Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Decision and Order Granting a Waiver to Fujitsu General From the Department of Energy Residential Central Air Conditioner and Heat Pump Test Procedure [Case No. CAC-010], 71383-71387 [E7-24438]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 241 / Monday, December 17, 2007 / Notices
will assure that students are aware of
the TEACH Grant program, the
program’s eligibility criteria, and that
students will indicate their plans to
pursue a teaching career. The
Department proposes to accomplish this
by asking the following question on the
FAFSA on the Web: ‘‘Are you planning
on completing coursework, now or in
the future, necessary for you to become
an elementary or secondary school
teacher? A ‘YES’ response to this
question will allow your school to
provide you with additional information
on a new federal program for students
who meet certain conditions and plan
on becoming teachers.’’
The FAFSA is completed by students
and their families and the information
submitted on the form is used to
determine the students’ eligibility and
financial need for financial aid under
the student financial assistance
programs authorized under Title IV of
the Higher Education Act of 1965, as
amended (Title IV, HEA Programs).
DATES: An emergency review has been
requested in accordance with the Act
(44 U.S.C. Chapter 3507 (j)), since
public harm is reasonably likely to
result if normal clearance procedures
are followed. Approval by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has
been requested by December 28, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Written comments
regarding the emergency review should
be addressed to the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Attention: Bridget Dooling, Desk Officer,
Department of Education, Office of
Management and Budget; 725 17th
Street, NW., Room 10222, New
Executive Office Building, Washington,
DC 20503, or faxed to (202) 395–6974.
ebenthall on PROD1PC69 with NOTICES
Dated: December 13, 2007.
Angela C. Arrington,
IC Clearance Official, Regulatory Information
Management Services, Office of Management.
Federal Student Aid
Type of Review: Revision.
Title: Free Application for Federal
Student Aid (FAFSA).
Frequency: Annually.
Affected Public: Individuals and
families.
Annual Reporting and Recordkeeping
Hour Burden:
Responses: 16,787,640.
Burden Hours: 8,054,467.
Abstract: The College Cost Reduction
and Access Act of 2007 establishes,
effective with the 2008–2009 award
year, the Teacher Education Assistance
for College and Higher Education
(TEACH) Grant Program, which
provides up to $4,000 a year in grant
assistance to students who plan on
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:28 Dec 14, 2007
Jkt 214001
being a teacher and meet certain
specified requirements. Because the
2008–2009 FAFSA Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) burden hour
estimate (approved December 2006)
does not include the burden associated
with reading and responding to a new
TEACH grant question (the TEACH
grant did not exist at that time) we are
submitting this request for an
emergency clearance of an updated
2008–2009 FAFSA. Through the
updated FAFSA, we are striving to make
students aware of the TEACH Grant
program and the eligibility criteria, in
addition to determining their plans to
pursue a teaching career. We propose to
accomplish this by asking the following
question on FAFSA on the Web: ‘‘Are
you planning on completing
coursework, now or in the future,
necessary for you to become an
elementary or secondary school teacher?
A ‘’YES’ response to this question will
allow your school to provide you with
additional information on a new federal
program for students who meet certain
conditions and plan on becoming
teachers.’’
Requests for copies of the proposed
information collection request may be
accessed from https://edicsweb.ed.gov,
by selecting the ‘‘Browse Pending
Collections’’ link and clicking on
‘‘Download attachments’’ to view.
Written requests for information should
be addressed to U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW.,
Potomac Center, 9th Floor, Washington,
DC 20202–4700. Requests may also be
electronically mailed to
ICDocketMgr@ed.gov or faxed to (202)
245–6623. Please specify the complete
title of the information collection when
making your request. Comments
regarding burden and/or the collection
activity requirements should be directed
to the e-mail address
ICDocketMgr@ed.gov. Individuals who
use a telecommunications device for the
deaf (TDD) may call the Federal
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–
800–877–8339 between 8 a.m. and 8
p.m., Eastern time, Monday through
Friday.
[FR Doc. E7–24452 Filed 12–14–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
71383
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy
Energy Conservation Program for
Consumer Products: Decision and
Order Granting a Waiver to Fujitsu
General From the Department of
Energy Residential Central Air
Conditioner and Heat Pump Test
Procedure [Case No. CAC–010]
Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Decision and Order.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This notice publishes the
Department of Energy’s Decision and
Order in Case No. CAC–010, which
grants a Waiver to Fujitsu General
Limited (Fujitsu) from the existing
Department of Energy (DOE) residential
central air conditioner and heat pump
test procedure for specified Airstage
Variable Refrigerant Flow (VRF) multisplit products. As a condition of this
waiver, Fujitsu must test and rate its
Airstage multi-split products according
to the alternate test procedure set forth
in this notice.
DATES: This Decision and Order is
effective December 17, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.
Michael G. Raymond, U.S. Department
of Energy, Building Technologies
Program, Mailstop EE–2J, 1000
Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20585–0121.
Telephone: (202) 586–9611. E-mail:
Michael.Raymond@ee.doe.gov.
Francine Pinto or Eric Stas, U.S.
Department of Energy, Office of the
General Counsel, Mail Stop GC–72,
1000 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20585–0103.
Telephone: (202) 586–9507. E-mail:
Francine.Pinto@hq.doe.gov or
Eric.Stas@hq.doe.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In
accordance with 10 CFR 430.27(l),
notice is hereby given of the issuance of
the Decision and Order set forth below.
In this Decision and Order, DOE grants
Fujitsu a Waiver from the applicable
DOE residential central air conditioner
and heat pump test procedure under 10
CFR part 430, subpart B, Appendix M,
for its Airstage VRF multi-split
products, subject to a condition
requiring Fujitsu to test and rate its
Airstage products pursuant to the
alternate test procedure provided in this
notice. Today’s decision requires that
Fujitsu may not make any
representations concerning the energy
efficiency of these products unless such
product has been tested in accordance
E:\FR\FM\17DEN1.SGM
17DEN1
71384
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 241 / Monday, December 17, 2007 / Notices
with the DOE test procedure, consistent
with the provisions and restrictions in
the alternate test procedure set forth in
the Decision and Order below, and such
representation fairly discloses the
results of such testing.1 (42 U.S.C.
6293(c))
Issued in Washington, DC, on November 4,
2007.
Alexander A. Karsner,
Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy.
Decision and Order
In the Matter of: Fujitsu General
Limited (Fujitsu) (Case No. CAC–010).
ebenthall on PROD1PC69 with NOTICES
Background
Title III of the Energy Policy and
Conservation Act (EPCA) sets forth a
variety of provisions concerning energy
efficiency, including Part B of Title III
which establishes the ‘‘Energy
Conservation Program for Consumer
Products Other Than Automobiles.’’ (42
U.S.C. 6291–6309) Similar to the
program in Part B, Part C of Title III
provides for an energy efficiency
program titled, ‘‘Certain Industrial
Equipment,’’ which includes
commercial air conditioning equipment,
package boilers, water heaters, and other
types of commercial equipment. (42
U.S.C. 6311–6317)
Today’s notice involves residential
products under Part B, as well as
commercial equipment under Part C.
Under both parts, the statute specifically
includes 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 (the
Secretary) 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))
Relevant to the current Petition for
Waiver, the test procedure for
residential central air conditioning and
heat pump products is set forth in 10
CFR part 430, subpart B, Appendix M.
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
1 Consistent with the statute, distributors,
retailers, and private labelers are held to the same
standard when making representations regarding
the energy efficiency of these products. (42 U.S.C.
6293(c))
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:28 Dec 14, 2007
Jkt 214001
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)) Under 42 U.S.C.
6314(a)(4)(B), the statute further directs
the Secretary to amend the test
procedure for a covered commercial
product if the industry test procedure is
amended, unless the Secretary
determines that such a modified test
procedure does not meet the statutory
criteria set forth in 42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2)
and (3).
On December 8, 2006, DOE published
a final rule adopting test procedures for
commercial package air conditioning
and heating equipment, effective
January 8, 2007. 71 FR 71340. The test
procedures in that final rule apply to
three-phase equipment. However, there
is no prescribed test procedure for
single-phase, small commercial package
air conditioning and heating equipment.
In addition, DOE’s regulations contain
provisions allowing a person to seek a
waiver from the test procedure
requirements for covered consumer
products, when the petitioner’s 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).
Petitioners must 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).
The Assistant Secretary for Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy (the
Assistant Secretary) may grant a waiver
subject to conditions, including
adherence to alternate test procedures.
10 CFR 430.27(l). In general, a waiver
terminates on the effective date of a
final rule which prescribes amended
test procedures appropriate to the model
series manufactured by the petitioner,
thereby eliminating any need for the
continuation of the waiver. 10 CFR
430.27(m).
The waiver process also allows any
interested person who has submitted a
Petition for Waiver to file an
Application for Interim Waiver of the
applicable test procedure requirements.
10 CFR 430.27(a)(2). The Assistant
Secretary will grant an Interim Waiver
request if it is determined that the
applicant will experience economic
hardship if the Interim Waiver is
denied, if it appears likely that the
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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 on the Petition
for Waiver. 10 CFR 430.27(g). An
Interim Waiver remains in effect for a
period of 180 days or until DOE issues
its determination on the Petition for
Waiver, whichever occurs first, and may
be extended by DOE for 180 days, if
necessary. 10 CFR 430.27(h).
On June 14, 2004, Fujitsu filed a
Petition for Waiver from the test
procedures applicable to its Airstage
line of residential and commercial VRF
multi-split air conditioning and heating
equipment.2 Fujitsu’s petition requested
a waiver from both the residential and
commercial test procedures. The
applicable residential test procedures
are contained in 10 CFR part 430,
subpart B, Appendix M, and, as
explained above, there is no applicable
commercial test procedure for such
products under 10 CFR part 430 or 431.
Fujitsu seeks a waiver from the test
procedures for this product class
because the design characteristics of its
Airstage VRF multi-split equipment
prevent testing according to the
currently prescribed residential test
procedures.
On February 4, 2005, DOE published
Fujitsu’s Petition for Waiver in the
Federal Register. 70 FR 5980. On
August 8, 2005, Fujitsu separately filed
an Application for Interim Waiver for
the same products for which it
petitioned for a waiver on June 14, 2004.
DOE granted the Application for Interim
Waiver on January 5, 2006.
In a similar and relevant case, DOE
published a Petition for Waiver from
Mitsubishi Electric and Electronics
USA, Inc. (MEUS) for products of the
same type as Fujitsu’s Airstage VRF
multi-split products. 71 FR 14858
(March 24, 2006). In the March 24, 2006
Federal Register notice, DOE also
published and requested comment on
an alternate test procedure for the
MEUS products at issue. DOE stated
that if it specified an alternate test
2 The Fujitsu Airstage VRF multi-split product
line at issue here involves single-phase equipment
for both residential and commercial use. Because
there is no DOE test procedure for single-phase,
small commercial package air-conditioning and
heating equipment, no waiver is required for
Fujitsu’s single-phase commercial Airstage
equipment. Nonetheless, Fujitsu’s Airstage VRF
multi-split products are properly classified as
‘‘consumer products,’’ because, to a significant
extent, they are for personal use or consumption by
individuals (given their frequent residential
applications). (42 U.S.C. 6291(1)(B)) Thus, the
Fujitsu Airstage VRF multi-split products require a
waiver from DOE’s test procedure for residential
central air conditioners and heat pumps, under 10
CFR part 430, subpart B, Appendix M.
E:\FR\FM\17DEN1.SGM
17DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 241 / Monday, December 17, 2007 / Notices
procedure for MEUS in the subsequent
Decision and Order, DOE would
consider applying the same procedure
to similar waivers for residential and
commercial central air conditioners and
heat pumps, including such products
for which waivers had previously been
granted. Most of the comments favored
DOE’s proposed alternate test
procedure. Also, there was general
agreement that an alternate test
procedure is necessary while a final test
procedure for these types of products is
being developed. The MEUS Decision
and Order, including the alternate test
procedure, was published in the Federal
Register on April 9, 2007. 72 FR 17528.
DOE received comments on the
Fujitsu petition from Carrier
Corporation (Carrier), Trane Division of
American Standard Inc. (Trane), Lennox
International Inc. (Lennox), and MEUS.
These comments are discussed in
further detail below.
Assertions and Determinations
ebenthall on PROD1PC69 with NOTICES
Fujitsu’s Petition for Waiver
On June 14, 2004, Fujitsu submitted a
Petition for Waiver from the test
procedures applicable to residential and
commercial package air-conditioning
and heating equipment for its Airstage
VRF multi-split products. Fujitsu’s
petition asserts that the energy use of its
Airstage systems cannot be accurately
measured using the current test
procedure for the following reasons:
1. The test procedure provides for
testing of a pair of indoor and outdoor
assemblies making up a typical split
system, but it provides no direction
about how Airstage units, with more
than ten thousand combinations of
indoor units, could be evaluated with
just one outdoor unit test.
2. The test procedure calls for testing
‘‘matched assemblies,’’ but Airstage
systems are designed to be used in
zoned systems where the capacity of the
indoor units does not match the
capacity of the outdoor unit.
In summary, the bases for Fujitsu’s
Petition for Waiver involve: (1) The
problem of being physically unable to
test most of the complete systems in a
laboratory; (2) the regulatory
requirement to test the highest-salesvolume combination; and (3) the lack of
a method for predicting the performance
of untested combinations. These were
the same bases underlying the MEUS
waiver discussed above.
Therefore, the Fujitsu petition
requested that DOE grant a waiver from
existing test procedures until such time
as a representative test procedure is
developed and adopted for this class of
products. Fujitsu did not include an
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:28 Dec 14, 2007
Jkt 214001
alternate test procedure in its Petition
for Waiver. However, DOE understands
that Fujitsu is actively working with
ARI to develop test procedures that
accurately reflect the operation and
energy consumption of these particular
product designs.
Of the four comments on the Fujitsu
Petition for Waiver, only MEUS
supported the petition. Carrier claimed
Fujitsu’s Airstage VRF systems could be
tested using the calorimeter air enthalpy
test method set forth in ASHRAE
Standard 37, ‘‘Methods of Testing for
Rating Unitary Air-Conditioning and
Heat Pump Equipment.’’ Although DOE
believes that use of this test, as Carrier
recommends, is theoretically possible
and would likely provide more accurate
results in the cooling mode, it is not a
practical solution because existing
calorimeter test rooms are too small to
test Fujitsu’s VRF Airstage systems with
more than three or four indoor units.
Lennox and Trane asserted that without
a testing and rating requirement, Fujitsu
could make energy efficiency claims
without the burden of providing
standardized ratings. DOE believes that
its alternate test procedure (discussed
below) effectively addresses these
objections.
As previously noted, DOE recently
addressed a situation regarding multisplit products that is relevant to the
Fujitsu products at issue here.
Specifically, on March 24, 2006, DOE
published in the Federal Register a
Petition for Waiver from MEUS
concerning its R410A CITY MULTI
VRFZ products, which are very similar
to Fujitsu’s VRF Airstage multi-split
products. 71 FR 14858. In that
publication, DOE stated:
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).
71 FR 14858, 14861 (March 24, 2006).
Since that time, DOE has developed
such an alternate test procedure.
Therefore, to enable Fujitsu to make
energy efficiency representations for its
specified Airstage VRF multi-split
products, DOE has decided to require
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
71385
use of the alternate test procedure
described below, as a condition of
Fujitsu’s waiver. This alternate test
procedure is substantially the same as
the one that DOE applied to the MEUS
waiver.
DOE’s Alternate Test Procedure
The alternate test procedure has two
basic components. First, it permits
Fujitsu to designate a ‘‘tested
combination’’ for each model of outdoor
unit. The indoor units designated as
part of the tested combination must
meet specific requirements. For
example, the tested combination must
have from two to five indoor units so
that it can be tested in available test
facilities. The tested combination must
be tested according to the applicable
DOE test procedure, as modified by the
provisions of the alternate test
procedure as set forth below. Second,
having a DOE test procedure that can be
applied to its products allows Fujitsu to
represent the energy efficiency of that
product, because any such
representation must fairly disclose the
results of such testing. The DOE test
procedure, as modified by the alternate
test procedure set forth in this Decision
and Order, provides for testing of a nontested combination in two ways: (1) At
an energy efficiency level determined
under a DOE-approved alternative rating
method; or (2) if the first method is not
available, then at the efficiency level of
the tested combination utilizing the
same outdoor unit. Until an alternative
rating method is developed, all
combinations with a particular outdoor
unit may use the rating of the
combination tested with that outdoor
unit.
DOE believes that adopting this
alternative test procedure as described
above (thereby allowing Fujitsu to make
energy efficiency representations for
non-tested combinations) is reasonable
because the outdoor unit is the principal
efficiency driver. The current DOE test
procedure 3 tends to rate these products
conservatively, because they are tested
under conditions where they operate
less efficiently than found in typical
use. The multi-zoning feature of these
products, which enables them to cool
only those portions of the building that
require cooling, uses less energy than if
the unit is operated to cool the entire
home or a comparatively larger area of
a commercial building in response to a
single thermostat. Therefore, the
alternate test procedure will provide a
conservative basis for assessing the
energy efficiency for such products.
3 10
E:\FR\FM\17DEN1.SGM
CFR part 430, subpart B, Appendix M.
17DEN1
ebenthall on PROD1PC69 with NOTICES
71386
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 241 / Monday, December 17, 2007 / Notices
The alternate test procedure applies to
both residential and commercial multisplit products. However, some
provisions are specific to residential or
commercial products. For example,
section (A) of the alternate test
procedure has different provisions for
residential and commercial products. In
contrast, section (B), which defines the
combinations of indoor and outdoor
units to test, and section (C), which sets
forth the requirements for making
representations, are the same for both
residential and commercial products.
Section (A) of the alternate test
procedure distinguishes between
residential and commercial products for
two reasons. First, 10 CFR 430.24, used
for residential products, already has
requirements for selecting split-system
combinations based on the highest sales
volume. However, part 431 of 10 CFR,
which applies to commercial products,
has no comparable requirements.
Therefore, section (A) of the alternate
test procedure modifies the existing
residential and commercial
requirements so that both residential
and commercial products can use the
same definition of a ‘‘tested
combination,’’ which is set forth in
section (B). Second, section (A) requires
several test procedure revisions to
determine the seasonal energy efficiency
ratio and heating seasonal performance
factor for the tested combination of
residential products. No test procedure
revisions are introduced for commercial
products because EPCA directs DOE to
adopt generally accepted industry test
standards (unless amendments to those
industry test procedures are determined
by clear and convincing evidence not to
meet the requirements of the statute).
(42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(4)) The changes for
residential products relate to: (1) The
requirement that all indoor units
operate during all tests; (2) the
restriction on using only one indoor test
room; (3) the selection of the
modulation levels (maximum,
minimum, and a specified intermediate
speed) used when testing; and (4) the
algorithm for estimating performance
over the intermediate speed operating
range. DOE proposed these changes in
its July 20, 2006 notice of proposed
rulemaking. 71 FR 41320.
For today’s Decision and Order, the
changes made by the final rule
published in the Federal Register on
October 22, 2007 (72 FR 59906) to test
procedure sections 2.1, 2.2.3, 2.4.1, 3.2.4
(including Table 6), 3.6.4 (including
Table 12), 4.1.4.2, and 4.2.4.2 constitute
mandatory elements of the alternate test
procedure. These changes allow indoor
units to cycle off, allow the
manufacturer to specify the compressor
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:28 Dec 14, 2007
Jkt 214001
speed used during certain tests, and
introduce a new algorithm for
estimating power consumption.
With regard to the laboratory testing
of both residential and commercial
products, some of the difficulties
associated with the existing test
procedure are avoided by the alternate
test procedure’s requirements for
choosing the indoor units to be used in
the manufacturer-specified tested
combination. For example, in addition
to limiting the number of indoor units,
another requirement is that all of the
indoor units must be subject to meeting
the same minimum external static
pressure. This requirement allows the
test lab to manifold the outlets from
each indoor unit into a common plenum
that supplies air to a single airflow
measuring apparatus. This requirement
eliminates situations in which some of
the indoor units are ducted and some
are non-ducted. Without this
requirement, the laboratory must
evaluate the capacity of a subgroup of
indoor coils separately, and then sum
the separate capacities to obtain the
overall system capacity. This would
require that the test laboratory be
equipped with multiple airflow
measuring apparatuses (which is
unlikely), or that the test laboratory
connect its one airflow measuring
apparatus to one or more common
indoor units until the contribution of
each indoor unit has been measured.
Furthermore, DOE stated in the notice
publishing the MEUS Petition for
Waiver that if the Department decides to
specify an alternate test procedure for
MEUS, it would consider applying the
procedure to waivers for similar
residential and commercial central air
conditioners and heat pumps produced
by other manufacturers. 71 FR 14858,
14861 (March 24, 2006). Most of the
comments received by DOE in response
to the March 2006 notice favored the
proposed alternate test procedure.
Commenters generally agreed that an
alternate test procedure is appropriate
for an interim period while a final test
procedure for these products is being
developed.
In light of the discussion above, DOE
believes that the problems described
above would prevent testing of Fujitsu’s
Airstage VRF multi-split products
according to the test procedures
currently prescribed in 10 CFR part 430,
subpart B, Appendix M. After reviewing
and considering all of the comments
submitted regarding the proposed
alternate test procedure, DOE has
decided to adopt the proposed alternate
test procedure, with the clarifications
discussed above. DOE will also consider
applying the same alternate test
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
procedure to waivers for similar central
air conditioners and heat pumps.
Consultations With Other Agencies
DOE consulted with the Federal Trade
Commission (FTC) concerning the
Fujitsu Petition for Waiver. The FTC did
not have any objections to the issuance
of a waiver to Fujitsu.
Conclusion
After careful consideration of all the
materials submitted by Fujitsu, the
comments received, and consultation
with the FTC, it is ordered that:
(1) The ‘‘Petition for Waiver’’ filed by
Fujitsu General Limited (Fujitsu) (Case
No. CAC–010) is hereby granted as set
forth in the paragraphs below.
(2) Fujitsu shall not be required to test
or rate its Airstage variable refrigerant
flow multi-split air conditioner and heat
pump models listed below on the basis
of the current test procedures contained
in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B,
Appendix M, but shall be required to
test and rate such products according to
the alternate test procedure as set forth
in paragraph (3).
Outdoor unit, Heat pump type:
AOU54U****
51.9 kBtu/hr cooling/54.4 kBtu/hr
heating, single phase, 208–230Vac,
60Hz.
Outdoor unit, Cooling-only type:
AOU54F****
51.9 kBtu/hr cooling, single phase, 208–
230Vac, 60Hz.
Indoor units:
AR Series, Compact duct type (ceiling/
floor standing), ARU 7/9/12/14/18/20/
22****
AR Series, Duct type, ARU25/30/36/
45****
AS Series, Wall mounted type, ASU7/9/
12/14/18/24/30****
AU Series, Compact ceiling cassette
type, AUU7/9/12/14/18****
AU Series, Ceiling cassette type,
AUU20/25/30/36/45/54****
The ‘‘****’’ denotes engineering
differences in the basic models.
(3) Alternate test procedure.
(A) Fujitsu shall be required to test
the products listed in paragraph (2)
above according to the test procedures
for central air conditioners and heat
pumps prescribed by DOE at 10 CFR
part 430, except that:
(i) Fujitsu shall not be required to
comply with: (1) 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 largest volume of retail sales;’’
and (2) the third sentence in 10 CFR
430(m)(2), including the provisions of
10 CFR 430(m)(2)(i) and (ii). Instead of
E:\FR\FM\17DEN1.SGM
17DEN1
ebenthall on PROD1PC69 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 241 / Monday, December 17, 2007 / Notices
testing the combinations likely to have
the highest volume of retail sales,
Fujitsu may test a ‘‘tested combination’’
selected in accordance with the
provisions of subparagraph (B) of this
paragraph. Additionally, instead of
following the provisions of 10 CFR
430(m)(2)(i) and (ii) for every other
system combination using the same
outdoor unit as the tested combination,
Fujitsu shall make representations
concerning the Airstage variable
refrigerant flow multi-split products
covered in this waiver according to the
provisions of subparagraph (C) below.
(ii) Fujitsu shall be required to
comply with 10 CFR part 430, subpart
B, Appendix M as amended by the final
rule published in the Federal Register
on October 22, 2007. 72 FR 59906. The
test procedure changes applicable to
multi-split products are in sections: 2.1,
2.2.3, 2.4.1, 3.2.4 (including Table 6),
3.6.4 (including Table 12), 4.1.4.2, and
4.2.4.2.
(B) 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 used as a tested
combination shall consist of an outdoor
unit that is matched with between two
and five indoor units.
(ii) The indoor units shall:
(a) Represent the highest sales volume
type models;
(b) Together, have a capacity between
95 percent and 105 percent of the
capacity of the outdoor unit;
(c) Not, individually, have a capacity
greater than 50 percent 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.
(C) Representations. In making
representations about the energy
efficiency of its Airstage variable
refrigerant flow multi-split air
conditioner and heat pump products,
for compliance, marketing, or other
purposes, Fujitsu must fairly disclose
the results of testing under the DOE test
procedure, doing so in a manner
consistent with the provisions outlined
below:
(i) For Airstage multi-split
combinations tested in accordance with
this alternate test procedure, Fujitsu
must disclose these test results.
(ii) For Airstage multi-split
combinations that are not tested, Fujitsu
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:28 Dec 14, 2007
Jkt 214001
must make a disclosure based on the
testing results for the tested
combination and which are consistent
with either of the two following
methods, except that only method (a)
may be used, if available:
(a) Representation of non-tested
combinations according to an
alternative rating method approved by
DOE; or
(b) Representation of non-tested
combinations at the same energy
efficiency level as the tested
combination with the same outdoor
unit.
(4) This waiver shall remain in effect
from the date of issuance of this Order
until April 21, 2008, which is the
effective date of a DOE final rule
prescribing an amended test procedure
appropriate to the model series
manufactured by Fujitsu listed above.
This final rule was published on
October 22, 2007 (72 FR 59906).
(5) This waiver is conditioned upon
the presumed validity of statements,
representations, and documentary
materials provided by the petitioner.
This waiver may be revoked or modified
at any time upon a determination that
the factual basis underlying the Petition
for Waiver is incorrect, or DOE
determines that the results from the
alternate test procedure are
unrepresentative of the basic models’
true energy consumption characteristics.
Issued in Washington, DC, on November 4,
2007.
Alexander A. Karsner,
Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy.
[FR Doc. E7–24438 Filed 12–14–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy
Energy Conservation Program for
Consumer Products: Decision and
Order Granting a Waiver to Samsung
Air Conditioning From the Department
of Energy Residential and Commercial
Package Air Conditioner and Heat
Pump Test Procedures [Case No.
CAC–009]
Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Decision and Order.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This notice publishes the
Department of Energy’s Decision and
Order in Case No. CAC–009, which
grants a waiver to Samsung Air
Conditioning (Samsung) from the
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
71387
existing Department of Energy (DOE)
residential and commercial package air
conditioner and heat pump test
procedures for specified Digital Variable
Multi (DVM) variable refrigerant flow
multi-split products. As a condition of
this waiver, Samsung must test and rate
its DVM multi-split products according
to the alternate test procedure set forth
in this notice.
This Decision and Order is
effective December 17, 2007.
DATES:
Dr.
Michael G. Raymond, U.S. Department
of Energy, Building Technologies
Program, Mailstop EE–2J, 1000
Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20585–0121.
Telephone: (202) 586–9611. E-mail:
Michael.Raymond@ee.doe.gov.
Francine Pinto or Eric Stas, U.S.
Department of Energy, Office of General
Counsel, Mail Stop GC–72, 1000
Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20585–0103.
Telephone: (202) 586–9507. E-mail:
Francine.Pinto@hq.doe.gov or
Eric.Stas@hq.doe.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
In
accordance with 10 CFR 430.27(l) and
10 CFR 431.401(f)(4), notice is hereby
given of the issuance of the Decision
and Order set forth below. In this
Decision and Order, DOE grants
Samsung a waiver from the applicable
DOE residential and commercial
package air conditioner and heat pump
test procedures 1 for its DVM multi-split
products, subject to a condition
requiring Samsung to test and rate its
DVM multi-split products pursuant to
the alternate test procedure provided in
this notice. Today’s decision requires
that Samsung may not make any
representations concerning the energy
efficiency of these products unless such
product has been tested in accordance
with the DOE test procedure, consistent
with the provisions and restrictions in
the alternate test procedure set forth in
the Decision and Order below, and such
representation fairly discloses the
results of such testing.2 (42 U.S.C.
6293(c))
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
1 For residential products, the applicable test
procedure is set forth in 10 CFR part 430, subpart
B, Appendix M. For commercial products, the
applicable test procedure is the Air-Conditioning
and Refrigeration Institute (ARI) Standard 340/360–
2004, ‘‘Performance Rating of Commercial and
Industrial Unitary Air-Conditioning and Heat Pump
Equipment’’ (incorporated by reference at 10 CFR
431.95(b)(2)).
2 Consistent with the statute, distributors,
retailers, and private labelers are held to the same
standard when making representations regarding
the energy efficiency of these products. (42 U.S.C.
6293(c))
E:\FR\FM\17DEN1.SGM
17DEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 241 (Monday, December 17, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71383-71387]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-24438]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Decision and
Order Granting a Waiver to Fujitsu General From the Department of
Energy Residential Central Air Conditioner and Heat Pump Test Procedure
[Case No. CAC-010]
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Decision and Order.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice publishes the Department of Energy's Decision and
Order in Case No. CAC-010, which grants a Waiver to Fujitsu General
Limited (Fujitsu) from the existing Department of Energy (DOE)
residential central air conditioner and heat pump test procedure for
specified Airstage Variable Refrigerant Flow (VRF) multi-split
products. As a condition of this waiver, Fujitsu must test and rate its
Airstage multi-split products according to the alternate test procedure
set forth in this notice.
DATES: This Decision and Order is effective December 17, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Michael G. Raymond, U.S.
Department of Energy, Building Technologies Program, Mailstop EE-2J,
1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone:
(202) 586-9611. E-mail: Michael.Raymond@ee.doe.gov.
Francine Pinto or Eric Stas, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of
the General Counsel, Mail Stop GC-72, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20585-0103. Telephone: (202) 586-9507. E-mail:
Francine.Pinto@hq.doe.gov or Eric.Stas@hq.doe.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with 10 CFR 430.27(l), notice
is hereby given of the issuance of the Decision and Order set forth
below. In this Decision and Order, DOE grants Fujitsu a Waiver from the
applicable DOE residential central air conditioner and heat pump test
procedure under 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, Appendix M, for its
Airstage VRF multi-split products, subject to a condition requiring
Fujitsu to test and rate its Airstage products pursuant to the
alternate test procedure provided in this notice. Today's decision
requires that Fujitsu may not make any representations concerning the
energy efficiency of these products unless such product has been tested
in accordance
[[Page 71384]]
with the DOE test procedure, consistent with the provisions and
restrictions in the alternate test procedure set forth in the Decision
and Order below, and such representation fairly discloses the results
of such testing.\1\ (42 U.S.C. 6293(c))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Consistent with the statute, distributors, retailers, and
private labelers are held to the same standard when making
representations regarding the energy efficiency of these products.
(42 U.S.C. 6293(c))
Issued in Washington, DC, on November 4, 2007.
Alexander A. Karsner,
Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
Decision and Order
In the Matter of: Fujitsu General Limited (Fujitsu) (Case No. CAC-
010).
Background
Title III of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) sets
forth a variety of provisions concerning energy efficiency, including
Part B of Title III which establishes the ``Energy Conservation Program
for Consumer Products Other Than Automobiles.'' (42 U.S.C. 6291-6309)
Similar to the program in Part B, Part C of Title III provides for an
energy efficiency program titled, ``Certain Industrial Equipment,''
which includes commercial air conditioning equipment, package boilers,
water heaters, and other types of commercial equipment. (42 U.S.C.
6311-6317)
Today's notice involves residential products under Part B, as well
as commercial equipment under Part C. Under both parts, the statute
specifically includes 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 (the
Secretary) 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))
Relevant to the current Petition for Waiver, the test procedure for
residential central air conditioning and heat pump products is set
forth in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, Appendix M. 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)) Under 42 U.S.C.
6314(a)(4)(B), the statute further directs the Secretary to amend the
test procedure for a covered commercial product if the industry test
procedure is amended, unless the Secretary determines that such a
modified test procedure does not meet the statutory criteria set forth
in 42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2) and (3).
On December 8, 2006, DOE published a final rule adopting test
procedures for commercial package air conditioning and heating
equipment, effective January 8, 2007. 71 FR 71340. The test procedures
in that final rule apply to three-phase equipment. However, there is no
prescribed test procedure for single-phase, small commercial package
air conditioning and heating equipment.
In addition, DOE's regulations contain provisions allowing a person
to seek a waiver from the test procedure requirements for covered
consumer products, when the petitioner's 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). Petitioners must 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).
The Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
(the Assistant Secretary) may grant a waiver subject to conditions,
including adherence to alternate test procedures. 10 CFR 430.27(l). In
general, a waiver terminates on the effective date of a final rule
which prescribes amended test procedures appropriate to the model
series manufactured by the petitioner, thereby eliminating any need for
the continuation of the waiver. 10 CFR 430.27(m).
The waiver process also allows any interested person who has
submitted a Petition for Waiver to file an Application for Interim
Waiver of the applicable test procedure requirements. 10 CFR
430.27(a)(2). The Assistant Secretary will grant an Interim Waiver
request if it is determined that the applicant will experience economic
hardship if the 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 on the Petition for
Waiver. 10 CFR 430.27(g). An Interim Waiver remains in effect for a
period of 180 days or until DOE issues its determination on the
Petition for Waiver, whichever occurs first, and may be extended by DOE
for 180 days, if necessary. 10 CFR 430.27(h).
On June 14, 2004, Fujitsu filed a Petition for Waiver from the test
procedures applicable to its Airstage line of residential and
commercial VRF multi-split air conditioning and heating equipment.\2\
Fujitsu's petition requested a waiver from both the residential and
commercial test procedures. The applicable residential test procedures
are contained in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, Appendix M, and, as
explained above, there is no applicable commercial test procedure for
such products under 10 CFR part 430 or 431. Fujitsu seeks a waiver from
the test procedures for this product class because the design
characteristics of its Airstage VRF multi-split equipment prevent
testing according to the currently prescribed residential test
procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The Fujitsu Airstage VRF multi-split product line at issue
here involves single-phase equipment for both residential and
commercial use. Because there is no DOE test procedure for single-
phase, small commercial package air-conditioning and heating
equipment, no waiver is required for Fujitsu's single-phase
commercial Airstage equipment. Nonetheless, Fujitsu's Airstage VRF
multi-split products are properly classified as ``consumer
products,'' because, to a significant extent, they are for personal
use or consumption by individuals (given their frequent residential
applications). (42 U.S.C. 6291(1)(B)) Thus, the Fujitsu Airstage VRF
multi-split products require a waiver from DOE's test procedure for
residential central air conditioners and heat pumps, under 10 CFR
part 430, subpart B, Appendix M.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On February 4, 2005, DOE published Fujitsu's Petition for Waiver in
the Federal Register. 70 FR 5980. On August 8, 2005, Fujitsu separately
filed an Application for Interim Waiver for the same products for which
it petitioned for a waiver on June 14, 2004. DOE granted the
Application for Interim Waiver on January 5, 2006.
In a similar and relevant case, DOE published a Petition for Waiver
from Mitsubishi Electric and Electronics USA, Inc. (MEUS) for products
of the same type as Fujitsu's Airstage VRF multi-split products. 71 FR
14858 (March 24, 2006). In the March 24, 2006 Federal Register notice,
DOE also published and requested comment on an alternate test procedure
for the MEUS products at issue. DOE stated that if it specified an
alternate test
[[Page 71385]]
procedure for MEUS in the subsequent Decision and Order, DOE would
consider applying the same procedure to similar waivers for residential
and commercial central air conditioners and heat pumps, including such
products for which waivers had previously been granted. Most of the
comments favored DOE's proposed alternate test procedure. Also, there
was general agreement that an alternate test procedure is necessary
while a final test procedure for these types of products is being
developed. The MEUS Decision and Order, including the alternate test
procedure, was published in the Federal Register on April 9, 2007. 72
FR 17528.
DOE received comments on the Fujitsu petition from Carrier
Corporation (Carrier), Trane Division of American Standard Inc.
(Trane), Lennox International Inc. (Lennox), and MEUS. These comments
are discussed in further detail below.
Assertions and Determinations
Fujitsu's Petition for Waiver
On June 14, 2004, Fujitsu submitted a Petition for Waiver from the
test procedures applicable to residential and commercial package air-
conditioning and heating equipment for its Airstage VRF multi-split
products. Fujitsu's petition asserts that the energy use of its
Airstage systems cannot be accurately measured using the current test
procedure for the following reasons:
1. The test procedure provides for testing of a pair of indoor and
outdoor assemblies making up a typical split system, but it provides no
direction about how Airstage units, with more than ten thousand
combinations of indoor units, could be evaluated with just one outdoor
unit test.
2. The test procedure calls for testing ``matched assemblies,'' but
Airstage systems are designed to be used in zoned systems where the
capacity of the indoor units does not match the capacity of the outdoor
unit.
In summary, the bases for Fujitsu's Petition for Waiver involve:
(1) The problem of being physically unable to test most of the complete
systems in a laboratory; (2) the regulatory requirement to test the
highest-sales-volume combination; and (3) the lack of a method for
predicting the performance of untested combinations. These were the
same bases underlying the MEUS waiver discussed above.
Therefore, the Fujitsu petition requested that DOE grant a waiver
from existing test procedures until such time as a representative test
procedure is developed and adopted for this class of products. Fujitsu
did not include an alternate test procedure in its Petition for Waiver.
However, DOE understands that Fujitsu is actively working with ARI to
develop test procedures that accurately reflect the operation and
energy consumption of these particular product designs.
Of the four comments on the Fujitsu Petition for Waiver, only MEUS
supported the petition. Carrier claimed Fujitsu's Airstage VRF systems
could be tested using the calorimeter air enthalpy test method set
forth in ASHRAE Standard 37, ``Methods of Testing for Rating Unitary
Air-Conditioning and Heat Pump Equipment.'' Although DOE believes that
use of this test, as Carrier recommends, is theoretically possible and
would likely provide more accurate results in the cooling mode, it is
not a practical solution because existing calorimeter test rooms are
too small to test Fujitsu's VRF Airstage systems with more than three
or four indoor units. Lennox and Trane asserted that without a testing
and rating requirement, Fujitsu could make energy efficiency claims
without the burden of providing standardized ratings. DOE believes that
its alternate test procedure (discussed below) effectively addresses
these objections.
As previously noted, DOE recently addressed a situation regarding
multi-split products that is relevant to the Fujitsu products at issue
here. Specifically, on March 24, 2006, DOE published in the Federal
Register a Petition for Waiver from MEUS concerning its R410A CITY
MULTI VRFZ products, which are very similar to Fujitsu's VRF Airstage
multi-split products. 71 FR 14858. In that publication, DOE stated:
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).
71 FR 14858, 14861 (March 24, 2006).
Since that time, DOE has developed such an alternate test
procedure. Therefore, to enable Fujitsu to make energy efficiency
representations for its specified Airstage VRF multi-split products,
DOE has decided to require use of the alternate test procedure
described below, as a condition of Fujitsu's waiver. This alternate
test procedure is substantially the same as the one that DOE applied to
the MEUS waiver.
DOE's Alternate Test Procedure
The alternate test procedure has two basic components. First, it
permits Fujitsu to designate a ``tested combination'' for each model of
outdoor unit. The indoor units designated as part of the tested
combination must meet specific requirements. For example, the tested
combination must have from two to five indoor units so that it can be
tested in available test facilities. The tested combination must be
tested according to the applicable DOE test procedure, as modified by
the provisions of the alternate test procedure as set forth below.
Second, having a DOE test procedure that can be applied to its products
allows Fujitsu to represent the energy efficiency of that product,
because any such representation must fairly disclose the results of
such testing. The DOE test procedure, as modified by the alternate test
procedure set forth in this Decision and Order, provides for testing of
a non-tested combination in two ways: (1) At an energy efficiency level
determined under a DOE-approved alternative rating method; or (2) if
the first method is not available, then at the efficiency level of the
tested combination utilizing the same outdoor unit. Until an
alternative rating method is developed, all combinations with a
particular outdoor unit may use the rating of the combination tested
with that outdoor unit.
DOE believes that adopting this alternative test procedure as
described above (thereby allowing Fujitsu to make energy efficiency
representations for non-tested combinations) is reasonable because the
outdoor unit is the principal efficiency driver. The current DOE test
procedure \3\ tends to rate these products conservatively, because they
are tested under conditions where they operate less efficiently than
found in typical use. The multi-zoning feature of these products, which
enables them to cool only those portions of the building that require
cooling, uses less energy than if the unit is operated to cool the
entire home or a comparatively larger area of a commercial building in
response to a single thermostat. Therefore, the alternate test
procedure will provide a conservative basis for assessing the energy
efficiency for such products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, Appendix M.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 71386]]
The alternate test procedure applies to both residential and
commercial multi-split products. However, some provisions are specific
to residential or commercial products. For example, section (A) of the
alternate test procedure has different provisions for residential and
commercial products. In contrast, section (B), which defines the
combinations of indoor and outdoor units to test, and section (C),
which sets forth the requirements for making representations, are the
same for both residential and commercial products.
Section (A) of the alternate test procedure distinguishes between
residential and commercial products for two reasons. First, 10 CFR
430.24, used for residential products, already has requirements for
selecting split-system combinations based on the highest sales volume.
However, part 431 of 10 CFR, which applies to commercial products, has
no comparable requirements. Therefore, section (A) of the alternate
test procedure modifies the existing residential and commercial
requirements so that both residential and commercial products can use
the same definition of a ``tested combination,'' which is set forth in
section (B). Second, section (A) requires several test procedure
revisions to determine the seasonal energy efficiency ratio and heating
seasonal performance factor for the tested combination of residential
products. No test procedure revisions are introduced for commercial
products because EPCA directs DOE to adopt generally accepted industry
test standards (unless amendments to those industry test procedures are
determined by clear and convincing evidence not to meet the
requirements of the statute). (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(4)) The changes for
residential products relate to: (1) The requirement that all indoor
units operate during all tests; (2) the restriction on using only one
indoor test room; (3) the selection of the modulation levels (maximum,
minimum, and a specified intermediate speed) used when testing; and (4)
the algorithm for estimating performance over the intermediate speed
operating range. DOE proposed these changes in its July 20, 2006 notice
of proposed rulemaking. 71 FR 41320.
For today's Decision and Order, the changes made by the final rule
published in the Federal Register on October 22, 2007 (72 FR 59906) to
test procedure sections 2.1, 2.2.3, 2.4.1, 3.2.4 (including Table 6),
3.6.4 (including Table 12), 4.1.4.2, and 4.2.4.2 constitute mandatory
elements of the alternate test procedure. These changes allow indoor
units to cycle off, allow the manufacturer to specify the compressor
speed used during certain tests, and introduce a new algorithm for
estimating power consumption.
With regard to the laboratory testing of both residential and
commercial products, some of the difficulties associated with the
existing test procedure are avoided by the alternate test procedure's
requirements for choosing the indoor units to be used in the
manufacturer-specified tested combination. For example, in addition to
limiting the number of indoor units, another requirement is that all of
the indoor units must be subject to meeting the same minimum external
static pressure. This requirement allows the test lab to manifold the
outlets from each indoor unit into a common plenum that supplies air to
a single airflow measuring apparatus. This requirement eliminates
situations in which some of the indoor units are ducted and some are
non-ducted. Without this requirement, the laboratory must evaluate the
capacity of a subgroup of indoor coils separately, and then sum the
separate capacities to obtain the overall system capacity. This would
require that the test laboratory be equipped with multiple airflow
measuring apparatuses (which is unlikely), or that the test laboratory
connect its one airflow measuring apparatus to one or more common
indoor units until the contribution of each indoor unit has been
measured.
Furthermore, DOE stated in the notice publishing the MEUS Petition
for Waiver that if the Department decides to specify an alternate test
procedure for MEUS, it would consider applying the procedure to waivers
for similar residential and commercial central air conditioners and
heat pumps produced by other manufacturers. 71 FR 14858, 14861 (March
24, 2006). Most of the comments received by DOE in response to the
March 2006 notice favored the proposed alternate test procedure.
Commenters generally agreed that an alternate test procedure is
appropriate for an interim period while a final test procedure for
these products is being developed.
In light of the discussion above, DOE believes that the problems
described above would prevent testing of Fujitsu's Airstage VRF multi-
split products according to the test procedures currently prescribed in
10 CFR part 430, subpart B, Appendix M. After reviewing and considering
all of the comments submitted regarding the proposed alternate test
procedure, DOE has decided to adopt the proposed alternate test
procedure, with the clarifications discussed above. DOE will also
consider applying the same alternate test procedure to waivers for
similar central air conditioners and heat pumps.
Consultations With Other Agencies
DOE consulted with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) concerning
the Fujitsu Petition for Waiver. The FTC did not have any objections to
the issuance of a waiver to Fujitsu.
Conclusion
After careful consideration of all the materials submitted by
Fujitsu, the comments received, and consultation with the FTC, it is
ordered that:
(1) The ``Petition for Waiver'' filed by Fujitsu General Limited
(Fujitsu) (Case No. CAC-010) is hereby granted as set forth in the
paragraphs below.
(2) Fujitsu shall not be required to test or rate its Airstage
variable refrigerant flow multi-split air conditioner and heat pump
models listed below on the basis of the current test procedures
contained in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, Appendix M, but shall be
required to test and rate such products according to the alternate test
procedure as set forth in paragraph (3).
Outdoor unit, Heat pump type: AOU54U****
51.9 kBtu/hr cooling/54.4 kBtu/hr heating, single phase, 208-230Vac,
60Hz.
Outdoor unit, Cooling-only type: AOU54F****
51.9 kBtu/hr cooling, single phase, 208-230Vac, 60Hz.
Indoor units:
AR Series, Compact duct type (ceiling/floor standing), ARU 7/9/12/14/
18/20/22****
AR Series, Duct type, ARU25/30/36/45****
AS Series, Wall mounted type, ASU7/9/12/14/18/24/30****
AU Series, Compact ceiling cassette type, AUU7/9/12/14/18****
AU Series, Ceiling cassette type, AUU20/25/30/36/45/54****
The ``****'' denotes engineering differences in the basic models.
(3) Alternate test procedure.
(A) Fujitsu shall be required to test the products listed in
paragraph (2) above according to the test procedures for central air
conditioners and heat pumps prescribed by DOE at 10 CFR part 430,
except that:
(i) Fujitsu shall not be required to comply with: (1) 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
largest volume of retail sales;'' and (2) the third sentence in 10 CFR
430(m)(2), including the provisions of 10 CFR 430(m)(2)(i) and (ii).
Instead of
[[Page 71387]]
testing the combinations likely to have the highest volume of retail
sales, Fujitsu may test a ``tested combination'' selected in accordance
with the provisions of subparagraph (B) of this paragraph.
Additionally, instead of following the provisions of 10 CFR
430(m)(2)(i) and (ii) for every other system combination using the same
outdoor unit as the tested combination, Fujitsu shall make
representations concerning the Airstage variable refrigerant flow
multi-split products covered in this waiver according to the provisions
of subparagraph (C) below.
(ii) Fujitsu shall be required to comply with 10 CFR part 430,
subpart B, Appendix M as amended by the final rule published in the
Federal Register on October 22, 2007. 72 FR 59906. The test procedure
changes applicable to multi-split products are in sections: 2.1, 2.2.3,
2.4.1, 3.2.4 (including Table 6), 3.6.4 (including Table 12), 4.1.4.2,
and 4.2.4.2.
(B) 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 used as a
tested combination shall consist of an outdoor unit that is matched
with between two and five indoor units.
(ii) The indoor units shall:
(a) Represent the highest sales volume type models;
(b) Together, have a capacity between 95 percent and 105 percent of
the capacity of the outdoor unit;
(c) Not, individually, have a capacity greater than 50 percent 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.
(C) Representations. In making representations about the energy
efficiency of its Airstage variable refrigerant flow multi-split air
conditioner and heat pump products, for compliance, marketing, or other
purposes, Fujitsu must fairly disclose the results of testing under the
DOE test procedure, doing so in a manner consistent with the provisions
outlined below:
(i) For Airstage multi-split combinations tested in accordance with
this alternate test procedure, Fujitsu must disclose these test
results.
(ii) For Airstage multi-split combinations that are not tested,
Fujitsu must make a disclosure based on the testing results for the
tested combination and which are consistent with either of the two
following methods, except that only method (a) may be used, if
available:
(a) Representation of non-tested combinations according to an
alternative rating method approved by DOE; or
(b) Representation of non-tested combinations at the same energy
efficiency level as the tested combination with the same outdoor unit.
(4) This waiver shall remain in effect from the date of issuance of
this Order until April 21, 2008, which is the effective date of a DOE
final rule prescribing an amended test procedure appropriate to the
model series manufactured by Fujitsu listed above. This final rule was
published on October 22, 2007 (72 FR 59906).
(5) This waiver is conditioned upon the presumed validity of
statements, representations, and documentary materials provided by the
petitioner. This waiver may be revoked or modified at any time upon a
determination that the factual basis underlying the Petition for Waiver
is incorrect, or DOE determines that the results from the alternate
test procedure are unrepresentative of the basic models' true energy
consumption characteristics.
Issued in Washington, DC, on November 4, 2007.
Alexander A. Karsner,
Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
[FR Doc. E7-24438 Filed 12-14-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
