Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Publication of the Petition for Waiver and Granting of the Application for Interim Waiver of Mitsubishi Electric From the DOE Residential and Commercial Package Air Conditioner and Heat Pump Test Procedures, 14858-14873 [06-2842]

Download as PDF wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES 14858 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2006 / Notices Craig Seltzer, Norfolk District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, ATTN: CENAO–PM–PA, 803 Front Street, Norfolk, VA 23510. E-mail address: Craig.L.Seltzer@usace.army.mil or Ms. Erika Mark, Baltimore District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, ATTN: CENAB–PL–P, P.O, Box 1715, Baltimore, MD 21203. E-mail address: Erika.L.Mark@usace.army.mil. Please include your name and address in your message. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The MP/ EIS will incorporate science, policy, and experience from a number of sources to develop a comprehensive approach to oyster restoration in Maryland and Virginia. The purpose of the MP is to lay out a road map for a long-term, largescale restoration of native oysters in the Maryland and Virginia waters of the Chesapeake Bay. All suitable locations and techniques available for native oyster restoration will be identified and explored, and, if restoration is feasible, will be included in the MP. Previously performed oyster restoration activities by NAB include the: Creation of new oyster bars and rehabilitation of existing non-productive bars; construction of see bars for production and collection of seed oysters or ‘‘spat’’; planting of hatcheryproduced and seed bar spat on new and rehabilitated bars; and monitoring of implemented projects. Previously performed oyster restoration activities by NAO include: Construction of permanent oyster reef sanctuaries; seeding of reefs with disease resistant DEBYTM strain oysters; adaptive management and monitoring; and managed spat-on-shell production areas with oysters moved to other sites in the Bay as part of a genetic rehabilitation stocking effort. This work is being conducted under the authority provided by Section 704(b) of the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 1986, as amended. Scoping: The Corps will conduct a public scoping meeting in Virginia this spring to supplement the scoping meetings previously held in Maryland, and will include interested parties throughout the development of the EIS through informational meetings and website postings and other means. All interested federal, state, and local agencies, interested private and public organizations, affected Indian tribes, and individuals are invited to attend the scoping meeting. Other Environmental Review and Consultation Requirements: To the fullest extent possible, the EIS will be integrated with analyses and consultation required by the Fish and VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:26 Mar 23, 2006 Jkt 208001 Wildlife Coordination Act of 1958, as amended; the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended; the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended; the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended; the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, as amended; and the Clean Water Act of 1977, as amended. Schedule: The anticipated date of publication of the draft PEIS is March 2007. The PEIS will be prepared in accordance with (1) the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), (2) regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality for implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500–1508), and (3) USACE regulations implementing NEPA (ER–200–2). Claire O’Neill, Project Manager. [FR Doc. 06–2863 Filed 3–23–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3710–41–M DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Army; Corps of Engineers Coastal Engineering Research Board (CERB) Department of the Army, DoD. Notice of open meeting. AGENCY: ACTION: SUMMARY: In accordance with Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–463), announcement is made of the following committee meeting: Name of Committee: Coastal Engineering Research Board (CERB). Date of Meeting: April 26, 2006. Place: Sheraton Gateway Atlanta Airport Hotel, 1900 Sullivan Road, Atlanta, GA 30337. Time: 8:30 a.m. to 3 p.m. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Inquiries and notice of intent to attend the meeting may be addressed to Colonel James R. Rowan, Executive Secretary, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Waterways Experiment Station, 3909 Halls Ferry Road, Vicksburg, MS 29180–6199. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Proposed Agenda: An Executive session of the Board will meet to discuss action items from past meetings and ongoing initiatives. This meeting is open to the public, but since seating capacity of the meeting room is limited, advance notice of intent to attend, although not required, is requested in order to assure adequate PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 arrangements for those wishing to attend. Brenda S. Bowen, Army Federal Register Liaison Officer. [FR Doc. 06–2859 Filed 3–23–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3710–61–M DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy [Case No. CAC–012] Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Publication of the Petition for Waiver and Granting of the Application for Interim Waiver of Mitsubishi Electric From the DOE Residential and Commercial Package Air Conditioner and Heat Pump Test Procedures Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy. ACTION: Notice of Petition for Waiver, granting of application for interim waiver, and request for comments. AGENCY: SUMMARY: Today’s notice publishes a Petition for Waiver from Mitsubishi Electric and Electronics USA, Inc. (MEUS). This Petition for Waiver (hereafter ‘‘MEUS Petition’’) requests a waiver of the test procedures applicable to residential and commercial package air conditioners and heat pumps. The Department of Energy (hereafter ‘‘Department’’ or ‘‘DOE’’) is soliciting comments, data, and information with respect to the MEUS Petition. Furthermore, today’s notice includes an alternate test procedure the Department is considering to include in the Decision and Order and for which it is requesting comments. Today’s notice also grants an Interim Waiver to MEUS from the existing Department test procedures applicable to residential and commercial package air conditioners and heat pumps. DATES: The Department will accept comments, data, and information regarding this Petition for Waiver until, but no later than April 24, 2006. ADDRESSES: Please submit comments, identified by case number [CAC–012], by any of the following methods: • Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards-Jones, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Program, Mailstop EE–2J, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585– 0121. Telephone: (202) 586–2945. Please submit one signed original paper copy. E:\FR\FM\24MRN1.SGM 24MRN1 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2006 / Notices wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES • Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda Edwards-Jones, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Program, Room 1J–018, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585. • E-mail: Michael.Raymond@ee.doe.gov. Include either the case number [CAC–012], and/ or ‘‘MEUS Petition’’ in the subject line of the message. • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and case number for this proceeding. Submit electronic comments in WordPerfect, Microsoft Word, PDF, or text (ASCII) file format and avoid the use of special characters or any form of encryption. Wherever possible, include the electronic signature of the author. Absent an electronic signature, comments submitted electronically must be followed and authenticated by submitting the signed original paper document. The Department does not accept telefacsimiles (faxes). Any person submitting written comments must also send a copy of such comments to the petitioner. (10 CFR 430.27(b)(1)(iv), 431.201(d)(2)) 1 The name and address of the petitioner of today’s notice is: William Rau, Senior Vice President and General Manager, HVAC Advanced Products Division, Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA, Inc., 4300 Lawrenceville-Suwanee Road, Suwanee, GA 30024. According to 10 CFR 1004.11, any person submitting information that he or she believes to be confidential and exempt by law from public disclosure should submit two copies: one copy of the document including all the information believed to be confidential, and one copy of the document with the information believed to be confidential deleted. The Department will make its own determination about the confidential status of the information and treat it according to its determination. Docket: For access to the docket to read the background documents 1 On October 18, 2005, DOE published a technical amendment which re-designates Subpart L (sections 431.201 through 431.207) of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) as Subpart V (sections 431.401 through 431.407). (70 FR 60407, October 18, 2005) DOE published the technical amendment to place in the CFR the energy conservation standards and related definitions that Congress prescribed in the Energy Policy Act of 2005 for certain consumer products and commercial and industrial equipment. The amendment does not change the test procedure waiver provisions for commercial equipment, but moves them from 10 CFR 431.201 to 431.401. The residential test procedure waiver provisions remain at 10 CFR 430.27. VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:26 Mar 23, 2006 Jkt 208001 relevant to this matter, go to the U.S. Department of Energy, Forrestal Building, Room 1J–018 (Resource Room of the Building Technologies Program), 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC, (202) 586–2945, between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Available documents include the following items: this notice; public comments received; the Petition for Waiver and Application for Interim Waiver; prior Department rulemakings regarding commercial central air conditioners and heat pumps; and the prior MEUS Petition for Waiver, the Department’s notice of the prior MEUS Petition for Waiver and the subsequent Department Decision and Order. Please call Ms. Brenda Edwards-Jones at the above telephone number for additional information regarding visiting the Resource Room. Please note: The Department’s Freedom of Information Reading Room (formerly Room 1E–190 at the Forrestal Building) is no longer housing rulemaking materials. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Michael G. Raymond, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Program, Mail Stop EE–2J, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585– 0121, (202) 586–9611; e-mail: Michael.Raymond.ee.doe.gov; or Francine Pinto, Esq., U.S. Department of Energy, Office of General Counsel, Mail Stop GC–72, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585–0103, (202) 586– 9507; e-mail: Francine.Pinto@hq.doe.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background and Authority II. Petition for Waiver III. Application for Interim Waiver IV. Alternate Test Procedure V. Summary and Request for Comments I. Background and Authority Title III of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) sets forth a variety of provisions concerning energy efficiency. Part B of Title III (42 U.S.C. 6291–6309) provides for the ‘‘Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products other than Automobiles.’’ Part C of Title III (42 U.S.C. 6311–6317) provides for an energy efficiency program entitled ‘‘Certain Industrial Equipment,’’ which is similar to the program in Part B, and which includes commercial air conditioning equipment, packaged boilers, water heaters, and other types of commercial equipment. Today’s notice involves residential products under Part B, and commercial PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 14859 equipment under Part C. Both parts specifically provide for definitions, test procedures, labeling provisions, energy conservation standards, and the authority to require information and reports from manufacturers. With respect to test procedures, both parts generally authorize the Secretary of Energy to prescribe test procedures that are reasonably designed to produce results which reflect energy efficiency, energy use and estimated operating costs, and that are not unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3), 6314(a)(2)). MEUS’s petition requests a waiver from both the residential and commercial test procedures for its R410A models of its CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning (VRFZ) product line, which are sold for commercial use. The test procedures for residential products appear at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, Appendix M. EPCA provides that the Secretary of Energy may amend test procedures for consumer products if the Secretary determines that amended test procedures would more accurately reflect energy efficiency, energy use or estimated annual operating costs, and are not unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(1)(A), and 42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)). For commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment, EPCA provides that the test procedures shall be those generally accepted industry testing procedures or rating procedures developed or recognized by the Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute (ARI) or by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE), as referenced in ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1 and in effect on June 30, 1992. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(4)(A)) This section also provides for the Secretary of Energy to amend the test procedure for a product if the industry test procedure is amended, unless the Secretary determines that such a modified test procedure does not meet the statutory criteria. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(4)(B)). On October 21, 2004, the Department published a direct final rule adopting test procedures for commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment, effective December 20, 2004. DOE adopted ARI Standard 210/240–2003 for small commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment with capacities <65,000 Btu/h and ARI Standard 340/360–2000 for large commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment with capacities ≥ 135,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h and small commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment E:\FR\FM\24MRN1.SGM 24MRN1 wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES 14860 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2006 / Notices with capacities ≥65,000 Btu/h and <135,000 Btu/h. (69 FR 61962, October 21, 2004) The capacities of MEUS’s MULTI CITY VRFZ products sold for commercial use fall in the ranges covered by both the commercial standards, ARI Standard 340/360–2000 and the ARI Standard 210/240–2003, and the test procedures for residential products cited above. The Department’s regulations contain provisions allowing a person to seek a waiver from the test procedure requirements for covered consumer products. These provisions are set forth in 10 CFR 430.27. The waiver provisions for commercial equipment are substantively identical to those for covered consumer products and are found at 10 CFR 431.401 (formerly, 10 CFR 431.201). The waiver provisions allow the Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (hereafter ‘‘Assistant Secretary’’) to temporarily waive test procedures for a particular basic model when a petitioner shows that the basic model contains one or more design characteristics that prevent testing according to the prescribed test procedures, or when the prescribed test procedures may evaluate the basic model in a manner so unrepresentative of its true energy consumption as to provide materially inaccurate comparative data. (10 CFR 430.27(a)(1), 10 CFR 431.201(a)(1)) The Assistant Secretary may grant the waiver subject to conditions, including adherence to alternate test procedures. Petitioners are to include in their petition any alternate test procedures known to evaluate the basic model in a manner representative of its energy consumption. (10 CFR 430.27(b)(1)(iii), 10 CFR 431.201(b)(1)(iii)) Waivers generally remain in effect until final test procedure amendments become effective, thereby resolving the problem that is the subject of the waiver. The waiver process also allows the Assistant Secretary to grant an Interim Waiver from test procedure requirements to manufacturers that have petitioned the Department for a waiver of such prescribed test procedures. (10 CFR 430.27(a)(2), 10 CFR 431.201(a)(2)) An Interim Waiver remains in effect for a period of 180 days or until the Department issues its determination on the Petition for Waiver, whichever is sooner, and may be extended for an additional 180 days, if necessary. (10 CFR 430.27(h), 10 CFR 431.201(e)(4)). II. Petition for Waiver On November 7, 2005, MEUS filed an Application for Interim Waiver and a Petition for Waiver from the test VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:26 Mar 23, 2006 Jkt 208001 procedures applicable to its residential and commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment. In particular, MEUS requested a waiver from the residential test procedures contained in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, Appendix M, and a waiver from the commercial test procedures contained in ARI Standard 210/240–2003 and in ARI Standard 340/360–2000. The Department previously granted MEUS a waiver from test procedures in 2004 for similar models which use R22 as a refrigerant. (69 FR 52660, August 27, 2004) Given product adjustments to accommodate the new R410A refrigerant, MEUS requests a waiver from the test procedures for its new MULTI CITY models. MEUS seeks a waiver from the applicable test procedures because, MEUS asserts, design characteristics of the R410A CITY MULTI VRFZ systems prevent testing according to the currently prescribed test procedures. MEUS claims that its R410A models cannot be tested pursuant to the existing test procedures for the same reasons that its R22 models were previously granted a waiver by the Department. In particular, the R410A CITY MULTI systems can connect more indoor units than the test laboratories can physically test at one time. Because of the inability to test products with so many indoor units, testing laboratories will not be able to test many of the R410A system combinations. Furthermore, MEUS asserts that the current test procedures do not provide direction for determining what combinations of outdoor and indoor units should be tested in the circumstance where a multitude of different combinations are possible. Also, the test procedures provide no mechanism for sampling component combinations. In addition, MEUS asserts that it is not practical to test all of the potentially available combinations of indoor and outdoor units, which numbers in the billions. MEUS states that the R410A CITY MULTI system is designed to be flexible, with numerous combinations possible. According to MEUS, each of the indoor units is designed to be used with up to 18 other indoor units with the 108,000 Btu/h outdoor units and potentially 31 other indoor units with the 234,000 Btu/h outdoor units. Also, MEUS offers 58 different indoor models that can be used in the different combinations. Given the above, MEUS asserts the current test procedures cannot practically be applied to the CITY MULI VRFZ systems. In addition, MEUS asserts, the current test procedures evaluate CITY MULTI VRFZ system products in a manner not PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 representative of their true energy efficiency. MEUS claims that many benefits of its system characteristics, including variable refrigerant control and distribution, zoning diversity, partload operation and simultaneous heating and cooling, are not credited under the current test procedures. The MEUS petition requests that the Department grant a waiver from existing test procedures until such time as a representative test procedure is developed and adopted for this class of products. MEUS did not include an alternate test procedure in its petition and noted that it knows of no alternative test procedure that could evaluate its products in a representative manner. However, MEUS is actively working with ARI to develop test procedures that accurately reflects the operation and energy consumption of these types of units. III. Application for Interim Waiver MEUS also requested an Interim Waiver to allow it to introduce its new R410A products in the U.S. market while the Department evaluates the Petition for Waiver. An Interim Waiver may be granted if it is determined that the applicant will experience economic hardship if the Application for Interim Waiver is denied, if it appears likely that the Petition for Waiver will be granted, and/or the Assistant Secretary determines that it would be desirable for public policy reasons to grant immediate relief pending a determination of the Petition for Waiver. (10 CFR 431.201(e)(3), 430.27(g)). MEUS’s Application for Interim Waiver does not provide sufficient information to evaluate what, if any, economic hardship MEU will likely experience if its Application for Interim Waiver is denied. However, in those instances where the likely success of the Petition for Waiver has been demonstrated, based upon the Department having granted a waiver for a similar product design, it is in the public interest to have similar products tested and rated for energy consumption on a comparable basis. For MEUS’s new R410A CITY MULTI VRFZ products, it appears likely that the Petition for Waiver will be granted. The products currently under consideration, MEUS’s new R410A CITY MULTI VRFZ products, are quite similar to the MEUS products previously granted a waiver, MEUS’s R22 CITY MULTI VRFZ products. (69 FR 52660, August 27, 2004) The previous MEUS waiver was granted because MEUS’s R22 products cannot be tested according to the prescribed test procedures, for two reasons: (1) Test laboratories cannot test E:\FR\FM\24MRN1.SGM 24MRN1 wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2006 / Notices products with so many indoor units (at the time of the ruling, R22 CITY MULTI VRFZ outdoor systems could connect an outdoor unit with up to sixteen indoor units); and (2) there are too many possible combinations of indoor and outdoor units (at the time of the ruling, MEUS offered 58 R22 indoor unit models, allowing for well over 1,000,000 combinations for each outdoor unit), and it is impractical to test so many combinations. As discussed above, the new MEUS CITY MULTI VRFZ systems will likely suffer the same testing problems that prompted the Department to grant MEUS the waiver for its R22 products. Thus, it is likely that MEUS’s Petition for Waiver will be granted for the new R410A models. Therefore, MEUS’s Application for an Interim Waiver from the Department test procedure for its new R410A CITY MULTI VRFZ systems is granted. Hence, it is ordered that: The Application for Interim Waiver filed by MEUS is hereby granted for MEUS’s new R410A CITY MULTI VRFZ central air conditioners and central air conditioning heat pumps. MEUS shall not be required to test or rate its CITY MULTI VRFZ products listed below on the basis of the currently applicable test procedures, which are the test procedures contained in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, Appendix M, for the PUMY–P48TGMU–* model, listed last, and ARI 340/360–2000 and ARI 210/ 240–2003, for the other listed models: CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning System R–2 Series Outdoor Equipment:2 • PURY–P72TGMU–*, 72,000 Btu/h, 208/230–3–60 split-system variablespeed heat pump • PURY–P96TGMU–*, 96,000 Btu/h, 208/230–3–60 split-system variablespeed heat pump • PURY–P108TGMU–*, 108,000 Btu/ h, 208/230–3–60 split-system variablespeed heat pump • PURY–P126TGMU–*, 126,000 Btu/ h, 208/230–3–60 split-system variablespeed heat pump • PURY–P144TGMU–*, 144,000 Btu/ h, 208/230–3–60 split-system variablespeed heat pump • PURY–P168TGMU–*, 168,000 Btu/ h, 208/230–3–60 split-system variablespeed heat pump • PURY–P192TGMU–*, 192,000 Btu/ h, 208/230–3–60 split-system variablespeed heat pump • PURY–P204TGMU–*, 204,000 Btu/ h, 208/230–3–60 split-system variablespeed heat pump 2 The * denotes engineering differences in the models. VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:26 Mar 23, 2006 Jkt 208001 • PURY–P216TGMU–*, 216,000 Btu/ h, 208/230–3–60 split-system variablespeed heat pump • PURY–P234TGMU–*, 234,000 Btu/ h, 208/230–3–60 split-system variablespeed heat pump CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning System Y-Series Outdoor Equipment: • PUHY–P72TGMU–*, 72,000 Btu/h, 208/230–3–60 split-system variablespeed heat pump • PUHY–P96TGMU–*, 96,000 Btu/h, 208/230–3–60 split-system variablespeed heat pump • PUHY–P108TGMU–*, 108,000 Btu/ h, 208/230–3–60 split-system variablespeed heat pump • PUHY–P126TGMU–*, 126,000 Btu/ h, 208/230–3–60 split-system variablespeed heat pump • PUHY–P144TGMU–*, 144,000 Btu/ h, 208/230–3–60 split-system variablespeed heat pump • PUHY–P168TGMU–*, 168,000 Btu/ h, 208/230–3–60 split-system variablespeed heat pump • PUHY–P192TGMU–*, 192,000 Btu/ h, 208/230–3–60 split-system variablespeed heat pump • PUHY–P204TGMU–*, 204,000 Btu/ h, 208/230–3–60 split-system variablespeed heat pump • PUHY–P216TGMU–*, 216,000 Btu/ h, 208/230–3–60 split-system variablespeed heat pump • PUHY–P234TGMU–*, 234,000 Btu/ h, 208/230–3–60 split-system variablespeed heat pump CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning System Indoor Equipment: P*FY models, ranging from 6,000 to 96,000 Btu/h, 208/230–1–60 splitsystem variable-capacity air conditioner or heat pump. • PCFY Series—Ceiling Suspended— PCFY–P12/18/24/30/36***–* • PDFY Series—Ceiling Concealed Ducted—PDFY–P06/08/12/15/18/24/30/ 36/48***–* • PEFY Series—Ceiling Concealed Ducted (Low Profile)—PEFY–P06/08/ 12***–* • PEFY Series—Ceiling Concealed Ducted (Alternate High Static Option)– PEFY–P15/18/24/27/30/36/48/54/72/ 96***–* • PEFY–F Series—Ceiling Concealed Ducted (100% OA Option)—PEFY–P30/ 54/72/96***–*–* • PFFY Series—Floor Standing (Concealed)—PEFY–P06/08/12/15/18/ 24***–* • PFFY Series—Floor Standing (Exposed)—PEFY–P06/08/12/15/18/ 24***–* • PKFY Series—Wall-Mounted— PKFY–P06/08/12/18/24/30***–* PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 14861 • PLFY Series—4-Way Airflow Ceiling Cassette—PEFY–P12/18/24/30/ 36***–* • PMFY Series—1-Way Airflow Ceiling Cassette—PEFY–P06/08/12/ 15***–* CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning System S-Series Outdoor Equipment: • PUMY—P48TGMU–*, 48,000 Btu/ h, 208/230–1–60 split-system variablespeed heat pump.3 This Interim Waiver is based upon the presumed validity of statements and allegations submitted by the company. This Interim Waiver may be removed or modified at any time upon a determination that the factual basis underlying the Application is incorrect. The Interim Waiver shall remain in effect for a period of 180 days or until the Department acts on the Petition for Waiver, whichever is sooner, and may be extended for an additional 180-day period, if necessary. IV. Alternate Test Procedure Manufacturers face restrictions with respect to making representations about the energy consumption and energy consumption costs of products covered by EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6314(d), 42 U.S.C. 6293(c)). Consistent representations are important for manufacturers to make claims about the energy efficiency of their products. For example, they are necessary to determine compliance with state and local energy codes and regulatory requirements, and can provide valuable consumer purchasing information. To provide a test procedure from which manufacturers can make valid representations, the Department is considering setting an alternate test procedure for MEUS in the subsequent Decision and Order. Furthermore, if DOE specifies an alternate test procedure for MEUS, DOE is considering applying the alternate test procedure to similar waivers for residential and commercial central air conditioners and heat pumps. Such cases include Samsung’s petition for its DVM products (70 FR 9629, February 28, 2005), Fujitsu’s petition for its Airstage variable refrigerant flow (VRF) products (70 FR 5980, February 4, 2005), and MEUS’s petition for its R22 CITY MULTI VRFZ products (69 FR 52660, August 27, 2004). As noted above, existing testing facilities have a limited ability to test multiple indoor units at one time, and the number of possible combination of 3 Though Mitsubishi sells the PUMY–P48TGMU– * model as a commercial product, it is tested according to the residential test procedures prescribed by DOE, at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, Appendix M. E:\FR\FM\24MRN1.SGM 24MRN1 wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES 14862 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2006 / Notices indoor and outdoor units for some variable refrigerant zoning systems is impractical to test. Subsequent to the waiver that DOE granted for MEUS’s R22 models, ARI developed a committee to discuss the issue and work on developing an appropriate test protocol for variable refrigerant zoning systems. However, to date, no additional test methodologies have been adopted by the committee or put forth to the Department. Furthermore, the Department is aware that the time required for drafting and approving such standards may be months or even years. DOE is considering amending the waiver issued to MEUS on August 27, 2004. DOE has been aware that MEUS has made efficiency representations for its City Multi products on its Web site for several years. The efficiency representations are currently listed under the headings ‘‘System Efficiency’’ for cooling, and ‘‘System COP’’ for heating. DOE is considering prohibiting the making of efficiency representations for the products granted a waiver on August 27, 2004, because these products were granted a waiver for the reason that the products could not be tested, which implies that representations cannot be made on the basis of testing. DOE is considering what energy efficiency representations it will allow for these products. If DOE grants this waiver, MEUS could sell products with energy efficiency representations under one of three methods outlined in (3)(B) below. An alternate test procedure is needed in order that manufacturers can make representations for their products. Even though MEUS did not include an alternate test procedure in their petition, and DOE did not specify one in the previous MEUS waiver, DOE is considering including in the Decision and Order the following waiver language: (1) The ‘‘’Petition for Waiver’’’ filed by Mitsubishi Electric and Electronics USA, Inc. (MEUS) is hereby granted as set forth in the paragraphs below. (2) MEUS shall be not be required to test or rate the CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning System (VRFZ) products covered in this waiver on the basis of the currently applicable test procedure, but shall be required to test and rate its CITY MULTI VRFZ products covered in this waiver according to the alternate test procedure as set forth in paragraph (3). (3) Alternate test procedure. MEUS shall be required to test according to those test procedures for central air conditioners and heat pumps prescribed by DOE at 10 CFR parts 430 and 431, except for the first sentence in 10 CFR VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:26 Mar 23, 2006 Jkt 208001 430.24(m)(2), which refers to ‘‘that combination manufactured by the condensing unit manufacturer likely to have the highest volume of retail sales.’’ Instead of testing the combinations likely to have the highest volume of retail sales, which may be difficult to identify, MEUS may test a ‘‘tested combination’’ selected in accordance with the provisions of subparagraph (A) of this section. MEUS may make representations of the MULTI CITY products covered in this waiver, according to the provisions of subparagraph (B). (A) Tested combination. The term ‘‘tested combination’’ means a sample basic model comprised of units that are production units, or are representative of production units, of the basic model being tested. For the purposes of this waiver, the tested combination shall have the following features: (i) The basic model of a variable refrigerant flow system (‘‘VRF system’’) used as a tested combination shall consist of an outdoor unit that is matched with between 2 and 5 indoor units. (ii) The indoor units shall— (a) Represent the highest sales volume type models; (b) Together, have a capacity between 95% and 105% of the capacity of the outdoor unit; (c) Not, individually, have a capacity greater than 50% of the capacity of the outdoor unit; (d) Have a fan speed that is consistent with the manufacturer’s specifications; and (e) All have the same external static pressure. (B) Representations. MEUS may make representations about the Energy Efficiency Rating (‘‘EER’’) or Coefficient of Performance (‘‘COP’’) of products covered by this test procedure waiver only to the extent that such representations are made consistent with the provisions outlined below: (i) If MEUS chooses to test retail combinations of its MULTI CITY VRFZ products, MEUS may make representations about these retail combinations according to those test procedures for central air conditioners and heat pumps prescribed at 10 CFR parts 430 and 431. (ii) In the case where MEUS does not test retail combinations, MEUS may make representations which are based on the testing results from the tested combination and which are consistent with any of the three following methods: (a) Representation of non-tested combinations according to an Alternative Rating Method (ARM) PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 approved by DOE and described in 10 CFR 430.24(m). (b) Representation of non-tested combinations with the representation given the tested combination.4 (c) Representation of non-tested combinations at the DOE prescribed minimum efficiency level for the product class. Method (a) is already allowed for all central air conditioners. It is not, at this time, possible for products such as MEUS’ multi-splits, because an ARM has not been developed for this type of product. Method (b) is a reduction of method (a). In method (a), with an ARM, the efficiency of non-tested combinations is calculated based on a tested combination that has the same outdoor unit as the non-tested combinations. The calculation is based on physical parameters of the indoor unit such as face area, number of rows, refrigerant circuitry, etc. In general, the efficiency calculated in this way will be either higher or lower than the efficiency of the tested combination. However, no ARM has been developed for these products, so the Department is proposing to allow MEUS to represent temporarily that all combinations using a particular outdoor unit have the efficiency of the combination that has been tested with that outdoor unit. That is equivalent to characterizing the indoor unit as having no effect on the efficiency. The Department believes this is reasonable because the outdoor unit is the principal efficiency driver, and the required test procedure does not exactly fit these products, but tends to rate them very conservatively. This is because the products are capable of simultaneous heating and cooling, which is more efficient than requiring all zones to be either heated or cooled, and because the test procedure requires full load testing, which disadvantages these products, which are optimized for best efficiency when operating with less than full loads. 4 Currently, no alternate rating method exists by which MEUS can rate its CITY MULTI VRFZ products. Given a waiver from applicable DOE test procedures and no alternate rating method, MEUS faces limitations in making representations with its CITY MULTI VRFZ products. As such, to comply with California state building codes, the California Energy Commission is requiring the MEUS represent its CITY MULTI VRFZ products as minimal efficiency commercial package air conditioner and heat pumps. (G. William Pennington, Manager Buildings Appliances Office, California Energy Commission, Letter to William Rau, Senior Vice President, General Manager, Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA, Inc, 16 June 2005) DOE believes that making a representation according to a tested combination would permit MEUS to make more accurate representations of its CITY MULTI VRFZ products. E:\FR\FM\24MRN1.SGM 24MRN1 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2006 / Notices Method (c) allows rating at the minimum standard level without testing because the Department believes the products’ efficiency in actual use would be at least as great as conventional products with efficiencies at the minimum standard level, because the required efficiency descriptor rates the products at full load. The products have higher efficiency when operating at part-load conditions, and the products, in fact, normally operate at part-load conditions. Further, the multi-zoning feature of these products, which enables them to cool only those portions of the building which require cooling, uses less energy than if the whole building must be cooled when cooling is required. wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES V. Summary and Request for Comments Today’s notice announces a MEUS Petition for Waiver and grants MEUS an Interim Waiver from the test procedures applicable to MEUS’s R410A MULTI CITY package air conditioner and heat pump units. The Department is publishing the MEUS Petition for Waiver in its entirety. The Petition contains no confidential information. Furthermore, today’s notice includes an alternate test procedure that the Department is considering to include in the subsequent Decision and Order. In this alternate test procedure, the Department proposes defining a ‘‘tested combination’’ which MEUS could test in lieu of testing all retail combinations of its VRFZ MULTI CITY products. Furthermore, should a manufacturer not be able to test all retail combinations, DOE proposes allowing manufacturers VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:26 Mar 23, 2006 Jkt 208001 to rate waived products according to an alternate rating method approved by DOE, to rate waived products as the same as that for the specified tested combination, or to rate at the minimum efficiency level without testing. The Department is also considering amending the waiver previously issued to MEUS on August 27, 2004, because MEUS is making energy efficiency representations even though it previously had represented to the Department that such units could not be tested. Thus, MEUS sold untested units with energy efficiency ratings that had not been properly verified. The Department is interested in receiving comments on all aspects of this notice. The Department is particularly interested in receiving comments and views of interested parties concerning the proposed alternate test procedure and the representations under consideration for the upcoming Decision and Order for the MEUS Petition, as well as for other similar air conditioner and heat pump cases. Specifically, the Department would like to receive comment on the following questions: • Is it appropriate for MEUS to use the proposed test procedure for ratings, representations and compliance with state and local energy codes and regulatory requirements? • What should the Department prescribe for manufacturers in situations where the defined tested combination is not testable or practical to test? • Would it be appropriate for DOE to create a separate class for multi-split, zoned central air conditioner and heat PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 14863 pumps, as an alternative to prescribing an alternate test procedure or modifying existing central air conditioner and heat pump test procedures? In this case, such central air conditioner and heat pump models would not be subject to an energy standard until an appropriate test procedure is developed and prescribed. • Should the Department allow energy efficiency representations for non-tested combinations of these products at the level of the tested combination? • Should the Department allow energy efficiency representations for non-tested combinations at the DOE prescribed minimum efficiency level for the product class? • Is the Department’s proposed definition of ‘‘tested combination’’ useful and workable? • Are there possible modifications to any test procedures or alternative rating methods which the Department could use to fairly represent the energy efficiency of MEUS R410A CITY MULTI products, as well as similar multi-split products from other manufacturers? Any person submitting written comments must also send a copy of such comments to the petitioner, whose contact information is cited above.(10 CFR 431.201(d)(2), 10 CFR 430.27(b)(1)(iv)). Issued in Washington, DC, on March 15, 2006. Douglas L. Faulkner, Acting Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. BILLING CODE 6450–01–P E:\FR\FM\24MRN1.SGM 24MRN1 VerDate Aug<31>2005 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2006 / Notices 18:26 Mar 23, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\24MRN1.SGM 24MRN1 EN24MR06.000</GPH> wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES 14864 VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:26 Mar 23, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\24MRN1.SGM 24MRN1 14865 EN24MR06.001</GPH> wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2006 / Notices VerDate Aug<31>2005 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2006 / Notices 18:26 Mar 23, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\24MRN1.SGM 24MRN1 EN24MR06.002</GPH> wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES 14866 VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:26 Mar 23, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\24MRN1.SGM 24MRN1 14867 EN24MR06.003</GPH> wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2006 / Notices VerDate Aug<31>2005 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2006 / Notices 18:26 Mar 23, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\24MRN1.SGM 24MRN1 EN24MR06.004</GPH> wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES 14868 VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:26 Mar 23, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\24MRN1.SGM 24MRN1 14869 EN24MR06.005</GPH> wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2006 / Notices VerDate Aug<31>2005 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2006 / Notices 18:26 Mar 23, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\24MRN1.SGM 24MRN1 EN24MR06.006</GPH> wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES 14870 VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:26 Mar 23, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\24MRN1.SGM 24MRN1 14871 EN24MR06.007</GPH> wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2006 / Notices VerDate Aug<31>2005 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2006 / Notices 18:26 Mar 23, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24MRN1.SGM 24MRN1 EN24MR06.008</GPH> wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES 14872 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2006 / Notices [FR Doc. 06–2842 Filed 3–23–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450–01–C DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Notice of Application for Amendment of Shoreline Management Plan and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES March 16, 2006. Take notice that the following application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection: a. Application Type: Amendment of Shoreline Management Plan. b. Project No: 2210–131. c. Dates Filed: March 16, 2006. d. Applicant: Appalachian Power Company (APC). e. Name of Project: Smith Mountain Pumped Storage Project. f. Location: The project is located on the Roanoke River, in Bedford, Pittsylvania,Franklin, and Roanoke Counties, Virginia. g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)–825(r) and 799 and 801. h. Applicant Contact: Frank M. Simms, Hydro Generation Department, American Electric Power, P.O. Box 2021, Roanoke, VA 24022–2121, (540) 985–2875. i. FERC Contact: Any questions on this notice should be addressed to Mrs. Heather Campbell at (202) 502–6182, or e-mail address: heather.campbell@ferc.gov or Mr. Bob Fletcher at (202) 502–8901, or e-mail address: robert.fletcher@ferc.gov. j. Deadline for filing comments and or motions: April 14, 2006. All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with: Ms. Magalie R. Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington DC 20426. Please include the project number (P– 2210–131) on any comments or motions filed. Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed electronically via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission’s Web site at http://www.ferc.gov under the e-Filing’’ link. The Commission strongly encourages e-filings. k. Description of Request: The licensee requests to amend the July 5, 2005 Order Modifying and Approving Shoreline Management Plan (112 FERC ¶ 61,026) to revise ordering paragraph (D) from: ‘‘All in-water construction, VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:26 Mar 23, 2006 Jkt 208001 except pile driving and associated above water dock construction activities, is prohibited from February 15 through June 15. Pile driving and associated inwater dock construction activities are prohibited from April 15 to June 15. Installation or maintenance of navigational markers is exempt from these time-of-year restrictions.’’ To ‘‘All in-water construction, except pile driving and associated above water dock construction activities, is prohibited from February 15 through June 15. Pile driving shall include the removal of existing piles necessary for construction of the associated facility and be limited to only piling installed utilizing impact equipment.’’ l. Location of the Application: This filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426 or may be viewed on the Commission’s Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘elibrary’’ link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, call toll-free 1–866–208–3676 or e-mail FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov. For TTY, call (202) 502–8659. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item h. above. m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission’s mailing list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission. n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene—Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission’s Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application. o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents—Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title ‘‘COMMENTS’’, ‘‘RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TERMS AND CONDITIONS’’, ‘‘PROTEST’’, or ‘‘MOTION TO INTERVENE’’, as applicable, and the Project Number of the particular application to which the filing refers. A copy of any motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the particular application. PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 14873 p. Agency Comments—Federal, state, and local agencies are invited to file comments on the described applications. Copies of the applications may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an agency’s comments must also be sent to the Applicant’s representatives. Magalie R. Salas, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6–4253 Filed 3–23–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717–01–P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP06–85–000] CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission Company; Notice of Application March 17, 2006. On March 10, 2006, in Docket No. CP06–85–000, CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission Company (CEGT), pursuant to section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act, as amended, and section 157 subpart A of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (Commission) regulations requests authorization to construct, own, and operate the Carthage to Perryville Project designed to receive and transport 1.237 billion cubic feet per day of natural gas. The project would consist of: 171.9 miles of 42-inch diameter pipeline; compression totaling 41,240 hp at two compressor stations; meter and regulator stations at receipt points with 3 Texas intrastate pipelines; interconnections with 4 interstate pipelines; and, appurtenant facilities. The facilities will operate separately from CEGT’s existing pipeline system, and CEGT is seeking implementation of a fixed charge for Fuel Use and Lost and Unaccounted For Gas (LUFG) applicable to transportation on the new facilities, all as more fully described in the application. CEGT seeks waiver of the Commission’s regulations such that the 30-day comment period for the Final Environmental Impact Statement may coincide with the 30-day requested certificate order’s rehearing period and that notational voting be used to extent this approach would expedite the order’s issuance. CEGT requests that the Commission issue requested authorizations by October 30, 2006 so that facilities may be operable in time E:\FR\FM\24MRN1.SGM 24MRN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 57 (Friday, March 24, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14858-14873]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-2842]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

[Case No. CAC-012]


Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Publication of 
the Petition for Waiver and Granting of the Application for Interim 
Waiver of Mitsubishi Electric From the DOE Residential and Commercial 
Package Air Conditioner and Heat Pump Test Procedures

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

ACTION: Notice of Petition for Waiver, granting of application for 
interim waiver, and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: Today's notice publishes a Petition for Waiver from Mitsubishi 
Electric and Electronics USA, Inc. (MEUS). This Petition for Waiver 
(hereafter ``MEUS Petition'') requests a waiver of the test procedures 
applicable to residential and commercial package air conditioners and 
heat pumps. The Department of Energy (hereafter ``Department'' or 
``DOE'') is soliciting comments, data, and information with respect to 
the MEUS Petition. Furthermore, today's notice includes an alternate 
test procedure the Department is considering to include in the Decision 
and Order and for which it is requesting comments.
    Today's notice also grants an Interim Waiver to MEUS from the 
existing Department test procedures applicable to residential and 
commercial package air conditioners and heat pumps.

DATES: The Department will accept comments, data, and information 
regarding this Petition for Waiver until, but no later than April 24, 
2006.

ADDRESSES: Please submit comments, identified by case number [CAC-012], 
by any of the following methods:
     Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards-Jones, U.S. Department of Energy, 
Building Technologies Program, Mailstop EE-2J, Forrestal Building, 1000 
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 
586-2945. Please submit one signed original paper copy.

[[Page 14859]]

     Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda Edwards-Jones, U.S. 
Department of Energy, Building Technologies Program, Room 1J-018, 
Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 
20585.
     E-mail: Michael.Raymond@ee.doe.gov. Include either the 
case number [CAC-012], and/or ``MEUS Petition'' in the subject line of 
the message.
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name 
and case number for this proceeding. Submit electronic comments in 
WordPerfect, Microsoft Word, PDF, or text (ASCII) file format and avoid 
the use of special characters or any form of encryption. Wherever 
possible, include the electronic signature of the author. Absent an 
electronic signature, comments submitted electronically must be 
followed and authenticated by submitting the signed original paper 
document. The Department does not accept telefacsimiles (faxes). Any 
person submitting written comments must also send a copy of such 
comments to the petitioner. (10 CFR 430.27(b)(1)(iv), 431.201(d)(2)) 
\1\ The name and address of the petitioner of today's notice is: 
William Rau, Senior Vice President and General Manager, HVAC Advanced 
Products Division, Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA, Inc., 4300 
Lawrenceville-Suwanee Road, Suwanee, GA 30024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ On October 18, 2005, DOE published a technical amendment 
which re-designates Subpart L (sections 431.201 through 431.207) of 
the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) as Subpart V (sections 431.401 
through 431.407). (70 FR 60407, October 18, 2005) DOE published the 
technical amendment to place in the CFR the energy conservation 
standards and related definitions that Congress prescribed in the 
Energy Policy Act of 2005 for certain consumer products and 
commercial and industrial equipment. The amendment does not change 
the test procedure waiver provisions for commercial equipment, but 
moves them from 10 CFR 431.201 to 431.401. The residential test 
procedure waiver provisions remain at 10 CFR 430.27.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to 10 CFR 1004.11, any person submitting information that 
he or she believes to be confidential and exempt by law from public 
disclosure should submit two copies: one copy of the document including 
all the information believed to be confidential, and one copy of the 
document with the information believed to be confidential deleted. The 
Department will make its own determination about the confidential 
status of the information and treat it according to its determination.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read the background documents 
relevant to this matter, go to the U.S. Department of Energy, Forrestal 
Building, Room 1J-018 (Resource Room of the Building Technologies 
Program), 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC, (202) 586-
2945, between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal 
holidays. Available documents include the following items: this notice; 
public comments received; the Petition for Waiver and Application for 
Interim Waiver; prior Department rulemakings regarding commercial 
central air conditioners and heat pumps; and the prior MEUS Petition 
for Waiver, the Department's notice of the prior MEUS Petition for 
Waiver and the subsequent Department Decision and Order. Please call 
Ms. Brenda Edwards-Jones at the above telephone number for additional 
information regarding visiting the Resource Room. Please note: The 
Department's Freedom of Information Reading Room (formerly Room 1E-190 
at the Forrestal Building) is no longer housing rulemaking materials.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Michael G. Raymond, U.S. 
Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, 
Building Technologies Program, Mail Stop EE-2J, Forrestal Building, 
1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121, (202) 586-
9611; e-mail: Michael.Raymond.ee.doe.gov; or
    Francine Pinto, Esq., U.S. Department of Energy, Office of General 
Counsel, Mail Stop GC-72, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, 
SW., Washington, DC 20585-0103, (202) 586-9507; e-mail: 
Francine.Pinto@hq.doe.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background and Authority
II. Petition for Waiver
III. Application for Interim Waiver
IV. Alternate Test Procedure
V. Summary and Request for Comments

I. Background and Authority

    Title III of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) sets 
forth a variety of provisions concerning energy efficiency. Part B of 
Title III (42 U.S.C. 6291-6309) provides for the ``Energy Conservation 
Program for Consumer Products other than Automobiles.'' Part C of Title 
III (42 U.S.C. 6311-6317) provides for an energy efficiency program 
entitled ``Certain Industrial Equipment,'' which is similar to the 
program in Part B, and which includes commercial air conditioning 
equipment, packaged boilers, water heaters, and other types of 
commercial equipment.
    Today's notice involves residential products under Part B, and 
commercial equipment under Part C. Both parts specifically provide for 
definitions, test procedures, labeling provisions, energy conservation 
standards, and the authority to require information and reports from 
manufacturers. With respect to test procedures, both parts generally 
authorize the Secretary of Energy to prescribe test procedures that are 
reasonably designed to produce results which reflect energy efficiency, 
energy use and estimated operating costs, and that are not unduly 
burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3), 6314(a)(2)).
    MEUS's petition requests a waiver from both the residential and 
commercial test procedures for its R410A models of its CITY MULTI 
Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning (VRFZ) product line, which are sold 
for commercial use. The test procedures for residential products appear 
at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, Appendix M. EPCA provides that the 
Secretary of Energy may amend test procedures for consumer products if 
the Secretary determines that amended test procedures would more 
accurately reflect energy efficiency, energy use or estimated annual 
operating costs, and are not unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 
6293(b)(1)(A), and 42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)).
    For commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment, EPCA 
provides that the test procedures shall be those generally accepted 
industry testing procedures or rating procedures developed or 
recognized by the Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute (ARI) or 
by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning 
Engineers (ASHRAE), as referenced in ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1 and in 
effect on June 30, 1992. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(4)(A)) This section also 
provides for the Secretary of Energy to amend the test procedure for a 
product if the industry test procedure is amended, unless the Secretary 
determines that such a modified test procedure does not meet the 
statutory criteria. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(4)(B)). On October 21, 2004, the 
Department published a direct final rule adopting test procedures for 
commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment, effective 
December 20, 2004. DOE adopted ARI Standard 210/240-2003 for small 
commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment with 
capacities <65,000 Btu/h and ARI Standard 340/360-2000 for large 
commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment with 
capacities >= 135,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h and small commercial 
package air conditioning and heating equipment

[[Page 14860]]

with capacities >=65,000 Btu/h and <135,000 Btu/h. (69 FR 61962, 
October 21, 2004) The capacities of MEUS's MULTI CITY VRFZ products 
sold for commercial use fall in the ranges covered by both the 
commercial standards, ARI Standard 340/360-2000 and the ARI Standard 
210/240-2003, and the test procedures for residential products cited 
above.
    The Department's regulations contain provisions allowing a person 
to seek a waiver from the test procedure requirements for covered 
consumer products. These provisions are set forth in 10 CFR 430.27. The 
waiver provisions for commercial equipment are substantively identical 
to those for covered consumer products and are found at 10 CFR 431.401 
(formerly, 10 CFR 431.201).
    The waiver provisions allow the Assistant Secretary for Energy 
Efficiency and Renewable Energy (hereafter ``Assistant Secretary'') to 
temporarily waive test procedures for a particular basic model when a 
petitioner shows that the basic model contains one or more design 
characteristics that prevent testing according to the prescribed test 
procedures, or when the prescribed test procedures may evaluate the 
basic model in a manner so unrepresentative of its true energy 
consumption as to provide materially inaccurate comparative data. (10 
CFR 430.27(a)(1), 10 CFR 431.201(a)(1)) The Assistant Secretary may 
grant the waiver subject to conditions, including adherence to 
alternate test procedures. Petitioners are to include in their petition 
any alternate test procedures known to evaluate the basic model in a 
manner representative of its energy consumption. (10 CFR 
430.27(b)(1)(iii), 10 CFR 431.201(b)(1)(iii)) Waivers generally remain 
in effect until final test procedure amendments become effective, 
thereby resolving the problem that is the subject of the waiver.
    The waiver process also allows the Assistant Secretary to grant an 
Interim Waiver from test procedure requirements to manufacturers that 
have petitioned the Department for a waiver of such prescribed test 
procedures. (10 CFR 430.27(a)(2), 10 CFR 431.201(a)(2)) An Interim 
Waiver remains in effect for a period of 180 days or until the 
Department issues its determination on the Petition for Waiver, 
whichever is sooner, and may be extended for an additional 180 days, if 
necessary. (10 CFR 430.27(h), 10 CFR 431.201(e)(4)).

II. Petition for Waiver

    On November 7, 2005, MEUS filed an Application for Interim Waiver 
and a Petition for Waiver from the test procedures applicable to its 
residential and commercial package air conditioning and heating 
equipment. In particular, MEUS requested a waiver from the residential 
test procedures contained in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, Appendix M, 
and a waiver from the commercial test procedures contained in ARI 
Standard 210/240-2003 and in ARI Standard 340/360-2000. The Department 
previously granted MEUS a waiver from test procedures in 2004 for 
similar models which use R22 as a refrigerant. (69 FR 52660, August 27, 
2004) Given product adjustments to accommodate the new R410A 
refrigerant, MEUS requests a waiver from the test procedures for its 
new MULTI CITY models.
    MEUS seeks a waiver from the applicable test procedures because, 
MEUS asserts, design characteristics of the R410A CITY MULTI VRFZ 
systems prevent testing according to the currently prescribed test 
procedures. MEUS claims that its R410A models cannot be tested pursuant 
to the existing test procedures for the same reasons that its R22 
models were previously granted a waiver by the Department. In 
particular, the R410A CITY MULTI systems can connect more indoor units 
than the test laboratories can physically test at one time. Because of 
the inability to test products with so many indoor units, testing 
laboratories will not be able to test many of the R410A system 
combinations. Furthermore, MEUS asserts that the current test 
procedures do not provide direction for determining what combinations 
of outdoor and indoor units should be tested in the circumstance where 
a multitude of different combinations are possible. Also, the test 
procedures provide no mechanism for sampling component combinations. In 
addition, MEUS asserts that it is not practical to test all of the 
potentially available combinations of indoor and outdoor units, which 
numbers in the billions.
    MEUS states that the R410A CITY MULTI system is designed to be 
flexible, with numerous combinations possible. According to MEUS, each 
of the indoor units is designed to be used with up to 18 other indoor 
units with the 108,000 Btu/h outdoor units and potentially 31 other 
indoor units with the 234,000 Btu/h outdoor units. Also, MEUS offers 58 
different indoor models that can be used in the different combinations. 
Given the above, MEUS asserts the current test procedures cannot 
practically be applied to the CITY MULI VRFZ systems.
    In addition, MEUS asserts, the current test procedures evaluate 
CITY MULTI VRFZ system products in a manner not representative of their 
true energy efficiency. MEUS claims that many benefits of its system 
characteristics, including variable refrigerant control and 
distribution, zoning diversity, part-load operation and simultaneous 
heating and cooling, are not credited under the current test 
procedures.
    The MEUS petition requests that the Department grant a waiver from 
existing test procedures until such time as a representative test 
procedure is developed and adopted for this class of products. MEUS did 
not include an alternate test procedure in its petition and noted that 
it knows of no alternative test procedure that could evaluate its 
products in a representative manner. However, MEUS is actively working 
with ARI to develop test procedures that accurately reflects the 
operation and energy consumption of these types of units.

III. Application for Interim Waiver

    MEUS also requested an Interim Waiver to allow it to introduce its 
new R410A products in the U.S. market while the Department evaluates 
the Petition for Waiver. An Interim Waiver may be granted if it is 
determined that the applicant will experience economic hardship if the 
Application for Interim Waiver is denied, if it appears likely that the 
Petition for Waiver will be granted, and/or the Assistant Secretary 
determines that it would be desirable for public policy reasons to 
grant immediate relief pending a determination of the Petition for 
Waiver. (10 CFR 431.201(e)(3), 430.27(g)).
    MEUS's Application for Interim Waiver does not provide sufficient 
information to evaluate what, if any, economic hardship MEU will likely 
experience if its Application for Interim Waiver is denied. However, in 
those instances where the likely success of the Petition for Waiver has 
been demonstrated, based upon the Department having granted a waiver 
for a similar product design, it is in the public interest to have 
similar products tested and rated for energy consumption on a 
comparable basis. For MEUS's new R410A CITY MULTI VRFZ products, it 
appears likely that the Petition for Waiver will be granted. The 
products currently under consideration, MEUS's new R410A CITY MULTI 
VRFZ products, are quite similar to the MEUS products previously 
granted a waiver, MEUS's R22 CITY MULTI VRFZ products. (69 FR 52660, 
August 27, 2004) The previous MEUS waiver was granted because MEUS's 
R22 products cannot be tested according to the prescribed test 
procedures, for two reasons: (1) Test laboratories cannot test

[[Page 14861]]

products with so many indoor units (at the time of the ruling, R22 CITY 
MULTI VRFZ outdoor systems could connect an outdoor unit with up to 
sixteen indoor units); and (2) there are too many possible combinations 
of indoor and outdoor units (at the time of the ruling, MEUS offered 58 
R22 indoor unit models, allowing for well over 1,000,000 combinations 
for each outdoor unit), and it is impractical to test so many 
combinations. As discussed above, the new MEUS CITY MULTI VRFZ systems 
will likely suffer the same testing problems that prompted the 
Department to grant MEUS the waiver for its R22 products. Thus, it is 
likely that MEUS's Petition for Waiver will be granted for the new 
R410A models.
    Therefore, MEUS's Application for an Interim Waiver from the 
Department test procedure for its new R410A CITY MULTI VRFZ systems is 
granted. Hence, it is ordered that:
    The Application for Interim Waiver filed by MEUS is hereby granted 
for MEUS's new R410A CITY MULTI VRFZ central air conditioners and 
central air conditioning heat pumps. MEUS shall not be required to test 
or rate its CITY MULTI VRFZ products listed below on the basis of the 
currently applicable test procedures, which are the test procedures 
contained in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, Appendix M, for the PUMY-
P48TGMU-* model, listed last, and ARI 340/360-2000 and ARI 210/240-
2003, for the other listed models:
    CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning System R-2 Series 
Outdoor Equipment:\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The * denotes engineering differences in the models.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     PURY-P72TGMU-*, 72,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split-system 
variable-speed heat pump
     PURY-P96TGMU-*, 96,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split-system 
variable-speed heat pump
     PURY-P108TGMU-*, 108,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split-system 
variable-speed heat pump
     PURY-P126TGMU-*, 126,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split-system 
variable-speed heat pump
     PURY-P144TGMU-*, 144,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split-system 
variable-speed heat pump
     PURY-P168TGMU-*, 168,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split-system 
variable-speed heat pump
     PURY-P192TGMU-*, 192,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split-system 
variable-speed heat pump
     PURY-P204TGMU-*, 204,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split-system 
variable-speed heat pump
     PURY-P216TGMU-*, 216,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split-system 
variable-speed heat pump
     PURY-P234TGMU-*, 234,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split-system 
variable-speed heat pump
    CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning System Y-Series Outdoor 
Equipment:
     PUHY-P72TGMU-*, 72,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split-system 
variable-speed heat pump
     PUHY-P96TGMU-*, 96,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split-system 
variable-speed heat pump
     PUHY-P108TGMU-*, 108,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split-system 
variable-speed heat pump
     PUHY-P126TGMU-*, 126,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split-system 
variable-speed heat pump
     PUHY-P144TGMU-*, 144,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split-system 
variable-speed heat pump
     PUHY-P168TGMU-*, 168,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split-system 
variable-speed heat pump
     PUHY-P192TGMU-*, 192,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split-system 
variable-speed heat pump
     PUHY-P204TGMU-*, 204,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split-system 
variable-speed heat pump
     PUHY-P216TGMU-*, 216,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split-system 
variable-speed heat pump
     PUHY-P234TGMU-*, 234,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split-system 
variable-speed heat pump
    CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning System Indoor 
Equipment:
    P*FY models, ranging from 6,000 to 96,000 Btu/h, 208/230-1-60 
split-system variable-capacity air conditioner or heat pump.
     PCFY Series--Ceiling Suspended--PCFY-P12/18/24/30/36***-*
     PDFY Series--Ceiling Concealed Ducted--PDFY-P06/08/12/15/
18/24/30/36/48***-*
     PEFY Series--Ceiling Concealed Ducted (Low Profile)--PEFY-
P06/08/12***-*
     PEFY Series--Ceiling Concealed Ducted (Alternate High 
Static Option)-PEFY-P15/18/24/27/30/36/48/54/72/96***-*
     PEFY-F Series--Ceiling Concealed Ducted (100% OA Option)--
PEFY-P30/54/72/96***-*-*
     PFFY Series--Floor Standing (Concealed)--PEFY-P06/08/12/
15/18/24***-*
     PFFY Series--Floor Standing (Exposed)--PEFY-P06/08/12/15/
18/24***-*
     PKFY Series--Wall-Mounted--PKFY-P06/08/12/18/24/30***-*
     PLFY Series--4-Way Airflow Ceiling Cassette--PEFY-P12/18/
24/30/36***-*
     PMFY Series--1-Way Airflow Ceiling Cassette--PEFY-P06/08/
12/15***-*
    CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning System S-Series Outdoor 
Equipment:
     PUMY--P48TGMU-*, 48,000 Btu/h, 208/230-1-60 split-system 
variable-speed heat pump.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Though Mitsubishi sells the PUMY-P48TGMU-* model as a 
commercial product, it is tested according to the residential test 
procedures prescribed by DOE, at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, 
Appendix M.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This Interim Waiver is based upon the presumed validity of 
statements and allegations submitted by the company. This Interim 
Waiver may be removed or modified at any time upon a determination that 
the factual basis underlying the Application is incorrect. The Interim 
Waiver shall remain in effect for a period of 180 days or until the 
Department acts on the Petition for Waiver, whichever is sooner, and 
may be extended for an additional 180-day period, if necessary.

IV. Alternate Test Procedure

    Manufacturers face restrictions with respect to making 
representations about the energy consumption and energy consumption 
costs of products covered by EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6314(d), 42 U.S.C. 
6293(c)). Consistent representations are important for manufacturers to 
make claims about the energy efficiency of their products. For example, 
they are necessary to determine compliance with state and local energy 
codes and regulatory requirements, and can provide valuable consumer 
purchasing information. To provide a test procedure from which 
manufacturers can make valid representations, the Department is 
considering setting an alternate test procedure for MEUS in the 
subsequent Decision and Order. Furthermore, if DOE specifies an 
alternate test procedure for MEUS, DOE is considering applying the 
alternate test procedure to similar waivers for residential and 
commercial central air conditioners and heat pumps. Such cases include 
Samsung's petition for its DVM products (70 FR 9629, February 28, 
2005), Fujitsu's petition for its Airstage variable refrigerant flow 
(VRF) products (70 FR 5980, February 4, 2005), and MEUS's petition for 
its R22 CITY MULTI VRFZ products (69 FR 52660, August 27, 2004).
    As noted above, existing testing facilities have a limited ability 
to test multiple indoor units at one time, and the number of possible 
combination of

[[Page 14862]]

indoor and outdoor units for some variable refrigerant zoning systems 
is impractical to test. Subsequent to the waiver that DOE granted for 
MEUS's R22 models, ARI developed a committee to discuss the issue and 
work on developing an appropriate test protocol for variable 
refrigerant zoning systems. However, to date, no additional test 
methodologies have been adopted by the committee or put forth to the 
Department. Furthermore, the Department is aware that the time required 
for drafting and approving such standards may be months or even years.
    DOE is considering amending the waiver issued to MEUS on August 27, 
2004. DOE has been aware that MEUS has made efficiency representations 
for its City Multi products on its Web site for several years. The 
efficiency representations are currently listed under the headings 
``System Efficiency'' for cooling, and ``System COP'' for heating. DOE 
is considering prohibiting the making of efficiency representations for 
the products granted a waiver on August 27, 2004, because these 
products were granted a waiver for the reason that the products could 
not be tested, which implies that representations cannot be made on the 
basis of testing.
    DOE is considering what energy efficiency representations it will 
allow for these products. If DOE grants this waiver, MEUS could sell 
products with energy efficiency representations under one of three 
methods outlined in (3)(B) below. An alternate test procedure is needed 
in order that manufacturers can make representations for their 
products. Even though MEUS did not include an alternate test procedure 
in their petition, and DOE did not specify one in the previous MEUS 
waiver, DOE is considering including in the Decision and Order the 
following waiver language:
    (1) The ``'Petition for Waiver''' filed by Mitsubishi Electric and 
Electronics USA, Inc. (MEUS) is hereby granted as set forth in the 
paragraphs below.
    (2) MEUS shall be not be required to test or rate the CITY MULTI 
Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning System (VRFZ) products covered in this 
waiver on the basis of the currently applicable test procedure, but 
shall be required to test and rate its CITY MULTI VRFZ products covered 
in this waiver according to the alternate test procedure as set forth 
in paragraph (3).
    (3) Alternate test procedure. MEUS shall be required to test 
according to those test procedures for central air conditioners and 
heat pumps prescribed by DOE at 10 CFR parts 430 and 431, except for 
the first sentence in 10 CFR 430.24(m)(2), which refers to ``that 
combination manufactured by the condensing unit manufacturer likely to 
have the highest volume of retail sales.'' Instead of testing the 
combinations likely to have the highest volume of retail sales, which 
may be difficult to identify, MEUS may test a ``tested combination'' 
selected in accordance with the provisions of subparagraph (A) of this 
section. MEUS may make representations of the MULTI CITY products 
covered in this waiver, according to the provisions of subparagraph 
(B).
    (A) Tested combination. The term ``tested combination'' means a 
sample basic model comprised of units that are production units, or are 
representative of production units, of the basic model being tested. 
For the purposes of this waiver, the tested combination shall have the 
following features:
    (i) The basic model of a variable refrigerant flow system (``VRF 
system'') used as a tested combination shall consist of an outdoor unit 
that is matched with between 2 and 5 indoor units.
    (ii) The indoor units shall--
    (a) Represent the highest sales volume type models;
    (b) Together, have a capacity between 95% and 105% of the capacity 
of the outdoor unit;
    (c) Not, individually, have a capacity greater than 50% of the 
capacity of the outdoor unit;
    (d) Have a fan speed that is consistent with the manufacturer's 
specifications; and
    (e) All have the same external static pressure.
    (B) Representations. MEUS may make representations about the Energy 
Efficiency Rating (``EER'') or Coefficient of Performance (``COP'') of 
products covered by this test procedure waiver only to the extent that 
such representations are made consistent with the provisions outlined 
below:
    (i) If MEUS chooses to test retail combinations of its MULTI CITY 
VRFZ products, MEUS may make representations about these retail 
combinations according to those test procedures for central air 
conditioners and heat pumps prescribed at 10 CFR parts 430 and 431.
    (ii) In the case where MEUS does not test retail combinations, MEUS 
may make representations which are based on the testing results from 
the tested combination and which are consistent with any of the three 
following methods:
    (a) Representation of non-tested combinations according to an 
Alternative Rating Method (ARM) approved by DOE and described in 10 CFR 
430.24(m).
    (b) Representation of non-tested combinations with the 
representation given the tested combination.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Currently, no alternate rating method exists by which MEUS 
can rate its CITY MULTI VRFZ products. Given a waiver from 
applicable DOE test procedures and no alternate rating method, MEUS 
faces limitations in making representations with its CITY MULTI VRFZ 
products. As such, to comply with California state building codes, 
the California Energy Commission is requiring the MEUS represent its 
CITY MULTI VRFZ products as minimal efficiency commercial package 
air conditioner and heat pumps. (G. William Pennington, Manager 
Buildings Appliances Office, California Energy Commission, Letter to 
William Rau, Senior Vice President, General Manager, Mitsubishi 
Electric & Electronics USA, Inc, 16 June 2005) DOE believes that 
making a representation according to a tested combination would 
permit MEUS to make more accurate representations of its CITY MULTI 
VRFZ products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (c) Representation of non-tested combinations at the DOE prescribed 
minimum efficiency level for the product class.
    Method (a) is already allowed for all central air conditioners. It 
is not, at this time, possible for products such as MEUS' multi-splits, 
because an ARM has not been developed for this type of product.
    Method (b) is a reduction of method (a). In method (a), with an 
ARM, the efficiency of non-tested combinations is calculated based on a 
tested combination that has the same outdoor unit as the non-tested 
combinations. The calculation is based on physical parameters of the 
indoor unit such as face area, number of rows, refrigerant circuitry, 
etc. In general, the efficiency calculated in this way will be either 
higher or lower than the efficiency of the tested combination. However, 
no ARM has been developed for these products, so the Department is 
proposing to allow MEUS to represent temporarily that all combinations 
using a particular outdoor unit have the efficiency of the combination 
that has been tested with that outdoor unit. That is equivalent to 
characterizing the indoor unit as having no effect on the efficiency. 
The Department believes this is reasonable because the outdoor unit is 
the principal efficiency driver, and the required test procedure does 
not exactly fit these products, but tends to rate them very 
conservatively. This is because the products are capable of 
simultaneous heating and cooling, which is more efficient than 
requiring all zones to be either heated or cooled, and because the test 
procedure requires full load testing, which disadvantages these 
products, which are optimized for best efficiency when operating with 
less than full loads.

[[Page 14863]]

    Method (c) allows rating at the minimum standard level without 
testing because the Department believes the products' efficiency in 
actual use would be at least as great as conventional products with 
efficiencies at the minimum standard level, because the required 
efficiency descriptor rates the products at full load. The products 
have higher efficiency when operating at part-load conditions, and the 
products, in fact, normally operate at part-load conditions. Further, 
the multi-zoning feature of these products, which enables them to cool 
only those portions of the building which require cooling, uses less 
energy than if the whole building must be cooled when cooling is 
required.

V. Summary and Request for Comments

    Today's notice announces a MEUS Petition for Waiver and grants MEUS 
an Interim Waiver from the test procedures applicable to MEUS's R410A 
MULTI CITY package air conditioner and heat pump units. The Department 
is publishing the MEUS Petition for Waiver in its entirety. The 
Petition contains no confidential information. Furthermore, today's 
notice includes an alternate test procedure that the Department is 
considering to include in the subsequent Decision and Order. In this 
alternate test procedure, the Department proposes defining a ``tested 
combination'' which MEUS could test in lieu of testing all retail 
combinations of its VRFZ MULTI CITY products. Furthermore, should a 
manufacturer not be able to test all retail combinations, DOE proposes 
allowing manufacturers to rate waived products according to an 
alternate rating method approved by DOE, to rate waived products as the 
same as that for the specified tested combination, or to rate at the 
minimum efficiency level without testing.
    The Department is also considering amending the waiver previously 
issued to MEUS on August 27, 2004, because MEUS is making energy 
efficiency representations even though it previously had represented to 
the Department that such units could not be tested. Thus, MEUS sold 
untested units with energy efficiency ratings that had not been 
properly verified.
    The Department is interested in receiving comments on all aspects 
of this notice. The Department is particularly interested in receiving 
comments and views of interested parties concerning the proposed 
alternate test procedure and the representations under consideration 
for the upcoming Decision and Order for the MEUS Petition, as well as 
for other similar air conditioner and heat pump cases. Specifically, 
the Department would like to receive comment on the following 
questions:
     Is it appropriate for MEUS to use the proposed test 
procedure for ratings, representations and compliance with state and 
local energy codes and regulatory requirements?
     What should the Department prescribe for manufacturers in 
situations where the defined tested combination is not testable or 
practical to test?
     Would it be appropriate for DOE to create a separate class 
for multi-split, zoned central air conditioner and heat pumps, as an 
alternative to prescribing an alternate test procedure or modifying 
existing central air conditioner and heat pump test procedures? In this 
case, such central air conditioner and heat pump models would not be 
subject to an energy standard until an appropriate test procedure is 
developed and prescribed.
     Should the Department allow energy efficiency 
representations for non-tested combinations of these products at the 
level of the tested combination?
     Should the Department allow energy efficiency 
representations for non-tested combinations at the DOE prescribed 
minimum efficiency level for the product class?
     Is the Department's proposed definition of ``tested 
combination'' useful and workable?
     Are there possible modifications to any test procedures or 
alternative rating methods which the Department could use to fairly 
represent the energy efficiency of MEUS R410A CITY MULTI products, as 
well as similar multi-split products from other manufacturers?
    Any person submitting written comments must also send a copy of 
such comments to the petitioner, whose contact information is cited 
above.(10 CFR 431.201(d)(2), 10 CFR 430.27(b)(1)(iv)).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on March 15, 2006.
Douglas L. Faulkner,
Acting Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P

[[Page 14864]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN24MR06.000


[[Page 14865]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN24MR06.001


[[Page 14866]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN24MR06.002


[[Page 14867]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN24MR06.003


[[Page 14868]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN24MR06.004


[[Page 14869]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN24MR06.005


[[Page 14870]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN24MR06.006


[[Page 14871]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN24MR06.007


[[Page 14872]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN24MR06.008


[[Page 14873]]


[FR Doc. 06-2842 Filed 3-23-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-C