before the final rule or there are
substantive changes between the draft and published versions, in which
case DOE may adopt the substance of the AHRI 210/240-202X Draft or
provide additional opportunity for comment on the substantive changes
to the updated industry consensus standard. Id. In May 2024, AHRI
published the finalized AHRI 210/240 standard, AHRI 210/240-2024, which
did not include any significant deviations from AHRI 210/240-202X
Draft.
AHRI, the CA IOUs, Carrier, Daikin, GE Appliances, JCI, Lennox, and
NEEA were generally supportive of DOE`s proposal on updating appendix
M1 by adopting the finalized AHRI 210/240 standard. (AHRI, No. 25 at p.
3; Carrier, No. 29 at p. 4; CA IOUs, No. 32 at p. 1; Daikin, No. 36 at
p. 1; GE Appliances, No. 37 at pp. 4-5; JCI, No. 35 at p. 1; Lennox,
No. 24 at p. 3; NEEA, No. 39 at p. 2) AHRI commented that it supports
the adoption of AHRI 210/240-2024 as a revised appendix M1, but with
minimal additions and some exclusions, and will be publishing an
addendum to AHRI 210/240-2024 that will include the aforementioned
minimal additions that DOE established in the April 2024 NOPR,
including revision to the definition of outdoor unit with no match.
(AHRI, No. 25 at p. 3)
The Joint Advocates and CA IOUs encouraged DOE to adopt AHRI 210/
240-2024 in the new CAC/HP test procedure final rule as soon as
possible. (Joint Advocates, No. 30 at p. 1; CA IOUs, No. 32 at p. 1)
Carrier stated that it supports the incorporation by reference of AHRI
210/240-2024 into a revised appendix M1, but with some recommendations.
(Carrier, No. 29 at p. 4) Rheem commented that even though it supported
the adoption of the consensus AHRI 210/240-2024 in the updated Appendix
M1, it was concerned that the new versions of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 37-
2009 \8\ and ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2016 \9\ with major changes, which
are to be published in the near future, are not currently referenced in
AHRI 210/240-2024. (Rheem, No. 34 at p. 3) Specifically, Rheem pointed
out that once the new versions of the aforementioned ASHRAE standards
are published, AHRI 210/240-2024 should be revised to incorporate
references to the revised standards, and subsequently, DOE should
update appendix M1 to incorporate the revised AHRI 210/240-2024 by
reference. (Id. at pp. 3-4) Rheem further commented that since AHRI
210/240-2024 cites sections of 10 CFR 429.16, and of appendix M1 to
subpart B of 10 CFR part 430, it should be revised to ensure that these
references to CFR are still appropriate, since DOE has proposed major
revisions to these sections from the CFR. (Id.) Rheem pointed to the
newly introduced enforcement provisions in 10 CFR 429.134(k), which
require calculation of average capacity (10 CFR
429.134(k)(4)(iii)(A)(1) and (2)) or time-averaged integrated (10 CFR
429.134(k)(4)(iii)(A)(3)) capacity and power consumption, and Rheem
suggested updates to appendix I of AHRI 210/240-2024 to state that
average capacity, average power consumption, time-averaged integrated
capacity, and time-integrated power consumption should be calculated
according to the appropriate sections of AHRI 210/240-2024 and ANSI/
ASHRAE 16, as applicable. (Id.) Rheem pointed out that table 8 of AHRI
210/240-2024, which lists the test conditions for CAC/HPs under test,
does not include the details on how to measure the compressor speed for
cooling full-speed tests (A2 and B2), and cooling minimum-speed tests
(B1, F1, G1, and I1) for variable-speed compressor units, as currently
specified in section 3.2.4(a) of appendix M1. (Id. at p. 4) Rheem
commented that the aforementioned details should be added as notes
under table 8 of AHRI 210/240-2024, after appropriate translations of
the test nomenclature.\10\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\8\ ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009 provides a method of test for many
categories of air-conditioning and heating products and equipment,
including CAC/HPs.
\9\ ANS/ASHRAE 16-2016 provides a method of test for rating room
air conditioners, packaged terminal air conditioners, and packaged
terminal heat pumps.
\10\ Currently, all full-speed cooling and heating mode tests in
appendix M1 are identified with ``2'' in the subscript of the
relevant test, whereas AHRI 210/240-202X and AHRI 1600-202X identify
them with the ``Full'' subscript. Similarly, all minimum-speed
cooling and heating mode tests in appendix M1 are identified with
``1'' in the subscript of the relevant test, whereas AHRI 210/240-
202X and AHRI 1600-202X identify them with the ``Low'' subscript.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In response to Rheem's comment, DOE notes that in the April 2024
NOPR, DOE proposed to incorporate by reference AHRI 210/240-202X draft
and the AHRI 1600-202X draft, at revised appendix M1 and new appendix
M2, respectively, while this final rule is updating these references to
the final drafts, AHRI 210/240-2024 and AHRI 1600-2024. DOE has
reviewed the finalized standards, AHRI 210/240-2024 and AHRI 1600-2024,
and has concluded that all current references to 10 CFR 429.16 in the
standards would

[[Page 1229]]

not require revision. Additionally, DOE clarifies that any further
updates to appendix I of the AHRI 210/240 and AHRI 1600 standards to
add the definitions of average capacity, average power consumption,
time-averaged integrated capacity, and time-integrated power
consumption will have to be initiated by AHRI, as part of an addendum.
DOE has determined that additional definitions are not necessary at
this time and notes that an updated appendix I to AHRI 210/240 and AHRI
1600 is not yet available for review; therefore, DOE is not adopting
additional definitions as recommended by Rheem at this time. Regarding
Rheem's comment on table 8 of AHRI 210/240-2024 lacking language from
section 3.2.4 (a) of the current appendix M1 for maintaining the same
full compressor speed for all full-speed cooling tests, and the same
minimum compressor speed for all minimum-speed cooling tests, DOE is
adding provisions in section 2 of the revised appendix M1 and section 2
of the new appendix M2, consistent with the existing requirement in
appendix M1, as follows:
For cooling mode tests of variable capacity systems, the compressor
shall operate at the same cooling full speed, measured by RPM of power
input frequency (Hz), for both A<INF>Full</INF> and B<INF>Full</INF>
tests. Additionally, the compressor shall operate at the same cooling
minimum speed, measured by RPM or power input frequency (Hz), for the
B<INF>Low</INF>, F<INF>Low</INF>, G<INF>Low</INF>, and I<INF>Low</INF>
tests.
As noted, in May 2024, AHRI published AHRI 210/240-2024, which does
not include any significant deviations from AHRI 210/240-202X Draft. As
such, the adoption of AHRI 210/240-2024 in this final rule is
consistent with the proposal to reference AHRI 210/240-202X Draft in
the April 2024 NOPR.
Therefore, DOE is amending its test procedure for CAC/HPs by
incorporating by reference AHRI 210/240-2024 for use in the new
appendix M1. Specifically, in the new test procedure for CAC/HPs at
appendix M1, DOE is adopting sections 3 (excluding 3.2.16, 3.2.20,
3.2.46, 3.2.51, 3.2.63, 3.2.78 and 3.2.79), 5 (excluding 5.1.6.2), 6.1-
6.3, and 6.6, and Appendices D, E, G, and K of AHRI 210/240-2024.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\11\ DOE notes that the substance of these provisions remains
the same as those proposed in the April 2024 NOPR, but AHRI did some
reorganization in moving from AHRI 210/240-202X Draft to AHRI 210/
240-2024. Consequently, the adopted section numbers cited here
differ from those presented in DOE's proposed rule. See 89 FR 24206,
24212.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Additionally, as proposed in the April 2024 NOPR, DOE is making
additions and deletions to the incorporations by reference for the CAC/
HP Federal test procedure (see 10 CFR 430.3) to align with the
references made within AHRI 210/240-2024. 89 FR 24206, 24212.
Currently, appendix M1 incorporates by reference: AMCA 210-
2007,\12\ AHRI 210/240-2008, AHRI 1230-2010,\13\ ASHRAE 23.1-2010,\14\
ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009, and ASHRAE 116-2010. 10 CFR 430.3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\12\ ANSI/AMCA 210-2007, ANSI/ASHRAE 51-2007, (``AMCA 210-
2007'') Laboratory Methods of Testing Fans for Certified Aerodynamic
Performance Rating, ANSI approved Aug. 17, 2007. A copy of AMCA 210-
2007 can be purchased from the Air Movement and Control Association
International Inc. (``AMCA'') website at <a href="http://www.amca.org/store/index.php">www.amca.org/store/index.php</a>.
\13\ ANSI/AHRI 1230-2010 with Addendum 2, (``AHRI 1230-2010''):
2010 Standard for Performance Rating of Variable Refrigerant Flow
(``VRF'') Multi-Split Air-Conditioning and Heat Pump Equipment, ANSI
approved Aug. 2, 2010. A copy of AHRI 1230-2010 can be obtained from
AHRI, 2111 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 500, Arlington, VA 22201, USA,
703-524-8800, or by going to <a href="http://www.ahrinet.org">www.ahrinet.org</a>.
\14\ ANSI/ASHRAE 23.1-2010, (``ASHRAE 23.1-2010''): Methods of
Testing for Rating the Performance of Positive Displacement
Refrigerant Compressors and Condensing Units that Operate at
Subcritical Temperatures of the Refrigerant, ANSI approved Jan. 28,
2010. A copy of ASHRAE 23.1-2010 can be obtained from the ASHRAE
website at <a href="http://www.ashrae.org/resources--publications">www.ashrae.org/resources--publications</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the amended test procedure at appendix M1, DOE is adding an
incorporation by reference to ANSI/ASHRAE 16-2016 and removing
incorporations by reference to AMCA 210-2007, AHRI 210/240-2008, AHRI
1230-2010, and ASHRAE 23.1-2010. Therefore, DOE is incorporating by
reference AHRI 210/240-2024, ANSI/ASHRAE 16-2016, ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009,
and ANSI/ASHRAE 116-2010, at appendix M1.
2. AHRI 1600-2024
In parallel to the AHRI 210/240-202X Draft, AHRI and other relevant
stakeholders, including DOE, worked to develop a forward-looking AHRI
test procedure that would act as the successor to the AHRI 210/240-202X
Draft and be effective in the long term (i.e., AHRI 1600-202X Draft).
In the April 2024 NOPR, DOE proposed to establish a new test
procedure for CAC/HPs at appendix M2 by incorporating by reference AHRI
1600-202X Draft (in its entirety). 89 FR 24206, 24212. DOE noted that
it intended to update its incorporation by reference to the final
published version of AHRI 1600-202X Draft in the final rule, unless the
draft version is not finalized before the final rule or there are
substantive changes between the draft and published versions, in which
case DOE may adopt the substance of the AHRI 1600-202X Draft or provide
additional opportunity for comment on the substantive changes to the
updated industry consensus standard. Id. In May 2024, AHRI published
the finalized AHRI 1600 standard, AHRI 1600-2024, which did not include
any significant deviations from AHRI 1600-202X Draft.
Several stakeholders, namely Lennox, AHRI, Mitsubishi, Copeland,
the CA IOUs, Rheem, Daikin, NEEA, and Carrier, appreciated DOE's
efforts of collaborating with the stakeholders to develop the AHRI 1600
standard, and supported its adoption at appendix M2. (Lennox, No. 24 at
p. 4; AHRI, No. 25 at p. 3; \15\ Mitsubishi, No. 28 at p. 1; Copeland,
No. 31 at p. 1; CA IOUs, No. 32 at p. 2; Rheem, No. 34 at p. 4; Daikin,
No. 36 at p. 1; NEEA, No. 39 at p. 2; Carrier, No. 29 at p. 4) Rheem
commented that in a similar vein to its comment made on AHRI 210/240-
2024 (see section III.B.1 of this document), DOE should be aware that
the revised editions of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 37 and ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 16 are currently not referenced in AHRI Standard 1600-2024.
(Rheem, No. 34 at p. 4) Rheem further pointed to DOE`s inclusion of the
energy efficiency metric energy efficiency ratio 2 (``EER2) in 10 CFR
430.23(m)(2); several sections of 10 CFR 429.16 and 10 CFR
429.134(k)(4); and sections 2, 4.1, and 4.2 of appendix M2 to subpart B
of 10 CFR part 430, which in turn incorporate AHRI 1600-2024 by
reference, which only includes energy efficiency ratio (``EER'') as the
efficiency metric, and not EER2. (Id. at p. 5) Rheem stated that this
mismatch should be resolved by either DOE revising its relevant
references from EER2 to EER, or that AHRI 1600-2024 should be revised
to replace all instances of EER with EER2. (Id.) Further, Rheem pointed
out that section 4.1 of the new appendix M2 references 10 CFR 431.97,
in relation to certification to the energy conservation standards SCORE
and SHORE, and suggested this citation should be changed to 10 CFR
430.32(c), which will be amended to prescribe energy conservation
standards for CAC/HPs. (Id.) Additionally, as noted in section III.B.1
for AHRI 210/240-2024, Rheem commented that table 8 of AHRI 1600-2024
should contain sentences similar to section 3.2.4(a) of appendix M1, to

[[Page 1230]]

specify that for variable-speed compressor systems, the cooling full
compressor speed for both A2 and B2 tests should be same, and the
cooling minimum compressor speed for the B1, F1, G1, and I1 tests
should remain the same. (Id. at p. 4)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\15\ While AHRI`s comment noted support for the adoption of the
AHRI 1600 standard at appendix M1, DOE surmises that this is a
typographical error, and AHRI intended to express support for
adoption at appendix M2 instead. As proposed in the April 2024 NOPR,
appendix M1 references the draft AHRI 210/240 standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In response to Rheem's comment regarding AHRI 210/240-2024
retaining the EER2 metric while AHRI 1600-2024 using the EER metric,
DOE agrees with Rheem that this mismatch has potential to confuse users
of the test procedure. DOE notes that the EER2 metric in AHRI 210/240-
2024 is identical to the EER metric in AHRI 1600-2024. Both metrics are
evaluated at the same test conditions and convey the same full-load
efficiency information. Therefore, for appendix M1, which references
AHRI 210/240-2024, DOE is retaining the EER2 metric. For appendix M2,
which references AHRI 1600-2024, DOE is including EER as the full-load
metric, with EER evaluated the same way as EER2 per appendix M1. DOE is
making appropriates changes in the regulatory text at 10 CFR parts 429
and 430, and appendix M2, to reflect this clarification. In response to
Rheem's comment for the citation of the SCORE and SHORE energy
conservation standards in the April 2024 NOPR, DOE agrees that the
correct citation is to 10 CFR 430.32(c), and not 10 CFR 431.97.
Finally, as mentioned in section III.B.1 of this document, DOE is
adding language to section 2 of appendix M2 to explicitly state that
for variable-capacity compressor systems, the cooling full compressor
speeds for both A<INF>Full</INF> and B<INF>Full</INF> tests should be
identical, and the cooling minimum compressor speed for the
B<INF>Low</INF>, F<INF>Low</INF>, G<INF>Low</INF>, and I<INF>Low</INF>
tests should be identical.
As discussed, AHRI 1600-2024 does not include any significant
deviations from AHRI 1600-202X Draft. As such, the adoption of AHRI
1600-2024 in this final rule is consistent with the proposal to
reference AHRI 1600-202X Draft in the April 2024 NOPR.
DOE is amending its test procedure for CAC/HPs by incorporating by
reference AHRI 1600-2024 for use in the new appendix M2. Specifically,
in the new test procedure for CAC/HPs at appendix M2, DOE is adopting
sections 3 (excluding 3.2.16, 3.2.20, 3.2.45, 3.2.50, 3.2.63, 3.2.78,
and 3.2.79), 5 (excluding 5.1.6.2), 6 (excluding 6.1.8, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4,
and 6.5), 11, and 12 and appendices D, E, G, K, and L of the AHRI 1600-
202X Draft in the Federal test procedure for CAC/HPs at appendix M2.
Additionally, consistent with the April 2024 NOPR, DOE is also
incorporating by reference ANSI/ASHRAE 16-2016, ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009,
and ANSI/ASHRAE 116-2010, which are referenced within AHRI 1600-2024.
Therefore, in total, DOE is proposing to incorporate by reference AHRI
1600-2024, ANSI/ASHRAE 16-2016, ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009, and ANSI/ASHRAE
116-2010, at appendix M2.
3. ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009
ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009 provides a method of test for electrically
driven unitary air-conditioning and heat pump equipment, which includes
CAC/HPs. In the April 2024 NOPR, DOE proposed to incorporate by
reference ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009 at both appendix M1 and appendix M2,
since AHRI 210/240-202X Draft and AHRI 1600-202X Draft both reference
test instructions in ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009. 89 FR 24206, 24212. The
finalized versions of these draft standards, AHRI 210/240-2024 and the
AHRI 1600-2024, also reference ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009. More specifically,
sections 5, 6, 8, and 11 and appendices C, D, E, I, and J of AHRI 210/
240-2024 and AHRI 1600-2024 refer to methods of test in ANSI/ASHRAE 37-
2009.
DOE currently incorporates by reference ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009 in 10
CFR part 430, subpart B, and the current incorporation by reference
applies to the current Federal test procedure for CAC/HPs specified at
appendix M1. Given that AHRI 210/240-2024 Draft references ANSI/ASHRAE
37-2009 for several test instructions, DOE has concluded, consistent
with the April 2024 NOPR, that it is appropriate to maintain the
existing incorporation by reference of ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009 in appendix
M1. Additionally, given that AHRI 1600-2024 references ANSI/ASHRAE 37-
2009 for several test instructions, DOE has concluded, consistent with
the April 2024 NOPR, that it is appropriate to incorporate by reference
ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009 for use with appendix M2.
4. ANSI/ASHRAE 16-2016
ANSI/ASHRAE 16-2016, which provides a method of test for rating
room air conditioners, packaged terminal air conditioners, and packaged
terminal heat pumps, is referenced for testing CAC/HPs by both the AHRI
210/240-202X Draft and the AHRI 1600-202X Draft. Consequently, in the
April 2024 NOPR, DOE proposed to incorporate by reference ANSI/ASHRAE
16-2016 at both appendix M1 and appendix M2. 89 FR 24206, 24213. The
finalized versions of the AHRI draft standards, AHRI 210/240-2024 and
AHRI 1600-2024, also reference ANSI/ASHRAE 16-2016. More specifically,
section 5.1.1 of AHRI 210/240-2024 and AHRI 1600-2024 refer to testing
of non-ducted CAC/HPs from provisions in ANSI/ASHRAE 16-2016, or by
using a combination of provisions in ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009 and ANSI/
ASHRAE 116-2016.
Currently, ANSI/ASHRAE 16-2016 is not incorporated by reference in
appendix M1. DOE has concluded that testing conducted per ANSI/ASHRAE
16-2016 for non-ducted CAC/HPs will not impact ratings in comparison to
testing conducted per provisions in ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009 and ANSI/ASHRAE
116-2010. Thus, given that AHRI 210/240-2024 and AHRI 1600-2024 refer
to ANSI/ASHRAE 16-2016 as an option for testing of non-ducted CAC/HPs,
and it does not impact ratings, DOE has concluded, consistent with the
April 2024 NOPR, that it is appropriate to incorporate by reference
ANSI/ASHRAE 16-2016 for appendices M1 and M2.
5. ANSI/ASHRAE 116-2010
ANSI/ASHRAE 116-2010, which provides a method of test for unitary
air conditioners and heat pumps with a cooling capacity of 65,000 Btu/h
and less, is referenced for testing CAC/HPs by both AHRI 210/240-202X
Draft and AHRI 1600-202X Draft. Consequently, in the April 2024 NOPR,
DOE proposed to incorporate by reference ANSI/ASHRAE 116-2010 at both
appendix M1 and appendix M2. 89 FR 24206, 24213. The finalized versions
of the AHRI draft standards, AHRI 210/240-2024 and AHRI 1600-2024, also
reference ANSI/ASHRAE 116-2010. More specifically, sections 5, 6, 8,
and 11 and appendices D and E of AHRI 210/240-2024 and AHRI 1600-2024
refer to methods of test in ANSI/ASHRAE 116-2010.
Given that AHRI 210/240-2024 references ANSI/ASHRAE 116-2010 for
several test instructions, DOE has concluded, consistent with the April
2024 NOPR, that it is appropriate to maintain the incorporation by
reference of ANSI/ASHRAE 116-2010 in appendix M1. Additionally, given
that the AHRI 1600-2024 Draft references ANSI/ASHRAE 116-2010 for
several test instructions, DOE has concluded, consistent with the April
2024 NOPR, that it is appropriate to incorporate by reference ANSI/
ASHRAE 116-2010 for use with appendix M2.

C. Revised CAC/HP Test Procedure

As discussed, EPCA requires that test procedures for each type of
covered product, including CAC/HPs, not be unduly burdensome to conduct
and be reasonably designed to produce test

[[Page 1231]]

results that reflect energy efficiency, energy use, and estimated
operating costs during a representative average use cycle or period of
use. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3))
In this final rule, DOE is maintaining the current efficiency
metrics, EER2, SEER2 and HSPF2, at appendix M1 and is referencing AHRI
210/240-2024 for measuring the existing metrics. DOE has determined
that the amendments to appendix M1 would not affect the measured
efficiency of CAC/HPs or require retesting solely because of DOE's
adoption of the amendments to the appendix M1 test procedure. At
appendix M1, DOE is incorporating by reference the following sections
of the AHRI 210/240-2024: sections 3 (with certain exclusions \16\), 5
(with one exclusion \17\), 6 (with certain exclusions \18\), 11, and
12, as well as appendices D, E, G, K, and L.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\16\ DOE is not incorporating by reference the following
provisions in section 3 of AHRI 210/240-2024 because the terms are
either defined in appendix M1, or are not needed for the DOE test
procedure: 3.2.16 (Double-duct System), 3.2.20 (Gross Capacity),
3.2.46 (Oil Recovery Mode), 3.2.51 (Published Rating), 3.2.63
(Standard Filter), 3.2.78 (Unitary Air-conditioner), and 3.2.79
(Unitary Heat Pump).
\17\ DOE is not incorporating by reference the following
provision in section 5 of AHRI 210/240-2024 because the term is
defined in appendix M1: 5.1.6.2 (Outdoor Unit with No Match
(OUWNM)).
\18\ DOE is not incorporating by reference the following
provisions in section 6 of AHRI 210/240-2024 because the provisions
are either defined in 10 CFR 429.16, or are not needed for the DOE
test procedure: 6.1.8 (Tested Combinations or Tested Units), 6.2
(Application Ratings), 6.3 (Publication of Ratings), 6.4 (Ratings),
and 6.5 (Uncertainty and Variability).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Additionally, DOE is establishing a new test procedure at appendix
M2 that adopts AHRI 1600-2024, including the new SCORE and SHORE
metrics.\19\ Use of appendix M2 is not required until the compliance
date of any amended standards denominated in terms of the new metrics
for appendix M2, should such standards be adopted. At appendix M2, DOE
is referencing the following sections of AHRI 1600-2024: sections 3
(with certain exclusions \20\), 5 (with one exclusion \21\), 6 (with
certain exclusions \22\), 11, and 12 and appendices D, E, G, K and L.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\19\ As explained in Section III.B.2, DOE will replace EER2 in
appendix M1 with EER in appendix M2. However, EER will be calculated
in a manner identical to EER2, and both convey the same full load
test information.
\20\ DOE is not incorporating by reference the following
provisions in section 3 of AHRI 1600-2024 because the terms are
either defined in appendix M1, or are not needed for the DOE test
procedure: 3.2.16 (Double-duct System), 3.2.20 (Gross Capacity),
3.2.45 (Oil Recovery Mode), 3.2.50 (Published Rating), 3.2.63
(Standard Filter), 3.2.78 (Unitary Air-conditioner), and 3.2.79
(Unitary Heat Pump).
\21\ DOE is not incorporating by reference the following
provision in section 5 of AHRI 1600-2024 because the term is defined
in appendix M2: 5.1.6.2 (Outdoor Unit with No Match (OUWNM)).
\22\ DOE is not incorporating by reference the following
provisions in section 6 of AHRI 1600-2024 D because the provisions
are either defined in 10 CFR 429.16, or are not needed for the DOE
test procedure: 6.1.8 (Tested Combinations or Tested Units), 6.2
(Application Ratings), 6.3 (Publication of Ratings), 6.4 (Ratings),
and 6.5 (Uncertainty and Variability).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Further, at both appendix M1 and appendix M2, DOE is incorporating
by reference the following: ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009, except sections 1
(Purpose), 2 (Scope), and 4 (Classifications); ANSI/ASHRAE 16-2016
except sections 1 (Purpose), 2 (Scope), and 4 (Classifications); and
ANSI/ASHRAE 116-2010 except sections 1 (Purpose), 2 (Scope), 4
(Classifications), and 7 (Methods of Test).

D. Efficiency Metrics

As discussed, DOE is updating the current Federal test procedure
for CAC/HPs at appendix M1 consistent with the most recent draft
version of the relevant industry consensus test procedure, AHRI 210/
240-2024. DOE is also establishing a new Federal test procedure at 10
CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix M2, consistent with the new industry
consensus test procedure, AHRI 1600-2024. Sections III.D.1 and III.D.2
of this document discuss which metrics are applicable for appendices M1
and M2, respectively.
1. Metrics Applicable to Appendix M1
Consistent with the April 2024 NOPR, appendix M1 maintains the
current energy efficiency metrics (i.e., EER2, SEER2, and HSPF2), and
includes a new optional metric: the peak load coefficient of
performance (``COP<INF>peak</INF>''), applicable to central heat pumps
(``CHPs''). The amendments to appendix M1 to align with AHRI 210/240-
2024 maintain the existing energy efficiency metrics, and DOE has
determined that testing under appendix M1 would be consistent with the
existing test procedure and there would be no impact on measured
efficiencies.
2. Metrics Applicable to Appendix M2
The newly established appendix M2 introduces new integrated cooling
and integrated heating efficiency metrics, namely SCORE and SHORE,
respectively. Unlike SEER2 and HSPF2, which are seasonal energy
efficiency descriptors, SCORE and SHORE are integrated metrics that
include off mode power, P<INF>W,OFF</INF>. Hence, appendix M2 will not
require separate representations for off mode power. Appendix M2 will
retain the full-load EER metric, with EER evaluated in the same way as
appendix M1.\23\ Appendix M2 also includes the optional metric
COP<INF>peak</INF>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\23\ AHRI 1600-2024 replaced the EER2 and COP2 metrics from AHRI
210/240-2024 with EER and COP. For consistency, appendix M2 will
follow the nomenclature in AHRI 1600-2024 and will hence use EER as
the full-load metric, while appendix M1 will use the EER2 metric.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. Near-Term Changes in the CAC/HP Test Procedure

The following sections discuss issues that affect the CAC/HP test
procedure in the near term--i.e., they will be required 180 days after
publication of the final rule. As previously explained, these near-term
revisions are implemented at appendix M1 via incorporation by reference
of the relevant industry consensus test procedure, AHRI 210/240-2024.
DOE has reviewed AHRI 210/240-2024 and has concluded that it satisfies
the EPCA requirement that test procedures should not be unduly
burdensome to conduct and should be representative of an average use
cycle. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) These near-term amendments in appendix M1
do not alter the measured efficiency of CAC/HPs in terms of the current
cooling and heating test metrics, SEER2 and HSPF2, or the current off
mode metric, P<INF>W,OFF</INF>.
DOE clarifies that while all issues discussed subsequently within
this section are near-term, they are also part of the long-term CAC/HP
test procedure--i.e., these revisions are also included in AHRI 1600-
2024, which DOE is incorporating by reference at appendix M2. As such,
when discussing these near-term changes, DOE makes references to both
AHRI 210/240-2024 and AHRI 1600-2024.
1. Controls Verification Procedure for Variable-Speed Systems
Appendix M1 uses a steady-state test concept for variable-speed
systems where test room conditions are kept within narrow operating
tolerances for each test point, and the CAC/HP system is manually
controlled to operate at a fixed specified compressor speed and airflow
rate for each test point. As part of the previous rulemaking, several
stakeholders encouraged DOE to review ways to improve the
representativeness of the test procedures for CAC/HPs (especially
variable-speed systems), particularly to consider test procedures where
the unit operates under its own native controls in responding to
conditioning loads (i.e., load-based testing).\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\24\ A load-based test method differs from the steady-state test
method currently used in DOE test procedures for air-conditioning
and heat pump equipment. In a steady-state test method, the indoor
room is maintained at a constant temperature throughout the test. In
this type of test, any variable-speed or variable-position
components of air conditioners and heat pumps are set in a fixed
position, which is typically specified by the manufacturer. In
contrast, a load-based test has the conditioning load applied to the
indoor room using a load profile that approximates how the load
varies for units installed in the field. In this type of test, an
air-conditioning system or heat pump is allowed to automatically
determine and vary its control settings in response to the imposed
conditioning loads rather than relying on manufacturer-specified
settings.

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

[[Page 1232]]

To review this topic in detail as part of the current rulemaking,
in an RFI published on January 24, 2023, (the ``January 2023 RFI''),
DOE requested comments, information, and data pertaining to the
consideration of load-based testing methodologies under development by
various organizations and whether certain aspects of these
methodologies might be adopted into the DOE test procedure. 88 FR 4091,
4098-4101.
In the April 2024 NOPR, based on review of the stakeholder comments
received in response to the January 2023 RFI--specifically, that it has
not yet been conclusively demonstrated that load-based testing methods
have sufficient repeatability and reproducibility to be the basis of
direct measurement of system performance--DOE tentatively concluded
that use for direct measurement of performance for regulatory purposes
would not be suitable at this time. 89 FR 24206, 24220. Instead, DOE
tentatively concluded that it would be appropriate to continue to allow
regulatory tests to use fixed-speed settings for testing variable-speed
systems, while developing a controls verification procedure (``CVP'')
that could be used for audit, assessment, and enforcement testing to
ensure that the fixed-speed settings are representative of native
(unfixed) control, in which the control system may vary compressor
speed and/or indoor airflow. Id.
DOE noted that AHRI and other relevant stakeholders, including DOE,
participated in the development of revised AHRI test standards to
address several issues raised in the January 2023 RFI, including the
representativeness of fixed-speed testing for variable-speed systems.
89 FR 24206, 24220. From these discussions on the revised AHRI test
standards, consensus was developed on using a CVP approach. Id. In
section III.F.1.e of the April 2024 NOPR, DOE provided a summary of the
CVP approach in Appendix I of AHRI 210/240-202X Draft and AHRI 1600-
202X Draft. 89 FR 24206, 24220-24222.
DOE acknowledged that the CVP approach outlined in appendix I of
the relevant AHRI drafts represented industry consensus regarding: (1)
the verification of compliance of systems with the variable capacity
system definition, and (2) verification of the consistency of fixed-
speed settings of compressor and indoor fans with native control
operation as part of enforcement. 89 FR 24206, 24222. DOE considered
that the CVP approach presented a more representative test procedure
for variable-speed systems operating in the field, because it provided
a tool to verify that the fixed compressor speed settings and indoor
air fan settings used in regulatory tests are representative of native
control operation as the unit operates to maintain the thermostat set
point, i.e., indoor dry-bulb temperature. Id. For these reasons, DOE
proposed to incorporate by reference appendix I of AHRI 210/240-202X
Draft to support enforcement associated with testing conducted in
accordance with appendix M1, and to incorporate by reference appendix I
of AHRI 1600-202X Draft to support enforcement associated with testing
conducted in accordance with appendix M2. Id.
In response to DOE's proposal, several stakeholders, namely Lennox,
the CA IOUs, Rheem, Daikin, GE Appliances, and Carrier, generally
showed support for DOE's proposal on implementing the CVP approach for
certification of variable-speed products. (Lennox, No. 24 at p. 2; CA
IOUs, No. 32 at p. 2; Rheem, No. 34 at p. 5; Daikin, No. 36 at p. 3; GE
Appliances, No. 37 at p. 4; Carrier, No. 29 at p. 5)
The Joint Advocates commented that even though it is not
appropriate to adopt load-based testing for measuring the direct
regulatory test performance of CAC/HPs due to insufficient information
on repeatability and reproducibility of load-based testing methods, DOE
should consider adopting them as an integral part of the test procedure
in a future update to the CAC/HP test procedure. (Joint Advocates, No.
30 at pp. 3-4) Further, the Joint Advocates commented that test data
that will better inform repeatability and reproducibility of load-based
tests will be coming out in the near future. (Id.) The Joint Advocates
expressed concern that since the CVP is only an enforcement provision,
manufacturers are not required to conduct it while rating their
product, and hence, adopting some version of load-based testing will
ensure that all certified ratings are more representative of unit
performance in the field. (Id.)
In response to the Joint Advocates' comment, DOE reiterates that it
explored the potential of adopting a load-based method for direct
measurement of performance in the April 2024 NOPR. However, as
discussed in the April 2024 NOPR, the consensus of affected
stakeholders was to adopt a CVP approach instead of a wholesale load-
based method test procedure. 89 FR 24206, 24222. DOE is not aware of
additional information, such as new load-based test data, available for
review to assess the feasibility of adopting load-based testing as a
mandatory part of the CAC/HP test procedure. Even though the CVP is
primarily intended for use by DOE for assessment and enforcement
purposes, it is expected that manufacturers will preemptively utilize
the CVP to evaluate the fixed-speed settings used for certification
tests of their variable-speed products to ensure consistency with
native-control operation.
AHRI 210/240-2024 and AHRI 1600-2024, the industry standards DOE is
referencing in this final rule, finalized the relevant test method for
the CVP at appendix I without any substantial change as compared to
their corresponding drafts. Therefore, consistent with the April 2024
NOPR, DOE is incorporating by reference appendix I of AHRI 210/240-2024
to support enforcement associated with testing conducted in accordance
with appendix M1, and to incorporate by reference appendix I of AHRI
1600-2024 to support enforcement associated with testing conducted in
accordance with appendix M2. The enforcement provisions are discussed
in more detail in section III.I.2 of this document.
2. Low-Temperature Heating Performance
In the April 2024 NOPR, DOE proposed to incorporate by reference
AHRI 210/240-202X and AHRI 1600-202X Drafts and adopt several test
procedure provisions that pertained to low-temperature heating
performance. 89 FR 24206, 24222-24225. Specifically, DOE proposed to
(1) reference the definition of ``cold climate heat pump'' (``CCHP'')
contained in the AHRI drafts, (2) reference the requirement for
products certified as a CCHP to conduct the H4 heating test (either the
H4, H4<INF>Full</INF>, or H4<INF>Boost</INF> heating test, as
applicable), (3) retain the current size-for-cooling approach, and (4)
include COP<INF>peak</INF> as an optional representation for combined
heat pump and electric resistance heat efficiency at 5 [deg]F outdoor
temperature for CHPs, as outlined in appendix K of AHRI 210/240-202X
and AHRI 1600-202X Drafts,\25\ at appendix M1 and appendix M2,
respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\25\ In several instances of the April 2024 NOPR, DOE
incorrectly referred to appendix L of the respective AHRI 210/240-
202X and AHRI 1600-202X Drafts as the appendices regarding
COP<INF>peak</INF>. (See 89 FR 24206, 24225). These were
typographical errors, since the appendices regarding
COP<INF>peak</INF> are at appendix K of the respective AHRI 210/240-
202X and AHRI 1600-202X Drafts.

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

[[Page 1233]]

DOE did not receive any comments regarding the aforementioned
proposals in the April 2024 NOPR. AHRI 210/240-2024 and AHRI 1600-2024,
the final versions of the draft AHRI standards, finalized the same low-
temperature heating performance provisions without change. Therefore,
consistent with the April 2024 NOPR proposal, DOE is incorporating by
reference AHRI 210/240-2024 and AHRI 1600-2024 and adopting the low-
temperature heating performance provisions discussed in the
aforementioned paragraphs.
3. Cut-Out and Cut-In Temperature Verification
Appendix J of AHRI 210/240-202X Draft and also of AHRI 1600-202X
Draft includes a test applicable to all CHPs to determine cut-out and
cut-in temperatures (i.e., T<INF>off</INF> and T<INF>on</INF>
respectively).\26\ In the April 2024 NOPR, DOE proposed that during
assessment and enforcement testing of CHPs, DOE may verify the cut-out
and cut-in temperatures using the test specified in appendix J of AHRI
210/240-202X Draft, when conducting assessment and enforcement testing
associated with appendix M1, and the test specified in appendix J of
AHRI 1600-202X Draft, when conducting assessment and enforcement
testing associated with appendix M2. The proposal indicated that, if
conducting the appendix J cut-out/cut-in verification, the tested
values determined for these temperatures would be used as the
T<INF>off</INF> and T<INF>on</INF> values for the unit. 89 FR 24206,
24226.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\26\ In several instances of the April 2024 NOPR, DOE
incorrectly referred to appendix K of the respective AHRI 210/240-
202X and AHRI 1600-202X Drafts as the appendices regarding cut-out
and cut-in temperature verification. (See 89 FR 24206, 24226 and 89
FR 24206, 24243). These were typographical errors, since the
appendices regarding cut-out and cut-in temperature verification are
at appendix J of the respective AHRI 210/240-202X and AHRI 1600-202X
Drafts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

AHRI 210/240-2024 and AHRI 1600-2024, the industry standards DOE is
referencing in this final rule, finalized the relevant test method for
determining cut-out and cut-in temperatures at appendix J without any
substantial change as compared to their respective drafts. Therefore,
consistent with the April 2024 NOPR, DOE is incorporating by reference
appendix J of AHRI 210/240-2024 and AHRI 1600-2024 at appendix M1 and
appendix M2, respectively.
As further discussed in section III.I.1 of this document, DOE may
verify certified cut-out and cut-in temperatures using the test methods
in appendix J of the relevant AHRI drafts for the purposes of
assessment and enforcement testing.
4. Low-Static Single-Split Blower-Coil System Definition and Testing
Provisions
Section 3.1.4.1.1 of appendix M1 defines the minimum external
static pressure (``ESP'') for ducted blower-coil systems in table 4.
For conventional blower-coil systems (i.e., all CAC/HPs that are not
classified as ceiling-mount, wall-mount, mobile home, low-static, mid-
static, small-duct high-velocity (``SDHV''), or space-constrained), the
minimum ESP is specified as 0.5 inches of water column (``in. wc.'').
The definition for low-static blower-coil systems includes only multi-
split and multi-head mini-split systems--it does not include single-
split systems.
AHRI 210/240-202X Draft and AHRI 1600-202X Draft include a new
definition specific for low-static single-split blower-coil systems, as
shown below.
``Low-static single-split blower-coil system'' means a ducted
single-split system air conditioner or heat pump for which all of the
following apply:
(1) The Outdoor Unit has a Specified cooling capacity less than or
equal to 24,000 Btu/h;
(2) If the Outdoor Unit is a heat pump or a variable capacity air
conditioner, it is separately Specified with a blower-coil indoor unit
tested with a minimum 0.5 in H2O ESP, otherwise it is separately
Specified with a coil-only indoor unit; and
(3) The Indoor Unit is marketed for and produces a maximum ESP less
than 0.5 in H2O when operated at the Specified cooling full-load
airflow not exceeding 400 scfm per Specified ton of cooling.
Both drafts also include provisions requiring low-static single-
split blower-coil systems to be tested at their specified airflow (not
to exceed 400 standardized cubic feet per minute (``scfm'') per
specified ton of cooling capacity) at their maximum airflow setting. If
the ESP achieved at the specified airflow is less than 0.1 in. wc., the
provisions require adjustment of the airflow measurement apparatus fan
to reduce airflow and increase ESP until a minimum of 0.1 in. wc. is
achieved.
In the April 2024 NOPR, DOE proposed to incorporate by reference
the new definition of low-static single-split blower-coil system and
associated testing provisions, which would include single-split systems
that cannot accommodate the 0.5 in. wc. required for testing single-
split blower-coil systems in accordance with the current DOE test
procedure in appendix M1. 89 FR 24206, 24227.
DOE did not receive any comments regarding the aforementioned
proposals in the April 2024 NOPR. AHRI 210/240-2024 and AHRI 1600-2024
finalized the definition and testing provisions for low-static single-
split blower-coil systems without substantial change as compared with
their respective drafts. Therefore, consistent with the April 2024 NOPR
proposals, DOE is incorporating by reference AHRI 210/240-2024 and AHRI
1600-2024, and adopting the definition and testing provisions for low-
static single-split blower-coil systems.
In advance of adopting these changes, multiple manufacturers,
including Samsung HVAC America LLC (``Samsung''),\27\ Mitsubishi,\28\
and Hisense (Guangdong) Air Conditioning Co. Ltd. (``Hisense''),\29\
petitioned DOE for test procedure waivers pertaining to low-static
single-split blower-coil systems. All petitions asserted nearly
identical circumstances and model limitations--that it was impossible
to test certain basic models according to appendix M1 because the
models could not operate at the conventional minimum ESP requirement of
0.5 in. wc. found in table 4 of appendix M1. Subsequently,
manufacturers could not certify compliance for or sell these products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\27\ See Samsung's petition at <a href="http://www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2023-BT-WAV-0010">www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2023-BT-WAV-0010</a>.
\28\ See Mitsubishi's petition at <a href="http://www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2023-BT-WAV-0015">www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2023-BT-WAV-0015</a>.
\29\ See Hisense's petition at <a href="http://www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2023-BT-WAV-0011">www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2023-BT-WAV-0011</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

On June 5, 2023, DOE published a notification of petition for
waiver and grant of an interim waiver that permits Samsung to use an
alternative test procedure for the basic models subject to its
petition. 88 FR 36558. The alternative test procedure allows Samsung to
test its basic models that are designed for low-static, short-duct
applications at 0.1 in. wc. ESP and to make proportional adjustments to
fan power and capacity such that the results are equivalent to
performance measured at 0.5 in. wc. ESP. 88 FR 36558, 36561-36563. DOE
initially determined that this alternate test procedure was appropriate
and allowed for the accurate measurement of the energy efficiency of
the specified basic models, while alleviating the testing problems
cited in implementing the DOE test procedure for the models. Id.
In the April 2024 NOPR, DOE noted that, should the new definition
of low-

[[Page 1234]]

static single-split blower-coil system and the associated testing
provisions be adopted, DOE would terminate Samsung's interim waiver
pending final determination. 89 FR 24206, 24227. The interim waiver was
granted with the understanding that it was impossible to test the
manufacturer's specific basic models according to the prescribed test
procedures in appendix M1. Given that DOE is adopting provisions for
low-static single-split blower-coil systems, DOE concludes that this
alternate test procedure is no longer necessary. Therefore, DOE is
terminating the aforementioned waiver for Samsung. DOE notes that the
ratings for the subject Samsung basic models may change when moving to
the amended appendix M1 test procedure outlined in this final rule.
DOE has not published a notification of petition for waiver or
granted interim waivers for either the Mitsubishi or Hisense petitions.
However, for the same reasons that DOE is terminating Samsung's
aforementioned waiver, DOE concludes that an alternate test procedure
is no longer necessary. DOE considers the petitions submitted by
Mitsubishi and Hisense to be addressed sufficiently by the low-static
single-split blower-coil system definition and testing provisions
adopted in this final rule.
5. Mandatory Constant Circulation Systems
Currently, nearly all CAC/HP products are designed with R-410A as
the refrigerant. However, under global warming potential (``GWP'')
restrictions enacted by an Environmental Protection Agency (``EPA'')
final rule published on October 24, 2023 (``October 2023 EPA final
rule''), the use of R-410A is scheduled to be phased out for CAC/HP
products.\30\ 88 FR 73098. The EPA Significant New Alternatives Policy
(``SNAP'') Program evaluates and regulates substitutes for ozone-
depleting chemicals (such as CAC/HP refrigerants) that are being phased
out under the stratospheric ozone protection provisions of the Clean
Air Act. (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.) \31\ Of interest to CAC/HPs, the EPA
SNAP Program's list of viable substitutes \32\ includes a group of
refrigerants classified as A2L refrigerants. While these refrigerants
have GWP levels meeting the requirements of the October 2023 EPA Final
Rule, they face stricter safety requirements than R-410A due to the
moderate flammability associated with their ``2L'' ASHRAE safety
classification.\33\ Many of the safety requirements specifically
address mitigation of ignition risk in case of refrigerant leakage. One
mitigation option for refrigerant leakage is air circulation, which can
be initiated when a leak is detected, or the system can use ``constant
circulation,'' running the fan, typically at a reduced speed, at all
times. This latter approach has energy use implications, which are
addressed in the AHRI 210/240 and AHRI 1600 standards.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\30\ EPA published an interim final rule on December 26, 2023
(``EPA Technology Transition Interim Final Rule'') that allows 1
additional year, until January 1, 2026, solely for the installation
of new CAC/HPs using components manufactured or imported prior to
January 1, 2025. 88 FR 88825.
\31\ Additional information regarding EPA's SNAP Program is
available online at <a href="http://www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/">www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/</a>.
\32\ A list of EPA SNAP Program-approved refrigerant substitutes
is available at <a href="http://www.epa.gov/snap/substitutes-residential-and-light-commercial-air-conditioning-and-heat-pumps">www.epa.gov/snap/substitutes-residential-and-light-commercial-air-conditioning-and-heat-pumps</a>.
\33\ ASHRAE assigns safety classification to refrigerants based
on toxicity and flammability data. The capital letter designates a
toxicity class based on allowable exposure, and the numeral denotes
flammability. For toxicity, class A denotes refrigerants of lower
toxicity, and class B denotes refrigerants of higher toxicity. For
flammability, class 1 denotes refrigerants that do not propagate a
flame when tested as per the standard; classes 2 and 2L denote
refrigerants of lower flammability; and class 3 denotes highly
flammable refrigerants (such as hydrocarbons).
\34\ DOE is aware that a refrigerant leakage detection system
may also draw power, which would also be addressed in the AHRI 210/
240 and AHRI 1600 test standards. However it is DOE's understanding
that the impact of this power is much less than operation of the fan
in constant circulation mode.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

AHRI 210/240-202X Draft and AHRI 1600-202X Draft include a new
definition for ``mandatory constant circulation system'' (``MCCS'').
The updated industry standard drafts also include testing provisions
for such systems, specifically requiring that CAC/HPs meeting the
mandatory constant circulation system definition not use the default
cooling and heating degradation coefficients, but rather evaluate these
degradation coefficients using the respective cyclic tests specified by
table 7 of AHRI 210/240-202X Draft and AHRI 1600-202X Draft, conducted
in accordance with section E12 of appendix E of AHRI 210/240-202X Draft
and AHRI 1600-202X Draft. In the April 2024 NOPR, DOE proposed to
incorporate by reference the new definition of MCCS and the
aforementioned testing provisions outlined in AHRI 210/240-202X Draft
and AHRI 1600-202X Draft, at appendix M1 and appendix M2, respectively.
89 FR 24206, 24228.
In response to DOE's proposal, Carrier expressed support for the
MCCS testing approach, but it commented that there is ambiguity
regarding the specific products to which the MCCS testing approach
applies. (Carrier, No. 29 at pp. 2-3) Carrier stated that for a CAC/HP
system with a charge quantity between m1 and m2,\35\ the room size in
which the UL 60335-2-40 4th edition refrigerant safety standard allows
the system to be installed (or the effective volume into which
refrigerant would be dispersed in case of leakage) is limited. Further,
this limitation can be stricter if the system does not employ air
circulation, either continuously or initiated by a refrigerant leak
detection system (``LDS''). (Id.) Carrier requested that DOE provide
further specificity on the testing approach for products that might
require air circulation as mitigation in some installations but not
necessarily all installations. (Id.) Carrier recommended that DOE
require all systems with a charge level greater than m1 and less than
or equal to m2 that do not contain an LDS be tested as an MCCS since
how and where these products are installed in the field are outside the
manufacturer's control (besides a label specifying the required area).
(Id.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\35\ UL 60335-2-40 fourth edition defines charge quantities m1
and m2 based on the type of refrigerant.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In a rebuttal, Daikin opposed Carrier's aforementioned
recommendation, for several reasons. (Daikin, No. 40 at p. 1) First,
Daikin commented that UL 60335-2-40 4th edition is clear in its
requirements for information that must be provided in installation
instructions, including instructions regarding how to install the
product in accordance with refrigerant safety codes, including how to
meet the minimum floor area requirements. (Id.) Daikin specifically
pointed to Annex DD of UL 60335-2-40 4th edition, which specifies that
an original equipment manufacturer (``OEM'') must include details of
minimum installation height, minimum floor area, and other appropriate
information in installation instructions to ensure safety requirements
are met. (Id.) Daikin also commented that CAC/HPs using A2L
refrigerant, in addition to providing information in installation
instructions, must have adequate warning labels (per Clause 7 of UL
60335-2-40 4th edition, Annex 101.DVF of UL 60335-2-40 4th edition, and
EPA SNAP Rule 25), such that the installer will be well aware the
product being installed needs special attention. (Id.)
Second, Daikin commented that the minimum floor area required by
ASHRAE 15.2 (with which UL 60335-2-40 requires compliance), for some
situations, does not depend on whether

[[Page 1235]]

the system employs circulation (whether continuous or LDS initiated) to
meet mitigation requirements. (Daikin, No. 40 at p. 2)
Third, Daikin commented that, if a manufacturer chooses to use
continuous circulation airflow as the method of leak mitigation, the
manufacturer must conduct additional safety verification of that
function, per Annex GG of UL 60335-2-40 4th edition (specifically,
Clause GG.2.2.2DV). (Daikin, No. 40 at pp. 2-3) Annex GG of UL 60335-2-
40 4th edition states that a product using continuous circulation shall
(1) run the indoor fan continuously, except for short periods of
maintenance and service; (2) detect or monitor continuously if the
airflow rate drops below a specific level (Q<INF>min</INF>); and (3) if
the airflow drops below the specified level, provide an output signal
that airflow is reduced and disable compressor operation unless the
compressor operation reduces the leak rate or the total amount of
refrigerant released to the indoor space. Consequently, Daikin
commented that, if the manufacturer chooses to rely on continuous
circulation as the mitigation method, the OSHA-certified Nationally
Recognized Testing Laboratory (``NRTL'') that certifies the product to
meet the safety standard UL 60335-2-40 must check by inspection that
the manufacturer runs the fan continuously. (Id.)
Fourth, Daikin commented on the DOE test procedure emphasis on
installation instructions. (Daikin, No. 40 at p. 3) The DOE test
procedure requirement to follow the OEM installation instructions when
installing a system for testing is based on the premise that the
installation instructions provide a setup representative of field
installation. Thus, Daikin asserted it would be logical for DOE to be
consistent and also assume that the installing contractor would follow
requirements related to refrigerant safety that are laid out in
installation instructions. (Id.)
In response to the Carrier and Daikin comments, it is DOE's
understanding (as noted in Daikin's comment) that use of constant
circulation as the method of refrigerant leakage risk mitigation
requires that the CAC/HP product must be inherently designed with this
feature--a contractor cannot be in compliance with UL 60335-2-40 4th
edition requirements if the feature is selected in the field for a
system that does not inherently already have it. Specifically, an NRTL
must certify upon inspection that a product using constant circulation
for safety code compliance indeed runs its indoor fan continuously.
Thus, the circumstances ``outside the manufacturer's control''
involving installation by a contractor using constant circulation as
the means of mitigation of systems without LDS and without MCCS that
Carrier mentioned in its comment are violations of refrigerant safety
codes. While such violations may occur in the future, DOE concludes
that the seriousness of the potential consequences would make them
infrequent, i.e., such circumstances could not be considered
representative of the installation of such systems. Therefore, DOE
determines that, for testing according to the DOE test procedure, it is
not appropriate to require testing using constant circulation for
products with charge between m1 and m2 that don't have an LDS and are
not inherently an MCCS. However, any product using constant circulation
to comply with refrigerant safety codes that would meet the MCCS
definition in AHRI 210/240-202X Draft and AHRI 1600-202X Draft could be
verified to have this status by powering up the unit, and consequently
will be required to test as an MCCS.
AHRI 210/240-2024 and AHRI 1600-2024 finalized the definition and
testing provisions for MCCS without substantial change. DOE has
determined that the definition and approach included in the finalized
versions provide a more representative measure of CAC/HP efficiency for
systems utilizing mandatory constant circulation as a means of
refrigerant leakage mitigation. Therefore, consistent with the April
2024 NOPR proposals, DOE is incorporating by reference AHRI 210/240-
2024 and AHRI 1600-2024 and adopting the definition and testing
provisions for MCCS.
Daikin noted in its comment that the certification aspects of the
MCCS test procedure changes were not included in the April 2024 NOPR.
(Daikin, No. 40 at p. 3) Daikin recommended that DOE include as
mandatory certification a declaration from the manufacturer regarding
whether the CAC/HP product relies upon mandatory continuous circulation
or not. (Id.) Further, Daikin suggested that whether a product uses
continuous circulation or not could be validated by operation of the
product when it is powered up, as well as validated by the safety
agency (i.e., NRTL) certification report. (Id.)
In response to Daikin's recommendation, DOE notes that it will
consider certification requirements for CAC/HPs, including a
requirement to certify whether the CAC/HP product relies upon mandatory
constant circulation or not, in a separate rulemaking. However, DOE may
validate whether a system utilizes constant circulation when powered up
for the purposes of assessment or enforcement testing.
6. Dual-Fuel Heat Pumps
Heat pumps generally have reduced capacity and perform less
efficiently at low ambient outdoor temperatures than they do at
moderate ambient outdoor temperatures. Most heat pumps require some
form of auxiliary heat when outdoor temperature is low to satisfy
building load in excess of heat pump capacity. DOE is aware of HPs that
combine the operation of a conventional electric HP with back-up heat
provided by fuel, such as a gas fuel-fired furnace or boiler. These are
referred to as ``dual-fuel'' systems or hybrid heat pumps (``HHPs'')
and provide an alternative to heat pumps specifically designed to
perform in cold climates (i.e., cold climate heat pumps). Dual-fuel
systems rely on heat pump operation at milder ambient temperatures, but
switch to the back-up heating source at low ambient temperatures.
The AHRI 210/240-202X Draft and AHRI 1600-202X Draft included a new
definition for dual-fuel heat pump systems. Additionally, the two AHRI
drafts introduced a new seasonal efficiency metric, Dual Fuel
Utilization Efficiency (``DFUE''), meant to capture the heating
efficiency of such dual-fuel heat pump systems. Calculation of DFUE
according to the draft standards is optional, requires no additional
testing, and is outlined in appendix L of both standards.
In the April 2024 NOPR, DOE tentatively determined that while the
definition and optional test approach included in the draft industry
standards may provide a representative test approach for dual-fuel heat
pump systems, DOE was at that time continuing to evaluate whether to
include such provisions in its CAC/HP test procedures. 89 FR 24206,
24229. Therefore, DOE proposed to not incorporate by reference the new
definition of dual-fuel heat pump and the optional seasonal efficiency
metric, DFUE, outlined in the AHRI 210/240-202X and AHRI 1600-202X
Drafts. Id.
AHRI 210/240-2024 and AHRI 1600-2024 finalized the definition and
optional seasonal efficiency metric, DFUE, for dual-fuel heat pump
without substantial change. Based on DOE's continued evaluation of the
dual-fuel provisions in the two AHRI drafts, DOE has concluded that
such provisions are not necessary in the CAC/HP test procedures.
Therefore, DOE is not incorporating by reference the new definition of
dual-fuel heat pump and

[[Page 1236]]

the optional seasonal efficiency metric, DFUE, outlined in the AHRI
210/240-2024 and AHRI 1600-2024. However, DOE recognizes that
representations of dual-fuel heat pump performance may be useful to
consumers. Therefore, while DOE is not proposing provisions for dual-
fuel heat pumps, DOE would allow manufacturers to make optional
representations of dual-fuel heat pump performance consistent with
available AHRI industry test standards.
DOE notes that since dual-fuel heat pump systems are comprised of
two covered products currently subject to energy conservations
standards (i.e., a heat pump and a furnace), DOE would continue to
require reporting of the relevant CAC/HP and consumer furnace heating
metrics--EER2, SEER2, HSPF2, EER, SCORE and SHORE for CAC/HP, and AFUE
for consumer furnaces; regardless of whether a manufacturer chooses to
rate their dual-fuel heat pumps with the DFUE metric. DOE also notes
that the current representation requirements at 10 CFR 429.16 require
representation of every individual heat pump combination distributed in
commerce. As such, installing an outdoor HP unit and an indoor coil
with an existing furnace (or other air mover) that is not being
replaced would constitute distribution in commerce of a coil-only heat
pump combination for which DOE requires a coil-only representation.
7. Rating Individual Components of Split Systems
(a) Background
DOE's test procedure in appendix M1 and its rating and
certification requirements for central air conditioners and heat pumps
in 10 CFR 429.16 have provisions that apply based on the configurations
in which these products are distributed in commerce. This includes
provisions for outdoor units of a split system that are not distributed
in commerce with any indoor units, which DOE's regulations refer to as
an outdoor unit with no match (``OUWNM'').
Specifically, 10 CFR 429.16(b)(2) requires that the ratings for
basic models of split-system central air conditioners or heat pumps
distributed in commerce as an OUWNM be based on the testing of a model
of coil-only indoor unit meeting the requirements of section 2.2e of
appendix M1. Section 2.2.e of appendix M1 requires that an OUWNM be
tested using a coil-only indoor unit with a single cooling air volume
rate whose coil has round tubes of outer diameter no less than 0.375
inches, and normalized gross indoor fin surface (``NGIFS,'' gross
indoor fin surface divided by the measured cooling capacity) no greater
than 1.0 square inch per British thermal unit per hour (sq in/Btu/hr).
(10 CFR 429.16 (b)(2)(i) and appendix M1, section 2.2.e) These
provisions were introduced in a final rule regarding CAC/HP test
procedures published on June 8, 2016 (``June 2016 Final Rule''), to
address outdoor-unit-only replacements of old R-22 outdoor units. 81 FR
36992, 37008-37012.
Effective January 1, 2010, EPA banned sales and distribution of
CAC/HPs designed to use R-22, a hydrochlorofluorocarbon (``HCFC'')
refrigerant that causes ozone depletion. 74 FR 66450 (Dec. 15, 2009).
However, EPA continued to allow sale and distribution of ``components''
of CAC/HP systems for repair purposes, such as outdoor units. Id. at 74
FR 66452. In the June 2016 Final Rule, DOE introduced the testing
provisions for OUWNMs to ensure that performance ratings for such
installations would be representative of the replacement of outdoor
units originally designed for R-22 and using the original indoor units.
See 81 FR 36992, 37008-37011.
In a final rule published on October 24, 2023 (``October 2023 EPA
final rule''), pursuant to provisions of the American Innovation and
Manufacturing Act (``AIM Act''), enacted on December 17, 2020 (42
U.S.C. 7675), EPA restricted the installation of residential and light
commercial systems that are designed for hydrofluorocarbon (``HFC'')
refrigerants having a GWP greater than 700, starting January 1, 2025.
88 FR 73098. On December 26, 2023, EPA published an amendment to the
October 2023 EPA Final Rule that extended the installation deadline to
January 1, 2026, as long as the ``specified components'' being
installed were manufactured or imported prior to January 1, 2025
(``December 2023 EPA interim final rule''). 88 FR 88825.
Split-system CAC/HPs are included in the scope of residential and
light commercial systems As such, new split-system CAC/HPs designed for
use with R-410A and sold as a combination of an outdoor and indoor unit
would be banned for installation, per the October 2023 EPA Final Rule.
However, EPA provides an exemption, permitting the sales of specified
components, to allow consumers to service and repair existing systems
that are over the GWP limits defined in the October 2023 EPA Final
Rule, provided the specified components are used only to service
existing systems and are subject to labeling and reporting
requirements. 88 FR 73098, 73124-73125. This provides an exemption for
individual specified components of R-410A based split-system CAC/HPs to
be sold as replacements, including condensing units and evaporator
units, similar to the component exemption adopted by the EPA when R-22
was phased out. 74 FR 66450, 66459-66460.
(b) NOPR Proposal
In the April 2024 NOPR, DOE noted that while the current OUWNM
provisions were precipitated by EPA's ruling on R-22 units, DOE's
intention was to apply them more broadly to any case where an outdoor
unit is sold without an indoor unit. 89 FR 24206, 24230. DOE noted that
the current OUWNM provisions apply for any outdoor units that are
distributed in commerce without an indoor matching pair, regardless of
the refrigerant the outdoor unit employs. Id. DOE clarified that per
the October 2023 EPA Final Rule, any outdoor unit designed for R-410A
or any banned refrigerant as per EPA regulations, when distributed in
commerce without an indoor unit on or after January 1, 2026, would be
deemed an outdoor unit with no match. Id. DOE further noted that,
similar to EPA requirements for the R-22 ban, EPA is allowing such an
outdoor unit to be installed as a replacement specified component for
an existing system but not to be installed with indoor units for
installation as a complete split CAC/HP system. Id.
DOE noted that appendix M1 currently does not explicitly define
outdoor units with no match and that while AHRI 210/240-202X Draft and
AHRI 1600-202X Draft define outdoor units with no match, the definition
applies explicitly only to R-22 replacement outdoor units and outdoor
units using refrigerants with properties similar to R-22. Id. Because
the definition of outdoor unit with no match in AHRI 210/240-202X Draft
and AHRI 1600-202X Draft is specifically focused on R-22 outdoor units,
DOE proposed not to incorporate the definition by reference, and
instead proposed a clarifying definition that is consistent with DOE's
intention in the June 2016 Final Rule. Id.
DOE proposed the following definition for OUWNM in the April 2024
NOPR for appendix M1:
Outdoor Unit with No Match (OUWNM). An Outdoor Unit that is not
distributed in commerce with any indoor units, and that meets any of
the following criteria:
(a) Is designed for use with a refrigerant that makes the unit
banned for installation when paired with an Indoor Unit as a system,
according to EPA regulations,

[[Page 1237]]

(b) Is designed for use with a refrigerant that has a 95 [deg]F
midpoint saturation absolute pressure that is <plus-minus> 18 percent
of the 95 [deg]F saturation absolute pressure for R-22, or
(c) Is shipped without a specified refrigerant from the point of
manufacture or is shipped such that more than 2 pounds of refrigerant
are required to meet the charge per section 5.1.8 of AHRI 210/240-202X
Draft. This shall not apply if either (a) the factory charge is equal
to or greater than 70 percent of the outdoor unit internal volume times
the liquid density of refrigerant at 95 [deg]F, or (b) an A2L
refrigerant is approved for use and listed in the certification report.
DOE noted that the proposed definition of OUWNM for appendix M2 is
the same as that for appendix M1, except that the reference in part (c)
of the definition is to section 5.1.8 of AHRI 1600-202X Draft. Id.
DOE tentatively concluded that the proposed definition would
further help clarify that the existing test procedure and rating
requirements for outdoor units with no match are applicable to R-410A-
based systems and any other refrigerants banned by EPA regulations from
January 1, 2026, as they have been previously, for R-22 and any other
ozone-depleting refrigerants. Id. As proposed, the definition would
apply to all types of outdoor units (i.e., heat pump, air conditioner,
single-speed, two-speed, variable-speed, etc.) and outdoor units with
no match would continue to be tested with an indoor coil having a
nominal tube diameter of 0.375 in and an NGIFS of 1.0 or less (as
determined in section 5.1.6.3 of AHRI 210/240-202X Draft and AHRI 1600-
202X Draft). Id. DOE clarified that the determination of represented
values, alternative efficiency determination method (``AEDM'')
requirements, combinations selected for testing, and certification
report requirements applicable to outdoor units with no match would
remain the same as those specified in table 1 to paragraph (a)(1),
paragraph (c)(2), table 2 to paragraph (b)(2)(i), and paragraph (e)(3),
respectively, in 10 CFR 429.16. Id. DOE noted that existing outdoor
models currently distributed in commerce as part of a split-system
basic model that transition to a replacement outdoor unit only would
need to be tested, rated, and recertified under the provisions in 10
CFR 429.16 for an outdoor unit with no match. Id. DOE noted that the
basic model number would need to change to reflect that the outdoor
unit is no longer part of a combination as previously certified, but
rather as an outdoor unit with no match; however, the outdoor unit
model could still be assigned the same individual model number. Id.
(c) Interaction With EPA Regulations
In response to its April 2024 NOPR, DOE received comments from
stakeholders on a variety of issues related to compliance with DOE's
regulations in the context of the October 2023 EPA Final Rule. These
specific comments are addressed in the next section, but to ensure
clarity this section first summarizes the key elements of compliance
with DOE testing, rating, and certification requirements for these
products during the period of implementation of the EPA rules.
As specified in the October 2023 EPA Final Rule, and modified in
the December 2023 EPA interim final rule, installation of central air
conditioner and heat pump systems manufactured or imported on or after
January 1, 2025, that use a refrigerant with a GWP higher than 700
would be prohibited from being installed beginning on January 1, 2025.
A system comprised of ``specified components'' manufactured or imported
prior to January 1, 2025, can still be installed until January 1, 2026.
The EPA's rule permits the continued manufacture, distribution, and
installation of individual specified components that use higher GWP
refrigerants on or after January 1, 2026, only as replacements for
components in existing systems provided they are labeled for this use
as specified in the EPA rule.
The DOE definition of the term ``central air conditioner or central
air conditioning heat pump'' in 10 CFR 430.2 specifies that a central
air conditioner or central air conditioning heat pump may consist of: A
single-package unit; an outdoor unit and one or more indoor units; an
indoor unit only; or an outdoor unit with no match. Further, the DOE
definition specifies that in the case of an indoor unit only or an
outdoor unit with no match, the unit must be tested and rated as a
system (combination of both an indoor and an outdoor unit). In
addition, DOE's requirements in 10 CFR 429.16(a) specify required
representations based on how the model is distributed in commerce
(i.e., as part of a matched system, as an indoor unit only, or as an
outdoor unit with no match).
DOE's rules for testing and rating covered products to establish
compliance with energy conservation standards apply to basic models as
distributed in commerce by the manufacturer (or importer). Although the
deadlines for installation of specified components under EPA's rule
apply to certain products based on their date of manufacture or import
(i.e., depending on whether they were manufactured prior to January 1,
2025), DOE's rules for how the manufacturer must test, rate, and
certify their products apply based on the date of manufacture (or
importation) and on how each basic model is distributed in commerce
(i.e., as part of a matched system or as an OUWNM), with the purpose
being to ensure that each basic model complies with the energy
conservation standard that applies to that basic model. A manufacturer
or importer is not required to retest and/or recertify a basic model
unless the manufacturer either makes a change to that basic model that
would make it a new basic model under DOE's definition of that term in
10 CFR 430.2 or makes a change to the configuration in which it is
being distributed in commerce such that a different tested combination
requirement applies to it under 10 CFR 429.16. Stated within the
context of the EPA's rule, a basic model of condensing unit that
previously had been rated and certified to DOE in one or more
combinations would not have to be re-tested and rated under the OUWNM
provisions until such a time as the manufacturer ceases distribution of
that basic model as part of a matched pair and begins distributing it
as an OUWNM. At that point, the manufacturer must test, rate, and
certify that condensing unit under the OUWNM as a new basic model, as
under the basic model definition in 10 CFR 430.2 the model as an OUWNM
cannot be the same basic model as it would have been in a combination.
For R-410A (or other refrigerant with GWP above 700) outdoor units
manufactured (or imported) prior to January 1, 2025, which under the
EPA's rule can still be installed as a system until January 1, 2026,
the certifications of those models based on their tested combinations
remain valid under DOE regulations as long as manufacturers continue to
distribute them in commerce as a system. However, if at some point the
manufacturer chooses to distribute in commerce the unit alone and not
as a combination with any indoor units (either before January 1, 2026
or after that date as a service-only replacement component to comply
with EPA's rule), the outdoor unit would have to be tested, rated, and
certified in accordance with the OUWNM provisions. This also applies
for R-410A (or other refrigerant with GWP above 700) outdoor units
manufactured or imported on or after January 1, 2025, as DOE expects
that manufacturers would cease distribution of the outdoor units

[[Page 1238]]

as part of a combination, as these systems could no longer be installed
anywhere in the U.S. This certification as a new basic model must be
made prior to the date at which the manufacturer begins distributing
those outdoor units as an OUWMN and would be indicated to DOE in its
certification reports via a discontinued model filing for the model as
distributed in a combination and certification as a new basic model of
OUWNM.
For an indoor unit intended only for replacement in an existing
system and which is no longer distributed in commerce for installation
as a combination, as would be the case for an existing system that uses
a refrigerant banned by EPA, the requirement in 10 CFR 430.2 and table
1 of 10 CFR 429.16(a) for the indoor unit to be rated as part of a
system would still apply even though the indoor unit is no longer being
distributed in commerce as part of a combination. This rating
requirement would apply regardless of whether the manufacturer of the
indoor unit is an ICM. If the indoor unit uses a refrigerant allowed by
EPA only for component replacement (e.g., R-410A), the rating for such
a unit would be based on a combination using that refrigerant, and per
EPA regulations could not be distributed in commerce as a combination.
However, this does not imply that the indoor unit cannot be rated, nor
that the entire system would have to be replaced. DOE notes further
that any such rating for the indoor unit must be compliant with current
standards, and that any indoor units distributed in commerce for use in
a system that uses a refrigerant subject to the EPA ban would need to
have been certified to DOE as compliant with the applicable standards
as part of a combination before January 1, 2025 and must have been
tested and rated in every combination with an outdoor unit with which
it has been previously distributed in commerce.
(d) Comments Received
In their response to the NOPR, the Joint Advocates and Lennox fully
supported the proposed provisions for OUWNMs. The Joint Advocates
agreed that DOE's clarifying definition for OUWNM will help ensure
representative ratings and that the proposed definition is consistent
with DOE's intent in the June 2016 Final Rule. (Joint Advocates, No. 30
at p. 3) Lennox strongly supported the DOE proposal that any outdoor
unit designed for R-410A or any banned refrigerant as per EPA
regulations, when distributed in commerce without an indoor unit on or
after January 1, 2026, would be deemed an outdoor unit with no match.
(Lennox, No. 24 at p. 2).
Several commenters requested more clarity or expressed concerns on
DOE's OUWNM provisions. These are discussed in the following
subsections.
(1) OUWNM Definition
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07JA25.000

An Outdoor Unit that is not distributed in commerce by the
manufacturer with any indoor units, and that meets any of the following
criteria:
(a) is designed for use with a refrigerant that makes the unit
banned for installation when paired with a new Indoor Unit as a system,
according to EPA regulations in 40 CFR chapter I, subchapter C,
[provisions (b) and (c) unchanged]
Rheem requested that DOE consider simplifying the proposed
definition for OUWNMs because some of the bullet points may overlap or
conflict with each other. (Rheem, No. 34 at p. 3) Rheem noted that in
SNAP Final Rule 237, EPA has approved R-32, R-452B, R-454A, R-454B, R-
454C, and R-457A for use in residential and light commercial air-
conditioning and heat pump end use, which also includes CAC/HPs. (Id.)
Rheem commented that among these substitutes, R-454C and R-457A have a
95 [deg]F midpoint saturation absolute pressure within 18 percent of
the 95 [deg]F saturation absolute pressure for R-22, thus meeting the
provisions in 4.1(b) and 3.1(b) of the proposed OUWNM definition at
appendix M1 and appendix M2, respectively. (Id.) Rheem suggested that
DOE simplify the definition of OUWNM to avoid confusion. (Id.)
DOE appreciates that AHRI is taking steps to update AHRI 210/240-
2024 and AHRI 1600-2024 standards to broaden the OUWNM provisions
beyond R-22 outdoor units and make them applicable to any outdoor units
that are distributed in commerce without an indoor matching pair,
regardless of the refrigerant the outdoor unit employs. Such an
implementation would be consistent with DOE's proposed definition of
OUWNMs in the April

[[Page 1239]]

2024 NOPR. DOE disagrees with the addition of ``by the manufacturer''
in the OUWNM definition to qualify distribution in commerce, since
under EPCA the term ``distribution in commerce'' also applies to
subsequent distribution after the initial offering by the manufacturer.
The proposed addition would undercut the general applicability of that
term across the distribution chain as established in EPCA. As explained
in DOE's March 7, 2011, final rule that established the certification
provisions in Part 429, application of the term ``distribution in
commerce'' would depend on a particular manufacturer's production
practices, business decisions, and the facts and circumstances of a
particular case. 76 FR 12422, 12426. . However, DOE agrees with the
inclusion of the term ``new'' to clarify that the EPA ban specifically
pertains to new system installations, and for further clarification is
including the term ``new'' to describe both the indoor unit with which
the outdoor unit is paired and the newly created system. In addition,
notwithstanding the broad applicability of the term ``distribute in
commerce,'' DOE notes that under 10 CFR 429.102(a)(6) it is a
prohibited act for a manufacturer or private labeler to distribute in
commerce any new covered product or covered equipment that is not in
compliance with an applicable energy conservation standard prescribed
under the Act, and therefore the obligation to certify that basic
models are in compliance with the standards lies with the manufacturer
and importer. This is also the basis for the requirement in 10 CFR
429.12(a) that each manufacturer, before distributing in commerce any
basic model of a covered product or covered equipment subject to an
applicable energy conservation standard, certify that the model meets
the applicable energy conservation standard.
DOE agrees with Rheem that certain SNAP-approved refrigerants, for
example R-454C and R-457A, have pressure-temperature relationship
characteristics similar to R-22 and would meet provision (b) of the
proposed OUWNM definition. DOE notes that both these refrigerants have
GWPs equal to or less than 150, and thus could potentially be under
consideration for future reductions in GWP as compared with
refrigerants R-454B and R-32, the primary near-term candidates for
transition from R-410A. To ensure that these SNAP-approved refrigerants
would not be subject to provision (b) of the proposed OUWNM definition,
DOE is qualifying provision (b) with a GWP limit--specifically, only
refrigerants with GWP greater than 150 (per EPA's measure) would be
subject to provision (b).
In summary, DOE is making minor modifications to the OUWNM
definition as follows:
An Outdoor Unit that is not distributed in commerce with any indoor
units, and that meets any of the following criteria:
(a) Is designed for use with a refrigerant that makes the unit
banned for installation when paired with a new Indoor Unit as a system,
according to EPA regulations in 40 CFR chapter I, subchapter C;
(b) Is designed for use with a refrigerant that has a 95 [deg]F
midpoint saturation absolute pressure that is <plus-minus>18 percent of
the 95 [deg]F saturation absolute pressure for R-22 and a global
warming potential greater than 150 per EPA regulations in 40 CFR 84.64;
or
(c) Is shipped without a specified refrigerant from the point of
manufacture or is shipped such that more than 2 pounds of refrigerant
are required to meet the charge per section 5.1.8 of AHRI 210/240-
2024.\36\ This shall not apply if either (a) the factory charge is
equal to or greater than 70 percent of the outdoor unit internal volume
times the liquid density of refrigerant at 95 [deg]F, or (b) an A2L
refrigerant is approved for use and listed in the certification report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\36\ For Appendix M2, the definition references section 5.1.8 of
AHRI 1600-2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(2) Clarity on Interaction With EPA Rule
AHRI and Carrier requested further clarity on how DOE's OUWNM
provisions will interface with the October 2023 EPA final rule,
particularly in terms of timing and scope. (AHRI, No. 25 at pp. 2-4;
Carrier, No. 29 at p. 3)
AHRI appreciated DOE's proposal to expand the OUWNM definition to
include HFC refrigerants having a GWP greater than 700, in line with
EPA's ban, but noted that the interaction between the EPA and DOE
regulations are complex and implementation questions remain. (AHRI, No.
25 at p. 2) AHRI cautioned that care must be taken to ensure industry
and downstream distribution partners understand and can remain
compliant with applicable regulations and that consumers who recently
installed products with R-410A refrigerant have meaningful access to
service parts for the useful life of their equipment. (Id.) AHRI noted
that while no date has been included with the DOE-proposed OUWNM
definition, the NOPR preamble presents the proposed date of 2026.
(AHRI, No. 25 at p. 3) AHRI sought clarification that OUWNM ratings
would only be required for split-system outdoor units using HFC
refrigerants having a GWP greater than 700 manufactured after January
1, 2025. (Id.) AHRI attached a spreadsheet (Exhibit 1) that contained
requests for clarification from DOE on questions regarding the
prohibitions for manufacture, distribution, and installation of various
product types. (AHRI, No. 25 at pp. 5-6). Specifically, AHRI requested
clarification on whether DOE's proposal applies to split-system CAC/HP
products imported into the United States, but which are not for sale in
the United States. (Id.)
Carrier appreciated DOE's intent to further clarify the OUWNM
requirements and noted that it is clear that the OUWNM category is the
equivalent of EPA's service-only condenser allowance in the market.
(Carrier, No. 29 at p. 3) Carrier commented that it supports DOE
stating the application of OUWNM requirements to a service-only R-410A
condensing unit, but requested that DOE provide additional clarity in
the final rule on certain aspects, including effective date, which unit
types OUWNM applies to, and the indoor airflow requirements. (Id.) In
particular, Carrier requested that DOE make the following
clarifications to better help the regulated community in complying with
applicable efficiency and refrigerant regulations: (1) R-410A
condensing units manufactured or imported on or after January 1, 2025
would need to be tested and rated as an OUWNM because EPA prohibits the
installation of those outdoor units with a new indoor unit; (2) any R-
410A outdoor and indoor units manufactured before January 1, 2025 could
be sold and installed utilizing the existing DOE-certified system
rating, because EPA is allowing installation; (3) since EPA prohibits
the sale and installation of any R-410A outdoor and indoor units in
2026 regardless of production date, any remaining pre-2025 inventory
held by a manufacturer would be required to be recertified using the
OUWNM procedure when distributed in commerce on or after January 1,
2026; and (4) any pre-2025 R-410A air conditioners in the Southeast or
Southwest regions could not be installed without being recertified as
an OUWNM. (Carrier, No. 29 at p. 3)
In response to AHRI, DOE clarifies that OUWNM ratings for split-
system outdoor units employing refrigerants with GWP greater than 700
would be required for units distributed in commerce as service-only
placement

[[Page 1240]]

components (i.e., not as a combination) from the point of manufacture
and thus subject to DOE's testing and rating requirements for outdoor
units with no match in Appendix M1 and 10 CFR 429.16. As discussed in
the previous section of this notice, DOE expects that manufacturers
would need to make this transition for units manufactured after January
1, 2025, which it intends to make available as service-only replacement
components for existing systems. Regarding units that are imported into
the United States but not distributed and sold for installation within
the United States, DOE notes that its requirements specified in 10 CFR
parts 429, 430, and 431 shall not apply to any covered product or
covered equipment if: (a) such covered product or covered equipment is
manufactured, sold, or held for sale for export from the United States
or is imported for export; (b) such covered product or covered
equipment or any container in which it is enclosed, when distributed in
commerce, bears a stamp or label stating ``NOT FOR SALE FOR USE IN THE
UNITED STATES''; and (c) such product is, in fact, not distributed in
commerce for use in the United States. 10 CFR 429.6.
DOE notes that the additional detail provided in the preceding
section of this notice, and in the preceding paragraphs, is largely
consistent with Carrier's suggestions. However, DOE wishes to correct
two of Carrier's clarifications: (1) the recertification of remaining
pre-2025 inventory would not be required provided those basic models
were correctly certified based on how they were distributed at the time
of their manufacture; and (2) the applicability of these provisions for
units to be installed in the Southeast or Southwest do not differ from
products subject to nationwide standards. The only difference for
installation in the Southeast or Southwest is that the regional energy
conservation standards would apply for such installations, as would
otherwise be the case per 10 CFR 430.32(c)(6), and the efficiency
rating as certified by the manufacturer must indicate those basic
models comply with the applicable regional standards and may be
installed in the Southeast and/or Southwest regions.
(3) Recertification of Units Already Distributed in Commerce
Several commenters expressed concern with the recertification as
OUWNMs of units already distributed in commerce, when installed after
January 1, 2026.
AHRI sought clarification on the intended meaning of the phrase
``distributed in commerce.'' (AHRI, No. 25 at p. 3) AHRI noted that the
current DOE regulation places no restrictions on distribution of
products if the product was initially certified and regional standards
are not an issue for the product and location. (AHRI, No. 25 at p. 6)
AHRI noted that DOE's NOPR proposal requires existing outdoor models
currently distributed in commerce as part of a split-system basic model
that transition to a replacement outdoor unit only to be tested, rated,
and recertified under the provisions in 10 CFR 429.16 for an outdoor
unit with no match. (Id.) AHRI noted that per EPCA, ``distribution in
commerce'' means ``to sell in commerce, to import, to introduce or
deliver for introduction into commerce, or to hold for sale or
distribution after introduction into commerce,'' and that
``distribution in commerce'' applies to both the initial offering for
sale by the manufacturer and the subsequent distribution by downstream
partners (i.e., sale by the distributor to the contractor, or the
contractor to the homeowner). (Id.) AHRI cautioned that without linking
the requirements to a manufacture/import date, DOE's proposal
complicates the distribution of outdoor units manufactured pre-2025
that are no longer in possession of the manufacturer or private
labeler. (Id.) AHRI questioned how DOE will enforce the proposal on
products subject to national energy efficiency standards. (Id.)
AHRI contended that for products subject to national standards, DOE
is constrained by the application of the base national standard, which
``applies to all products manufactured or imported into the United
States on and after the effective date of the standard.'' \37\ (AHRI,
No. 25 at p. 6) Therefore, AHRI asserted that space-constrained
products; small-duct high-velocity, air conditioners in the North; and
heat pumps manufactured or imported prior to January 1, 2025 that were
certified as compliant with the base national standard can still be
installed in the United States until the inventory is depleted. (Id.)
AHRI questioned how DOE could require manufacturers, distributors, or
contractors to retroactively apply testing, rating, or certification
requirements on outdoor units subject to national standards that were
distributed in commerce and are no longer in the manufacturer's
possession. (AHRI, No. 25 at pp. 6-7) AHRI requested for DOE to link
the OUWNM definition to a manufacture/import date, as DOE's proposal
complicates the distribution of outdoor units manufactured prior to
January 1, 2025 that are no longer in possession of the manufacturer
(or private labeler). (AHRI, No. 25 at p. 7) Similarly, for products
subject to regional standards, AHRI questioned how DOE could require
manufacturers, distributors, or contractors to retroactively apply
testing, rating, or certification for outdoor units manufactured/
imported in 2024 and no longer in possession of the manufacturer. (Id.)
AHRI requested clarification on whether DOE intended that air
conditioners slated for the Southeast and Southwest regions,
manufactured/imported in 2024, and still in possession of the
manufacturer be recertified as OUWNMs on January 1, 2025. (Id.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\37\ 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(6)(E).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

AHRI noted that while the NOPR preamble states that ``the basic
model number would need to change to reflect that the outdoor unit is
no longer part of a combination as previously certified, but rather as
an outdoor unit with no match, but the outdoor unit model could still
be assigned the same individual model number,'' DOE has not described
in the proposed regulatory text how the testing, rating, and
recertification for outdoor units distributed in commerce by outdoor
unit manufacturers (``OUMs'') for a former certified combination that
transitions to OUWNMs for replacement will be completed. (AHRI, No. 25
at p. 6) AHRI expressed concern that this may create logistical
complications, given that ``distributed in commerce'' applies to both
the initial sale and the subsequent sale of products that have already
entered commerce and are no longer in the possession of the
manufacturer to be recertified. (Id.) AHRI contended that certification
of a condensing unit as an OUWNM should apply to products manufactured
after January 1, 2025. (Id.)
HARDI strongly opposed any restriction on the ability of its
members to sell products already in inventory, including install date
regulations, such as EPA's transitions program and the statutorily
required install date in DOE's regional standards for split-system
central air conditioners. (HARDI, No. 26 at pp. 1-2) HARDI commented
that it believed install date requirements hinder the ability of the
heating, ventilation, air-conditioning, and refrigeration industry to
move to more energy-efficient or environmentally friendly products and
that install date regulations that cause dead inventory are ineffective
because they create waste, increase costs, and constitute a

[[Page 1241]]

regulatory taking.\38\ (Id.) HARDI commented that it was its
understanding that the phrase ``currently distributed in commerce''
does not intend to include CAC/HP equipment already in distributors'
warehouses, but it asserted that, just like with the confusing
compliance regime caused by the install date associated with regional
standards for split-system central air conditioners, if this phrase is
used in the final regulation, local compliance officials will prevent
repairs to existing systems if the outdoor unit does not have proof of
meeting the minimum efficiency standard. (HARDI, No. 26 at p. 2) HARDI
suggested that the best course of action is to apply the OUWNM testing
and certification requirements at the same date of manufacture timeline
as the EPA requirement for outdoor condensing units to be marked ``For
servicing existing equipment only.'' (Id.) HARDI noted that for split-
system CAC/HPs, EPA requires anything manufactured after January 1,
2025 to be marked ``For servicing existing equipment only.'' (Id.)
HARDI further noted that while new split-system CAC/HPs can be
installed until January 1, 2026 using R-410A or other high-GWP
refrigerants, EPA requires those systems to be manufactured before
January 1, 2025, and outdoor units manufactured after January 1, 2025
can only be used as components, thereby meeting the proposed definition
of OUWNMs. (Id.) HARDI recommended that DOE limit the need to test,
rate, and recertify equipment to only outdoor units manufactured after
January 1, 2025, as this will ensure that equipment intended to be
installed as an OUWNM does meet the minimum efficiency requirements
while not affecting equipment originally sold for installation as a
matched system. (Id.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\38\ HARDI notes that a regulatory taking is a ``taking of
property under the Fifth Amendment by way of regulation that
seriously restricts a property owner's rights,'' Blacks Law
Dictionary, 11th Edition. (HARDI, No. 26 at p. 1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

JCI expressed concerns with DOE's proposal to require
recertification of units ``currently distributed in commerce'' to meet
the OUWNM requirements, contending that requiring recertification of a
component as part of a system that was previously certified as
compliant and has already entered commerce, i.e., is no longer in the
possession of the original manufacturer, is overly burdensome for
manufacturers, distributors, and contractors, and will be problematic
for DOE to enforce without tying enforcement to the manufacture/import
date. (JCI, No. 35 at p. 2) JCI recommended that for outdoor units that
have entered commerce, the ``date of manufacture'' be used as the
enforcement mechanism. (Id.) JCI commented that it was its
understanding that outdoor units manufactured on or after January 1,
2025 would be required to meet DOE's OUWNM criteria if they were still
in the possession of the original manufacturer. (Id.) JCI stated that
clarifying that the OUWNM requirements would take effect on January 1,
2025, versus the NOPR date of January 1, 2026, reduces the amount of
inventory in the channel that would require recertification. (Id.)
Rheem also expressed concern about language for OUWNMs applicable
to ``existing outdoor models currently distributed in commerce,'' where
these products would need to be recertified and given a new basic model
number in the event that they are only eligible for component
replacement per EPA's Technology Transitions rule. (Rheem, No. 34 at p.
3) Rheem asserted that the notion of obtaining proof of new rating and
a different model number is unreasonable to require once the equipment
has left manufacturer warehouses, as the application of new labels and
rating certifications is impractical to carry out at the distributor
and installer levels. (Id.) Rheem commented that EPA appears to
recognize this impracticality and does not require relabeling of
equipment made prior to January 1, 2025 to indicate ``for service
only.'' (Id.) Rheem contended that a change in the test procedure
should not render obsolete a product currently in commerce that was
compliant at the time of manufacture. (Id.)
As indicated by AHRI, DOE notes that per EPCA, the terms ``to
distribute in commerce'' and ``distribution in commerce'' mean to
``sell in commerce, to import, to introduce or deliver for introduction
into commerce, or to hold for sale or distribution after introduction
into commerce.'' (42 U.S.C. 6291(16)) Under the statutory definition,
this term can apply to the initial offering of sale by a manufacturer
or by subsequent distribution by downstream partners. As was discussed
in the previous section, the December 2023 EPA Interim Final Rule
allows for a 1-year sell-through period (until January 1, 2026) for any
CAC/HP system employing a refrigerant with a GWP of 700 or greater,
provided the specified component is manufactured or imported prior to
January 1, 2025 (see 40 CFR 84.54(c)(1)). Since EPA prohibits the
installation of any specified CAC/HP components to create a new system
employing a refrigerant with a GWP of 700 or greater on or after
January 1, 2026, irrespective of the manufacturing date, any remaining
pre-2025 inventory (i.e., imported or manufactured before January 1,
2025) held by any channel of distribution (manufacturer or distributor)
could not be installed as a system after January 1, 2026.
DOE's rating and certification requirements in 10 CFR 429.16 for
central air conditioners and heat pumps apply based on how a
manufacturer distributes the models in commerce. If the manufacturer
ceases distribution in commerce of a model of outdoor unit that was
previously part of a combination and begins distributing it only as an
OUWNM to allow for use as a service-only replacement under the EPA's
rules for components of an R-410A system, that model of outdoor unit
would need to be recertified under the OUWNM requirements regardless of
when that transition occurs, since the manufacturer (or private
labeler) has an obligation to ensure that any basic model it
distributes is compliant with the applicable energy conservation
standard for the configuration (or configurations) in which the
manufacturer distributes it. However, the requirement to recertify
those basic models does not apply retroactively to units of a basic
model that were already distributed in commerce as part of a
combination and had been correctly certified according to DOE's
regulations.
Regarding AHRI's concern about enforcement of national standards,
DOE notes that no changes were proposed to national standards in the
April 2024 NOPR, and none are being finalized in this rulemaking. The
purpose of the clarification provided in this rulemaking is to ensure
that manufacturers have a clear understanding of how to comply with
DOE's certification requirements for products that will be subject to
EPA regulations. DOE's certification provisions in 10 CFR 429.12(a)
specify that each manufacturer, before distributing in commerce any
basic model of a covered product or covered equipment subject to an
applicable energy conservation standard set forth in parts 430 or 431,
and annually thereafter . . . shall submit a certification report to
DOE certifying that each basic model meets the applicable energy
conservation standard(s). To the extent that outdoor units that were
previously certified as compliant as part of a matched system begin
being distributed in commerce as outdoor units with no match, they are
being distributed as a new basic model, and therefore, must certify
compliance with the applicable energy conservation

[[Page 1242]]

standards. The application of the base national standard, as referenced
by AHRI, still applies to the outdoor unit based on its manufacture
date, but compliance with that standard must be determined for the
basic model distributed in commerce (i.e., the OUWNM).
DOE notes that the EPA regulations include a 1-year sell-through
period to reduce inventory of units that may be in danger of not
complying with the EPA rule. DOE's rationale also applies to AHRI's
concern on regional standards. However, DOE notes that there is
confusion on the applicability of the EPA dates on the regional level.
DOE clarifies, consistent with the national application, that air
conditioners certified as able to be installed in the Southeast and
Southwest regions manufactured or imported before January 1, 2025, and
that have already been distributed in commerce, would not need to be
certified as OUWNMs on January 1, 2025, provided the manufacturer had
already certified compliance with the applicable energy conservation
standards. For units intended for installation in the Southeast or
Southwest regions, this would include a certification that they comply
with those applicable standards. As previously explained in this
notice, the only distinction from CAC/HP products that are not subject
to regional efficiency standards is that split-system AC outdoor units
certified as OUWNM would have to meet the applicable standards for the
Southeast or Southwest regions to be installed in those regions.
DOE notes there may be confusion regarding the applicability of the
compliance dates in the EPA rule and how these dates affect DOE
regional standards requirements. To be clear, the EPA rule has no
effect on DOE requirements. For certain split-system central air
conditioning systems or certain OUWNMs to be installed in the Southeast
or Southwest region consistent with DOE regional standards
requirements, the system/OUWNM must be certified to DOE as compliant
with the applicable regional standard(s), and the certification must
indicate that the model/combination can be installed in the Southeast
and/or Southwest region. While the EPA rule may change the approach a
manufacture may take with respect to testing and certifying a
particular model, it does not change DOE requirements.
In response to AHRI's concern that DOE has not described in the
proposed regulatory text how the testing, rating, and recertification
for OUWNMs will be completed, DOE notes that the testing requirements
are laid out in section 4.2 of revised appendix M1 and section 3.2 of
new appendix M2. Additionally, as noted in the April 2024 NOPR, and
explained in the preceding section of this notice, existing outdoor
models currently distributed in commerce as part of a split-system
basic model that the manufacturer transitions to a replacement outdoor
unit only would need to be tested, rated, and certified under the
provisions in 10 CFR 429.16 for an outdoor unit with no match. 89 FR
24206, 24231. As described previously in this section, distribution of
such a model as an OUWNM represents distribution in commerce of a new
basic model, and accordingly, the basic model must be certified as
compliant with the applicable energy conservation standards. DOE may
consider additional certification requirements under a separate
rulemaking regarding appliance and equipment certification.
In response to HARDI, DOE clarifies that the reporting obligations
apply to manufacturers, and importers, and thus basic models previously
distributed in commerce by the manufacturer that were certified by the
manufacturer in accordance with 10 CFR 429.12 do not need to be
recertified. Regarding HARDI's criticism of regulation based on install
date requirements, DOE clarifies that, whereas the EPA rule is based on
the date of installation, the application of the OUWNM provisions are
based on the configuration in which the manufacturer (or importer)
distributed the basic model from the point of manufacture (or import).
It does not depend upon distributor or retail sales and offerings. DOE
notes that the EPA regulations include a 1-year sell-through period for
pre-2025 inventory to provide time to reduce inventory. The OUWNM
provisions in this rulemaking simply align with the EPA action
undertaken in the October 2023 EPA rule. In response to HARDI's
recommendation to limit the need to test, rate, and recertify equipment
to only outdoor units manufactured after January 1, 2025, DOE agrees
that most inventory manufactured prior to January 1, 2025, will likely
be distributed in commerce with indoor units and be installed prior to
January 1, 2026; however, to the extent that any outdoor units
manufactured prior to January 1, 2025, continue to be distributed in
commerce by the manufacturer after January 1, 2026, as OUWNM, the
manufacturer must test consistent with the requirements applicable to
OUWNMs and certify the compliance of such models with the applicable
energy conservation standard.
In response to JCI, DOE again stresses that the timing for
implementation of the OUWNM provisions is tied to the EPA rule.
Specifically, an outdoor unit no longer has a match when EPA
requirements no longer allow installation with an indoor unit to create
a new system, and thus must be certified to DOE as an OUWNM as it
continues to be distributed in commerce. As discussed in III.E.7.c(2),
DOE clarifies that any outdoor CAC/HP units manufactured or imported on
or after January 1, 2025 and employing refrigerants with GWP greater
than 700 (for example, R-410A), would need to be tested and rated as an
OUWNM, consistent with the EPA requirement that such models be used
``for servicing existing equipment only.'' For units manufactured or
imported before January 1, 2025 the existing DOE-certified system
rating can be used, provided the manufacturer does not continue
distribution of the outdoor units alone, because the EPA regulations
permit installations of such systems until January 1, 2026. However, if
the unit is distributed in commerce alone and not as a combination with
any indoor units, as likely would be the case for products intended for
installation as an individual replacement component of an existing
system, the outdoor unit would have to be certified in accordance with
the OUWNM provisions prior to the date at which the manufacturer begins
distributing those outdoor units as an OUWMN, as indicated to DOE in
its certification reports via a discontinued model filing for the model
as distributed in a combination and certification as an OUWNM.
In response to Rheem's claim that EPA does not require relabeling
of equipment made prior to January 1, 2025 to indicate ``for service
only,'' DOE notes that the EPA labeling requirement at 40 CFR 84.58(b)
states, ``Effective upon the date listed for each subsector in Sec.
84.54(c) . . . any specified component . . . that uses or is intended
to use any regulated substance, or blend containing any regulated
substance . . . must have a permanent label compliant with paragraph
(c) \39\ of this section containing the information in paragraph (a)(1)
of this section. For specified components that are intended for use

[[Page 1243]]

with a regulated substance or blends containing a regulated substance
that exceed the applicable GWP limit or HFC restriction, the label must
state ``For servicing existing equipment only'' in addition to the
other required labeling elements.'' (See 40 CFR 84.58(b)) 40 CFR
84.58(c) requires the label to list, at a minimum, the refrigerant and
the date of manufacture. DOE is aware that there are two dates listed
in the relevant paragraph for split-system CAC/HPs under section Sec.
84.54(c)--January 1, 2025 and January 1, 2026. As discussed above and
in the preceding section of this notice the December 2023 EPA Interim
Final Rule pushed back the restriction on R-410A and similar
refrigerants such that components manufactured prior to January 1, 2025
could be installed as part of systems prior to January 1, 2026, and
thereafter would be installable only for servicing existing equipment.
Thus, unless EPA intended for the ``for servicing existing equipment
only'' words to be on specified components starting January 1, 2025,
when they would still be allowed to be used for system installations,
EPA regulations effectively state that the required label would have to
be applied or changed while the component is in distribution, i.e.,
after leaving the manufacturer but before installation. However, DOE
notes that these labeling provisions are separate from its own
regulatory requirements and that manufacturers seeking more specific
guidance on the implementation of these provisions should consult EPA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\39\ The reference is to paragraph (c) but should be to
paragraph (d), which specifies label design (e.g., English language,
durable and printed/affixed to the product exterior surface, readily
visible and legible, etc.). Paragraph (c) addresses products in the
foam or aerosol sector and is not relevant for the refrigeration,
air-conditioning, and heat pump sector addressed in paragraph (b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Regarding Rheem's contention that a change in the test procedure
should not render a currently compliant product obsolete, DOE notes
that it is the EPA action, and not a change to the DOE test procedure,
that would prevent the installation of a previously certified CAC/HP
system. In accordance with this EPA action, DOE's OUWNM provisions in
the test procedure provide a means for manufacturers to assign an
energy efficiency rating to split-system outdoor units after the EPA
has banned them for full-system installations. As discussed earlier in
this section and in the preceding section, to the extent that the
manufacturer of the outdoor unit of a previously certified CAC/HP
system begins distributing it in commerce as an OUWNM, it would become
a new basic model and the manufacturer would need to certify that it
complies with the applicable energy conservation standard.
In a comment related to concerns regarding recertification as OUWNM
of outdoor units already distributed in commerce, GE Appliances
indicated that products currently in production would need redesign to
comply with cut-out/cut-in temperature and CVP enforcement testing. (GE
Appliances, No. 37 at p. 6) They commented that since import and
production of legacy R-410A equipment will cease after January 1, 2025,
there will be no need to redesign existing inventory, in order to
comply with the cut-out/cut-in temperature and CVP enforcement test.
Id. They pointed out that most of DOE`s energy efficiency enforcements
are based on date of import or manufacture, so exclusion of R-410A
legacy equipment from CVP and cut-out/cut-in enforcement testing would
be consistent with this practice, and that failing to exclude these
products from such enforcement would lead to stranded inventory,
resulting in the loss of embodied carbon in the inventory, with little/
no energy efficiency saving. Id.
In response to the comment by GE Appliances, certifications
required to be made by a manufacturer for the compressor and indoor
blower speed of any variable capacity system at specific test
conditions must represent normal operation. The CVP provisions
established in this final rule describe how DOE would verify that
certified values are appropriate for the purposes of DOE enforcement
testing. Hence, DOE would expect existing properly-certified variable
speed CAC/HPs and CHPs to pass the CVP enforcement with minimal or no
adjustment to existing performance representations. Further, DOE
certainly would not expect changes sufficient to call into question the
compliance of such models with DOE efficiency standards. Similarly,
although cut-out and cut-in temperatures are not currently required to
be certified, DOE would expect manufacturers to have certified HSPF2
values that are consistent with the actual cut-out/cut-in
characteristics of certified models. Manufacturers are not required
themselves to conduct CVP testing. To the extent that manufacturers are
correctly certifying performance of existing models, there would be no
need to recertify or redesign such models in response to DOE
implementing CVP testing for enforcement purposes. Therefore, DOE
disagrees with the suggestion of GE Appliances, that there should be
specific exclusions for legacy R-410A CAC/HPs from the CVP and cut-out/
cut-in temperature enforcement provisions.
(4) Applicability to Multi-Head Mini-Splits, Multi-Splits, and Multi-
Circuit Systems
AHRI and Carrier requested clarity on whether the OUWNM provisions
are applicable to multi-head mini-split, multi-split, or multi-circuit
systems. (AHRI, No. 25 at pp. 4-5; Carrier, No. 29 at pp. 3-4).
Carrier requested that DOE confirm that the OUWNM certification
requirement is applicable to all split-system condensing units within
the scope of appendix M1, which includes single-split, multi-head mini-
split, multi-split (including VRF), and multi-circuit air conditioner
and heat pump systems. (Carrier, No. 29 at pp. 3-4) Specifically,
Carrier commented that it believes multi-head mini-split and multi-
split systems should also require the OUWNM certification. (Id.)
Carrier noted that while these systems are generally intended to be
installed with multiple indoor units, they can be installed with a
single indoor unit, which could be ducted or ductless, and that
multiple manufacturers have combinations that utilize a mini-split
(traditionally known as a ``ductless outdoor unit'') with a
conventional ``ducted'' indoor unit and coil combination. (Id.) Carrier
further noted that multi-split and mini-VRF outdoor units are able to
be rated, certified, and used in combination with a single indoor unit
as well as the typical multiple indoor units. (Id.) Carrier expressed
concern that if OUWNM provisions are not required for these systems
that can be installed with a single indoor unit, they could be used to
replace the condenser on a system with an indoor unit that was never a
certified combination, yielding poor system efficiencies. (Id.) Carrier
commented that it was its understanding that EPA's reasoning to allow a
service-only condenser was to address the customer concern of replacing
their entire system upon a part failure in the condenser. (Id.) Carrier
stated that in its experience, this does not happen regularly in the
market, and if there is a premature part failure in the condenser, the
part (i.e., compressor, expansion valve, motor, control board, or coil)
is replaced or repaired, especially in the case of complex outdoor
units such as multi-split condensers. (Id.) Carrier noted that in the
situation the condenser fails at end of life, it is common practice to
replace the entire system. (Id.) For these reasons, Carrier requested
that DOE clarify that all split-system condensing units within the
scope of appendix M1 that are manufactured beginning January 1, 2025
with R-410A or any banned refrigerant must be certified as an OUWNM.
(Id.).
AHRI noted that appendix M1 defines the tested combination of a
multi-head mini-split, multi-split, or multi-circuit system to consist
of one outdoor unit

[[Page 1244]]

with one or more compressors matched with between two and five indoor
units. (AHRI, No. 25 at p. 4) AHRI further noted that appendix M1
requires that these indoor units must collectively have a nominal
cooling capacity greater than or equal to 95 percent and less than or
equal to 105 percent of the nominal cooling capacity of the outdoor
unit. (Id.) AHRI requested that DOE confirm (1) if multi-head systems
would test as OUWNM with one or two indoor units per appendix M1,
section 2.2(e); and (2) if the preference is for testing multi-head
systems with two (or more) indoor units, whether the coil-only indoor
unit coil shall be split evenly between the two, or in another
configuration. (AHRI, No. 25 at pp. 4-5).
DOE agrees with the reasons presented by Carrier and clarifies that
the OUWNM provisions are applicable to all split-system CAC/HPs within
the scope of appendix M1--including single-split, multi-head mini-
split, multi-split (including VRF), and multi-circuit air conditioner
and heat pump systems. As noted by AHRI, per appendix M1, the tested
combination of a multi-head mini-split, multi-split, or multi-circuit
system requires between two and five indoor units. However, the indoor
unit requirements (which are based on the highest sales volume family)
are not explicitly applicable for OUWNM testing. As indicated by
Carrier, multi-head systems can be installed and are able to be rated
with either a single indoor unit or multiple indoor units. To provide
maximum flexibility to manufacturers and to limit test burden, DOE
clarifies that, for multi-head systems being certified under the
outdoor unit with no match provisions, (1) multi-head systems capable
of being paired with a single indoor coil shall be tested with a single
indoor coil; and (2) multi-head systems incapable of being paired with
a single indoor coil shall be tested with the least amount (between two
to five) of identical indoor coils. If testing with two or more indoor
coils, all coils shall have the same dimensions. The current testing
instructions in section 2.2(e) of appendix M1 \40\ are written for a
single indoor coil, but the same concept of the NGIFS can be extended
to two or more identical indoor coils. Specifically, when evaluating
NGIFS with two or more indoor coils, the total summation of the fin
surface area would include all coils. DOE may consider certification
requirements to include whether one or more indoor coils were used to
evaluate an OUWNM rating in a separate rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\40\ These instructions are also included in sections 5.1.6.2
and 5.1.6.3 of AHRI 210/240-2024 and AHRI 1600-2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(5) Control Type and Communicating System
Carrier also requested that DOE clarify that OUWNM certification is
required for all condensing units, regardless of the control type being
used to generate the system rating. (Carrier, No. 29 at p. 4) Carrier
noted that many of the communicating variable-speed condensers on the
market today also have the capability to operate with a conventional
24-V non-communicating thermostat and that it would be extremely
difficult to exclude these units from the OUWNM certification and
ensure they were actually being matched with a certified communicating
indoor unit that was previously installed. (Id.)
Conversely, GE Appliances commented that multi-head ductless split
systems and VRF systems under 65k BTU, which are almost always
variable-speed communicating systems, are unable to complete the
existing test procedure for an OUWNM listing, as existing software does
not support or allow a coil-only match without connection to a matched
indoor unit. (GE Appliances, No. 37 at p. 4) GE asserted that the
inability to provide replacement outdoor units to service existing
communicating systems will lead to significant harm for consumers, the
environment, and DOE's goals for heat pumps and variable-speed systems.
(Id.) GE Appliances requested that DOE allow outdoor-unit-only listings
for variable-speed communicating systems capable of supporting multiple
indoor coils based on the lowest-performing system performance for the
outdoor coil for any previously listed system or currently produced,
compatible communicating coil. (Id.) GE Appliances asserted that
because outdoor units for communicating systems can generally only work
with matched indoor units using the same communications protocol, there
is little risk of improper combinations to create systems that perform
worse than efficiency levels required by DOE. (Id.) GE Appliances
further commented that listing OUWNM units for these systems in this
manner ensures accurate consumer information about expected product
performance and also ensures service components' availability where
they would otherwise be restricted. (Id.)
Mitsubishi also asserted that while it understands the broad
industry support for DOE to extend the definition of OUWNM to R-410A
outdoor units, the proposed language does not take into account the
emergence and expansion of communicating variable-speed equipment.
(Mitsubishi, No. 28 at p. 2) Mitsubishi contended that like every other
inverter-driven variable-capacity ductless OEM, Mitsubishi systems and
components are unable to test or operate with any coil in a lab or in
the field that is not equipped with proprietary communication protocol
and firmware, and that evaluating their outdoor units as OUWNMs renders
these controls and advancements completely useless. (Id.) Mitsubishi
requested that either communicating variable-speed systems be exempted
from the OUWNM provisions, or that specific allowances be considered to
enable communicating variable-capacity outdoor units to be tested in a
way that demonstrates compliance with Federal efficiency minimum
standards. (Id.)
DOE clarifies that the OUWNM requirements will apply to all split-
system CAC/HPs units, whether they use proprietary controls to
communicate conditioned-space temperature and/or humidity, use a
generic thermostat, or allow either installation approach. Also, DOE
understands that many ductless multi-split systems and VRF systems are
variable-speed systems that employ software that requires the outdoor
unit to be paired with a recognized indoor unit (i.e., a pairing
confirming system).\41\ Manufacturers of ductless multi-split systems
and VRF systems may already have the means to test these systems with a
generic indoor unit or may need to reprogram their outdoor units to
allow operation with a generic indoor unit, for units using a
refrigerant with GWP greater than 700 that are manufactured after
January 1, 2025. While the latter option may require additional
software rework, this reprogramming would require limited engineering
hours to implement, such that DOE does not consider it to be burdensome
to manufacturers. In response to GE's proposal to allow outdoor-unit-
only listings for such systems based on the lowest-performing system
combination for the outdoor coil, and Mitsubishi's request for such
systems to be exempted from the OUWNM provisions or given special

[[Page 1245]]

allowances, DOE notes that neither approach provides confirmation that
a given outdoor unit could not be field paired with a nonproprietary
indoor unit(s). Therefore, to maintain consistency across all split-
system CAC/HPs, irrespective of the control type, DOE is exempting
neither pairing confirming variable-speed systems nor variable-speed
communicating systems from the OUWNM provisions, nor allowing either
category of outdoor units to be rated based on its lowest-performing
combination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\41\ While the term used by commenters to refer to such systems
is ``communicating,'' DOE notes that the current test procedure uses
this term differently. Specifically, ``communicating,'' per the
current test procedure, refers to the ability of the system to
communicate in-space temperature with both the outdoor and indoor
units, instead of communication between the indoor and outdoor
units. DOE also notes that neither the AHRI test standards (210/240
and 1600) nor the test procedure being finalized in this rule use
the term ``communicating.'' To prevent confusion, DOE is referring
to these systems as ``pairing confirming systems.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(6) Service Coil Definition
GE Appliances and Mitsubishi requested revision to the ``service
coil'' definition (see 10 CFR appendix M1, section 1.2) to also include
integrated indoor blowers within the definition's scope. (GE
Appliances, No. 37 at pp. 1-3; Mitsubishi, No. 28 at p. 2)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07JA25.001

[[Page 1246]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07JA25.002

GE Appliances contended that revising the definition of service
coil to account for DFS systems is essential to protect consumers who
have recently installed DFS systems using R-410A refrigerant and that
without these revisions, indoor replacement units to repair DFS systems
during their expected useful life may be limited, and consumers may be
required to replace entire systems instead of merely components. (Id.)
GE further commented that if DFS systems are not able to have indoor
coil replacements, there is a risk of significant negative consumer
sentiment toward DFS systems. (Id.)
Mitsubishi asserted that circumstances where full replacement of
ductless indoor units would be significantly less costly than field
replacement of individual parts would needlessly impact the pocketbooks
of homeowners and consume scarce technician labor hours. (Mitsubishi,
No. 28 at p. 2) Mitsubishi recommended a carve out or alteration of the
current definition of service coil to allow ductless indoor units to be
sold for purposes of service, as it would remedy this concern and be
better aligned with the EPA Technology Transitions rule and guidance.
(Id.)
DOE concurs with GE Appliances that mini-split, multi-split, and
VRF systems have become more prevalent in the residential air-
conditioning market. As noted by GE Appliances, the current service
coil definition does not include indoor units that have integrated
indoor blowers. DOE also notes that the service coil definition in AHRI
210/240-2024 and AHRI 1600-2024, the industry standards DOE is
referencing in this final rule, also do not include integrated indoor
blowers within the service coil definition. Both appendix M1 (see
section 1.2 of appendix M1) and the AHRI standards define ``indoor
unit'', which includes integrated blowers within the definition's
scope. The indoor unit definition in Appendix M1 also explicitly notes
that a service coil is not an indoor unit. In relevance to the EPA
rule, the labelling requirements at 40 CFR 84.58(b) clarify the
installation allowances of indoor units. Specifically, 40 CFR 84.58(b)
notes that, after January 1, 2025, specified components intended for
use with banned refrigerants shall have the label ``For servicing
existing equipment only'' attached. Any indoor units that are intended
to be used with banned refrigerants (such as R-410A) fall within the
scope of specified components and under the aforementioned regulatory
provisions under the EPA's rule would need to have this label attached.
As was noted in the previous section of this notice, the CAC/HP
definition in 10 CFR 430.2 includes a requirement that indoor units
sold alone be rated as part of a combination. Specifically, the
definition states ``A central air conditioner or central air
conditioning heat pump may consist of: A single-package unit; an
outdoor unit and one or more indoor units; an indoor unit only; or an
outdoor unit with no match. In the case of an indoor unit only or an
outdoor unit with no match, the unit must be tested and rated as a
system (combination of both an indoor and an outdoor unit).'' Such
indoor units may be distributed by indoor coil manufacturers (``ICMs'')
which, as defined in Appendix M1, manufacture indoor units but do not
manufacture single-package units or outdoor units. They may also be
distributed in commerce alone and not as part of a combination by non-
ICMs for the replacement market. For an indoor unit intended only for
replacement in an existing system and which is no longer distributed in
commerce for installation as a combination, as would be the case for an
existing system that uses a refrigerant banned by EPA, the requirement
in table 1 of 10 CFR 429.16(a) for the indoor unit to be rated as part
of a system would still apply even though the indoor unit is no longer
being distributed in commerce as part of a combination. This rating
requirement would apply regardless of whether the manufacturer of the
indoor unit is an ICM. If the indoor unit uses a refrigerant allowed by
EPA only for component replacement (e.g., R-410A), the rating for such
a unit would be based on a combination using that refrigerant, and per
EPA regulations could not be distributed in commerce as a combination.
However, this does not imply that the indoor unit cannot be rated, nor
that the entire system would have to be replaced, as suggested by GE.
DOE notes further that any such rating

[[Page 1247]]

for the indoor unit must be compliant with current standards, and that
any indoor units distributed in commerce for use in a system that uses
a refrigerant subject to the EPA ban would need to have been certified
to DOE as compliant with the applicable standards as part of a
combination before January 1, 2025.
(7) Space-Constrained Systems
NCP commented that it performed analysis, testing, and simulations
of through-the-wall space-constrained R-410A systems to evaluate
available options to meet the proposed OUWNM requirement for applicable
outdoor condensing units. (NCP, No. 27 at p. 2) NCP contended that the
results of this testing \42\ indicated that its space-constrained
outdoor condensing units would not meet applicable minimum efficiency
requirements when rated using a generic indoor coil as specified by the
OUWNM requirements. (Id.) NCP asserted that it was not aware of any
space-constrained outdoor condensing units from other manufacturers
that could meet efficiency requirements when rated as an OUWNM. (Id.)
NCP asserted that the OUWNM requirements in DOE's proposed rule would
effectively prohibit any space-constrained R-410A outdoor condensing
unit after January 1, 2026, and leave manufacturers with stranded
inventory. (NCP, No. 27 at p. 2) NCP contended that occupants of
multifamily housing units with recently installed space-constrained R-
410A split systems would be left without options for service
replacement of their outdoor condensing unit section, beyond
installation of the entire indoor and outdoor split system. (Id.) To
provide relief from excessive cost burdens, NCP suggested that DOE
should include language in the final rule that coil-only ratings for
space-constrained split-system outdoor units with R-410A are
permissible until January 1, 2028, for units manufactured before
January 1, 2025. (Id.) Alternatively, NCP suggested that DOE should use
its enforcement discretion to provide additional 2-year sell through
before OUWNM ratings are required for through-the-wall space-
constrained R-410A outdoor condensing units. (Id.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\42\ NCP shared results of its analysis in confidential exhibits
A and B.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

DOE reviewed the confidential data provided by NCP for select
outdoor unit models and agrees that the data suggests that these models
cannot meet applicable minimum efficiency requirements when tested as
OUWNMs. However, DOE notes that the data provided does not include
performance data or estimates for designs with any technology
improvements, e.g., two-stage or variable-speed compressors. Thus it is
not clear that compliance with Federal standards is impossible for
space-constrained OUWNMs.
DOE further notes that NCP suggests a delay of the OUWNM
requirement until January 1, 2028, but the need for replacement outdoor
units would still exist after January 1, 2028, only 3 years after EPA's
transition date for R-410A. This would suggest that NCP believes that
space-constrained outdoor unit designs can be developed to be compliant
with standards using the OUWNM test requirements starting on that date.
Regarding stranded inventory, as clarified earlier in section
III.E.6.c.1, DOE notes that the EPA rule includes a 1-year sell-through
period that would enable any accumulated inventory to be distributed,
beyond which any space-constrained CAC/HP outdoor units using R-410A
would need to certify as OUWNMs. As discussed elsewhere in this final
rule, to the extent that units are distributed in commerce as OUWNMs,
they would be distributed as a different basic model as compared to
distribution in commerce when paired with an indoor unit.
For these reasons, DOE has determined that there is not sufficient
justification for delaying the OUWNM requirements for R-410A space-
constrained CAC/HP products. Additionally, as discussed previously in
this section, the timing of permitted installations of R-410A systems
and components is based on EPA's refrigerant regulations. DOE is
clarifying the applicability of the test procedure requirements in this
final rule to allow for component installations consistent with EPA's
requirements.
(8) Representativeness of Paired Indoor Coil
Rheem questioned the appropriateness of the indoor coil
specifications currently required for OUWNM testing. (Rheem, No. 34 at
pp. 2-3) Rheem provided historical background of DOE's OUWNM provisions
by citing language from past rulemaking notices, noting some of the
following key points:
(1) DOE first proposed an NGIFS for rating and certifying the
performance of outdoor units designed for R-22 in the November 9, 2015
SNOPR, where DOE proposed an upper limit on NGIFS equal to 1.15. 80 FR
69278, 69404.
(2) DOE indicated that its analysis supporting NGIFS values for
OUWNM testing was based on reverse-engineered SEER 13 split systems
(blower-coil combinations) designed for R-22. 81 FR 36992, 37010.
(3) However, DOE set the upper limit on NGIFS at 1.0 in the June
08, 2016 Final Rule, arguing that a lower NGIFS better reflected the
installed base of indoor units, since the installed base also included
10 SEER split systems. 81 FR 36992, 37010.
(4) In the August 24, 2016 SNOPR, DOE acknowledged that legacy
(existing) indoor units matched with no-match outdoor units would not
always be indoor units designed for R-22, and that the NGIFS 1.0 upper
limit did not provide a good representation of the heat transfer
performance of indoor coils with newer designs. 81 FR 58164.
Rheem also commented on the DOE proposal in the August 8, 2016
SNOPR to adopt a maximum NGIFS requirement generally for testing of
single-split coil-only systems. Because this proposal did not address
OUWNM outdoor units and because DOE did not adopt the proposal, Rheem
stated that it is not relevant to the OUWNM discussion. Based on the
historical context provided from prior rules, Rheem requested DOE
review the test provisions for OUWNMs, the definition of NGIFS, and its
upper limit to accurately represent the current installed base of
indoor coils with which such condensing units would be matched in the
field. (Rheem, No. 34 at p. 3)
DOE appreciates Rheem's comment charting the historical development
of the OUWNM testing provisions. As noted earlier in section III.E.7
and indicated by Rheem's comment, the current instruction at section
2.2.e of appendix M1 requires that an OUWNM be tested using a coil-only
indoor unit coil that has round tubes of outer diameter no less than
0.375 inches and NGIFS of no greater than 1.0 sq in/Btu/hr. These
indoor coil specifications were initially finalized for appendix M in
the June 8, 2016 Final Rule and extended to appendix M1 in the January
2017 Final Rule. 81 FR 36992, 82 FR 1426. DOE did not propose revision
of the requirements in the April 2024 NOPR.
In response to Rheem's comment, DOE reviewed historical data,
starting with shipments analysis supporting the energy conservation
standards direct final rule published on January 6, 2017 (``January
2017 DFR''). 82 FR 1786. DOE conducted analysis to determine whether a
substantial percentage of CAC system replacements in 2025 would occur
in residences in which the indoor unit would have been installed prior
to 2010, i.e., when the representative indoor unit would have been part
of a

[[Page 1248]]

13 SEER R-22 system, consistent with DOE's initial analysis to
establish the NGIFS requirements. To conduct this analysis, DOE used
national impact analysis results provided in the January 2017 DFR and
its supporting documents and spreadsheets. (See 82 FR 1786, 1822-1824)
In this assessment, DOE considered that a portion of system
replacements have been outdoor-unit-only installations, consistent with
the January 2017 DFR assumptions for the percentage of installations
involving just an outdoor unit. This factor increases the average age
of an existing indoor unit, since, for some portion of the existing
residences, the indoor unit would not have been replaced during the
last outdoor unit replacement.
The results of this analysis indicate that more than 60 percent of
system replacements in 2025 would involve a residence where the indoor
unit was installed before 2010. DOE also considered sensitivity of this
analysis to differences between shipment projections made to support
the January 2017 DFR and actual recent-year shipments and found that an
analysis updated for recent shipment data would suggest a slightly
higher percentage for pre-2010 indoor units. Thus, DOE concludes that
the NGIFS limit initially established in the June 8, 2016 Final Rule is
still representative, and DOE is not revising it in this final rule.
(9) Single Cooling Air Volume Rate
AHRI, the CA IOUs, Carrier, and Daikin recommended that DOE retain
the requirement to test OUWNMs with a single cooling air volume rate.
(AHRI, No. 25 at p. 5; CA IOUs, No. 32 at pp. 2-3; Carrier, No. 29 at
p. 4; Daikin, No. 36 at p. 2)
AHRI recommended that the testing instructions proposed for OUWNMs
at section 4.2 of appendix M1 also include the current regulatory
requirement that the coil-only indoor unit has a ``single cooling air
volume rate.'' (AHRI, No. 25 at p. 5) The CA IOUs also recommended that
DOE retain the requirement for testing OUWNMs with a ``single cooling
air volume rate'' in section 4.2 of the proposed revision to appendix
M1 and include an identical requirement in section 3.2 of appendix M2.
(CA IOUs, No. 32 at p. 2) The CA IOUs commented that they believe this
specific requirement of a single cooling air volume rate was
inadvertently left out of the new AHRI standards. (Id.) The CA IOUs
reasoned that because OUWNMs are compatible with any existing air
handler that continues to remain as the primary air-moving system after
the originally paired outdoor unit is replaced, DOE cannot guarantee
that such systems will have controls capable of varying airflow during
operation and should, therefore, continue to require a single air
volume rate. (Id.) Carrier also noted that the current appendix M1
requirements for OUWNM testing require a single cooling air volume
rate, and it recommended that DOE continue to require a single cooling
air volume rate. (Carrier, No. 29 at p. 4) Daikin strongly suggested
that DOE maintain the single airflow rate requirement for all OUWNMs,
reasoning that OUWNMs do not include an indoor unit change and would,
therefore, not have any enhancements, such as non-bleed expansion
valves or blower delays, to improve cyclic performance. (Daikin, No. 36
at p. 2)
The current requirements at section 2.2e of appendix M1 require
that an OUWNM be tested using a coil-only indoor unit at a single
cooling air volume rate. DOE notes that this requirement was
inadvertently left out of the April 2024 NOPR. DOE agrees with the
reasoning presented by commenters advocating that this requirement be
retained. Therefore, DOE is including language at section 4.2 of
revised appendix M1 and section 3.2 of new appendix M2, requiring the
use of a single cooling air volume rate when testing OUWNMs.
(10) Use of Default Degradation Coefficient for OUWNM Testing
AHRI, the CA IOUs, and Daikin recommended that DOE use the default
degradation coefficient of 0.25 for all OUWNMs, for both heating and
cooling modes. (AHRI, No. 25 at p. 5; CA IOUs, No. 32 at p. 3; Daikin,
No. 36 at p. 2)
AHRI noted that the existing provisions for OUWNMs for degradation
coefficient in enforcement is to use the default value (0.25), whereas
the published versions of AHRI 210/240-2024 and AHRI 1600-2024 allow
for testing of CD for OUWNMs. (AHRI, No. 25 at p. 5) AHRI strongly
recommended that DOE adopt the default degradation coefficient of 0.25
for all OUWNMs, for both heating and cooling modes. (Id.) AHRI reasoned
that a significant portion of OUWNM units are applied in multifamily
apartment dwelling situations, where the probability of being properly
paired with an indoor product that can be retrofitted to have a time
delay, or having an indoor product that is retrofitted with a non-bleed
thermal expansion valve or an electronic expansion valve is relatively
low (since many multifamily apartment dwelling indoor systems are
ceiling-mount blower coil systems or wall-mount blower coil systems).
(Id.) Therefore, AHRI contended that a substantial portion of OUWNMs
installed in multifamily applications would not have the lower CD in
the real world, as experienced in testing. (Id.) The CA IOUs also
suggested that the cyclic degradation default values in proposed
appendices M1 and M2 align with the current requirement in 10 CFR part
429 for OUWNMs. (CA IOUs, No. 32 at p. 3) The CA IOUs noted that they
supported the use of default values because the metering device, which
is unknown for an OUWNM, significantly affects cyclic degradation.
(Id.) Daikin also suggested that the default value of 0.25 be used for
both cooling and heating degradation coefficients for OUWNMs. (Daikin,
No. 36 at p. 2)
As noted by commenters, the current enforcement requirement at 10
CFR 429.134(k)(2)(ii) states that DOE will use the default cooling and
heating degradation coefficients when testing models of OUWNMs. DOE
agrees with the reasoning presented by commenters and notes that this
enforcement requirement was put in place on the basis of the same
rationale. Additionally, the requirement was intended to be adopted
broadly for testing, not just for enforcement, as indicated in the June
2016 Test Procedure Final Rule. 81 FR 36992, 37011. To clarify that
this requirement also applies to testing, DOE is including provisions
at section 4.2 of revised appendix M1 and section 3.2 of new appendix
M2 to require that testing of OUWNMs only use the default degradation
coefficients (0.25) for both cooling and heating modes.
8. Inlet and Outlet Duct Configurations
Both appendix D of the AHRI 210/240-202X Draft and appendix D of
the AHRI 1600-202X Draft define lists of clarifications/exceptions to
their referenced version of ASHRAE Test Standard 37 (ANSI/ASHRAE 37-
2009). These clarifications/exceptions have been revised repeatedly
throughout the version history of the AHRI 210/240 standard. In the
April 2024 NOPR, DOE noted that both appendix D of AHRI 210/240-202X
Draft and appendix D of AHRI 1600-202X Draft contain updates regarding
inlet and outlet duct configurations, including the duct revisions
investigated in RP 1581 and RP 1743 to accommodate smaller
environmental chambers. These updates are consistent with the draft of
an update of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 37 (``May 2023 ASHRAE 37 Draft'').
DOE surmised that the inclusion of these May 2023 ASHRAE 37 Draft
updates in appendix D of the relevant AHRI drafts represented industry
consensus, and DOE tentatively determined that the

[[Page 1249]]

updates are appropriate for CAC/HP testing. 89 FR 24206, 24231.
Consequently, DOE proposed to incorporate by reference appendix D of
AHRI 210/240-202X Draft at appendix M1 and to incorporate by reference
appendix D of AHRI 1600-202X Draft at appendix M2. Id.
DOE noted that AHRI 210/240-202X Draft and AHRI 1600-202X Draft
reference the current version of ASHRAE Test Standard 37, ANSI/ASHRAE
37-2009, because the May 2023 ASHRAE 37 Draft had not yet been
finalized and published. Id. DOE further noted that it may choose to
update its incorporation by reference to the final published version of
the May 2023 ASHRAE 37 Draft in a future rulemaking. Id.
DOE did not receive any comments regarding the aforementioned
proposals in the April 2024 NOPR. AHRI 210/240-2024 and AHRI 1600-2024
finalized the updates regarding inlet and outlet duct configurations
without substantial change. Both standards continue to reference ANSI/
ASHRAE 37-2009 since the May 2023 ASHRAE 37 Draft has not yet been
finalized. Therefore, consistent with the April 2024 NOPR proposal, DOE
is incorporating by reference Appendix D of AHRI 210/240-2024 and AHRI
1600-2024, at appendix M1 and appendix M2, respectively. DOE is also
continuing to maintain reference to ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009 since the May
2023 ASHRAE 37 Draft has not yet been finalized.
9. Heat Comfort Controllers
A heat comfort controller enables a heat pump to regulate the
operation of the electric resistance elements such that the air
temperature leaving the indoor section does not fall below a specified
temperature (see section 1.2 of appendix M1).
In the April 2024 NOPR, DOE noted that appendix M1 does not
currently specify additional steps for calculating the HSPF2 of heat
pumps having a heat comfort controller and having a variable-speed
compressor. 89 FR 24206, 24231. DOE noted that AHRI 210/240-202X Draft
and AHRI 1600-202X Draft specify additional steps for calculating the
HSPF2 and SHORE of heat pumps having a variable-capacity compressor and
a heat comfort controller and that these additional steps are similar
to the additional steps for calculating the HSPF2 and SHORE of other
system types having a heat comfort controller. Id. DOE tentatively
determined that the inclusion of these additional steps for calculating
HSPF2 and SHORE is appropriate for heat pumps having a variable-
capacity compressor and a heat comfort controller, because these
provisions provide representative measures of unit operation when
installed with heat comfort controllers. Id. Therefore, DOE proposed to
incorporate by reference the additional steps for calculating the HSPF2
of heat pumps having a variable-capacity compressor and a heat comfort
controller outlined in section 11.2.2.5 of AHRI 210/240-202X Draft, at
appendix M1. Id. Likewise, DOE proposed to incorporate by reference the
additional steps for calculating the SHORE of heat pumps having a
variable-capacity compressor and a heat comfort controller outlined in
section 11.2.2.5 of AHRI 1600-202X Draft, at appendix M2. Id.
DOE did not receive any comments regarding these proposals. AHRI
210/240-2024 and AHRI 1600-2024 finalized the updates to the heat
comfort controller calculations without substantial change. Therefore,
consistent with the April 2024 NOPR proposals, DOE is incorporating by
reference section 11.2.2.5 of AHRI 210/240-2024 and AHRI 1600-2024, at
appendix M1 and appendix M2, respectively.

F. Long-Term Changes in the CAC Test Procedure

The following sections discuss issues that affect the CAC/HP test
procedure in the long term--i.e., they will be effective when new CAC/
HP standards are established in terms of the efficiency metrics SCORE
and SHORE in appendix M2. As previously explained, these long-term
revisions would be implemented at the new appendix M2 via incorporation
by reference of the relevant industry consensus test procedure, AHRI
1600-2024. DOE has reviewed AHRI 1600-2024 and has concluded that it
satisfies the EPCA requirement that test procedures should not be
unduly burdensome to conduct and should be representative of an average
use cycle. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) These long-term amendments in
appendix M2 would alter the measured efficiency of CAC/HPs and would
require representations in terms of new cooling and heating test
metrics, SCORE and SHORE, respectively.
1. Power Consumption of Auxiliary Components
AHRI 1600-202X Draft introduces SCORE and SHORE as replacements for
the current cooling and heating performance metrics, SEER2 and HSPF2,
used to determine the measured efficiency of CAC/HPs. Unlike SEER2 and
HSPF2, which are seasonal efficiency metrics that don't include all
energy consumed by the systems, these new metrics do address energy use
of all components and operational modes, specifically including the
standby and off mode power consumption of auxiliary components. These
include those components discussed previously (i.e., crankcase heaters
and indoor fans utilizing constant circulation) for both SCORE and
SHORE, and, additionally, base pan heaters for SHORE.
SEER2 and HSPF2 are both ratio metrics that include all calculated
space conditioning in the numerator and all energy use associated with
space conditioning in the denominator. In contrast, AHRI 1600-202X
Draft includes two new quantities--E<INF>s,c</INF> (measured in watt-
hours), added to the denominator of the calculation for SCORE, meant to
represent all auxiliary component energy usage during cooling mode
(i.e., during both cooling conditioning hours and cooling-season
shoulder hours, as applicable), and E<INF>s,h</INF> (also measured in
watt-hours), added to the denominator of the calculation for SHORE,
that is meant to represent all auxiliary component energy usage during
heating mode (i.e., during both heating conditioning hours and heating-
season shoulder hours, as applicable). Table 14 and table 16 of AHRI
1600-202X Draft outline instructions for determining each component's
number of standby power operating hours in cooling mode and heating
modes, and appendix G of AHRI 1600-202X Draft \43\ outlines
instructions for determining the average power of all auxiliary
components considered in the calculations of either E<INF>s,c</INF> or
E<INF>s,h</INF>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\43\ In the April 2024 NOPR, DOE incorrectly referred to
appendix H of AHRI 1600-202X Draft as the appendix regarding the
determination of average power of auxiliary components (see 89 FR
24206, 24236). This was a typographical error, since the appendix
regarding the determination of average power of auxiliary components
is at appendix G of AHRI 1600-202X Draft.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the April 2024 NOPR, DOE tentatively concluded that the
respective inclusions of E<INF>s,c</INF> and E<INF>s,h</INF> into the
calculations of the new cooling and heating performance metrics, SCORE
and SHORE, represent industry consensus regarding whether to reflect
the power consumption of auxiliary components in the efficiency metrics
for CAC/HPs. 89 FR 24206, 24236. DOE tentatively determined that
inclusion of the energy consumed by auxiliary components in the
efficiency metrics for CAC/HPs would result in more representative
measures of efficiency. Id. Therefore, DOE proposed to incorporate by
reference the new cooling and heating performance metrics, SCORE and
SHORE, as

[[Page 1250]]

included in AHRI 1600-202X Draft, and the associated provisions
regarding the standby and off mode power consumption of auxiliary
components, in appendix M2. Id.
DOE did not receive any comments regarding this proposal. AHRI
1600-2024 finalized the new cooling and heating performance metrics,
SCORE and SHORE, and the associated provisions regarding the standby
and off mode power consumption of auxiliary components, without
substantial change. Therefore, consistent with the April 2024 NOPR
proposal, DOE is incorporating by reference AHRI 1600-2024, and
adopting the SCORE and SHORE metrics, and the associated provisions
regarding the standby and off mode power consumption of auxiliary
components, at appendix M2.
2. Impact of Defrost on Performance
In order for HPs to undergo a defrost cycle, which aims to remove
the moisture collected as frost on the outdoor coil, an HP temporarily
switches to cooling mode operation. This enables an HP to transfer heat
from the indoor coil to the outdoor coil, thus providing the heat
needed to warm the coil above freezing temperature and melt the frost.
In the April 2024 NOPR, DOE explained how AHRI 1600-202X Draft
introduces two changes to the treatment of defrost performance of CAC/
HPs: (1) it simplifies the demand defrost credit by uniformly applying
a 3-percent increase to the SHORE rating for all HPs equipped with
demand defrost, and (2) it accounts for the use of supplementary heat
during defrost using a new defrost heat and defrost overrun debits. 89
FR 24206, 24236-24238. DOE surmised that AHRI 1600-202X Draft's
introduction of the simplified demand defrost credit in AHRI 1600-202X
Draft represented industry consensus regarding improvements to the
accuracy of the credit, incentives for more efficient defrost control
strategies, and more accurate representations of modern defrost control
technologies in the test procedure. 89 FR 24206, 24237. DOE tentatively
determined that a simplified demand defrost credit would disincentivize
unnecessary early defrosts (90 minutes after the termination of the
prior defrost cycle), accurately represent defrost energy use while
limiting test burden, and consequently allow for more advanced and
efficient defrost control strategies. Similarly, DOE tentatively
determined that the defrost heat and defrost overrun debits associated
with accounting for use of supplementary heat during defrost
represented industry consensus and that these debits result in more
representative CAC/HP efficiencies for models with supplementary heat
during defrost. Therefore, DOE proposed to incorporate by reference at
appendix M2 the defrost-related provisions from AHRI 1600-202X Draft.
In response to DOE's proposal, the Joint Advocates stated that they
acknowledge the improvements made to the treatment of defrost in the
proposed appendix M2. (Joint Advocates, No. 30 at p. 4) However, the
Joint Advocates also commented that, by assigning the defrost credit
and debits based on a yes or no framework, the proposed appendix M2
does not capture the true differentiation that exists between defrost
controls. (Id.) The Joint Advocates encouraged DOE to collect
information about defrost mechanisms and consider how defrost impact
may be better represented in a future update to the CAC/HP Federal test
procedures. (Id.)
In response to the Joint Advocates, DOE notes that it will continue
to review the defrost credit and debits and may propose changes once
more information is made available. However, since little or no
information is currently available and the defrost credit and debits
represent industry consensus, DOE is adopting the defrost credit and
debits without modification, as proposed.
DOE did not receive any other comments regarding this proposal.
AHRI 1600-2024 finalized the defrost related provisions discussed in
the aforementioned paragraphs, without substantial change. Therefore,
consistent with the April 2024 NOPR proposal, DOE is incorporating by
reference AHRI 1600-2024 and adopting the defrost-related provisions at
appendix M2.
3. Updates to Building Load Lines and Temperature Bin Hours
In the April 2024 NOPR, DOE discussed several changes introduced in
AHRI 1600-202X Draft with regard to the building load lines and
temperature bin hours used when determining the new seasonal metrics,
SCORE and SHORE. 89 FR 24206, 24238-24239. Specifically, DOE noted that
(1) the new metrics use total hours instead of fractional hours; (2)
total hours are split into conditioning hours and shoulder hours, with
the cooling conditioning hours and cooling-season shoulder hours for
each bin listed in table 15 of AHRI 1600-202X Draft \44\ and the
heating conditioning hours and heating-season shoulder hours for each
bin listed in table 18 of AHRI 1600-202X Draft; \45\ and (3) the
cooling and heating building load lines were revised based on PNNL
EnergyPlus simulations. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\44\ In the relevant April 2024 NOPR preamble discussion, there
were instances where DOE mistakenly referred to section table 13 of
AHRI 1600-202X Draft. This has been corrected to table 15 of AHRI
1600-202X Draft in this final rule preamble discussion.
\45\ In the relevant April 2024 NOPR preamble discussion, there
were instances where DOE mistakenly referred to table 15 of AHRI
1600-202X Draft. This has been corrected to table 18 of AHRI 1600-
202X Draft in this final rule preamble discussion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

DOE surmised that the switch from fractional hours to total hours,
the associated values of the conditioning hours and shoulder hours, and
changes in the building load line equations represented industry
consensus for calculations of the new cooling and heating performance
metrics, SCORE and SHORE. 89 FR 24206, 24239. DOE proposed to
incorporate by reference the new cooling conditioning hours, cooling-
season shoulder hours, heating conditioning hours, heating-season
shoulder hours, and the updated building load line equations in AHRI
1600-202X Draft, at appendix M2. Id.
In response to DOE's proposal, Copeland asserted that, while a
differentiated load line for variable-speed systems is indeed
consistent with AHRI 1600-2024, it may no longer be representative of
how various compressor-staging technologies are sized and installed in
the field by the time ratings in terms of SCORE and SHORE take effect.
(Copeland, No. 31 at pp. 2-3) Copeland pointed to a recent (February
2024) revision of the capacity range sizing recommendations for two-
stage systems in the third edition of Air Conditioning Contractors of
America's (``ACCA's'') Manual S[supreg] \46\ as the source of its
concern, remarking that these revisions were not available when the
AHRI Standards Technical Committee discussions regarding AHRI 210/240-
2024 and AHRI 1600-2024 took place. (Id.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\46\ To access the normative section of the third edition of the
ACCA Manual S, see <a href="http://www.acca.org/standards/technical-manuals/manual-s">www.acca.org/standards/technical-manuals/manual-s</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Copeland also noted that the slope factors used to differentiate
the heating building load line for variable-speed HPs from single-stage
and two-stage HPs in the current appendix M1 (i.e., C and
C<INF>VS</INF>) were derived from an Oak Ridge National Laboratory
(``ORNL'') analysis \47\ and influenced by the capacity range sizing
recommendations in the second edition of ACCA's Manual S. (Copeland,
No. 31 at pp. 2-3) Copeland commented that the second

[[Page 1251]]

edition of ACCA's Manual S allowed a range of capacity from 0.9 to 1.15
for single-stage and two-stage HPs and 0.9 to 1.3 for variable-speed
HPs, which, if used to calculate a size adjustment factor for variable-
speed HPs, equals 1.07 (by dividing (0.9 + 1.3) by (0.9 + 1.15)). (Id.)
Taking this same approach with the third edition of ACCA's Manual S,
which allows oversizing for two-stage HPs up to 1.25 and up to 1.3 for
variable-speed HPs, Copeland stated that the size adjustment factor for
variable-speed HPs would be 1.02 (by dividing (0.9 + 1.3) by (0.9 +
1.25)) instead of 1.07. (Id.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\47\ See <a href="http://www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2016-BT-TP-0029-0002">www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2016-BT-TP-0029-0002</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rather than adjus

[…truncated; see source link]

View on FederalRegister.gov →Plain-text source

Indexed from Federal Register on January 7, 2025.

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.