Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Decision and Order Granting a Waiver to Daikin U.S. Corporation From the Department of Energy Commercial Package Air Conditioner and Heat Pump Test Procedures and Denying a Waiver From the Residential Central Air Conditioner and Heat Pump Test Procedures, 39680-39684 [E8-15705]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
39680
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 133 / Thursday, July 10, 2008 / Notices
implementation. [Based on requirement
in 41 CFR 105–71.111(d)(1)]
New or amended Federal statutes or
regulations, including appropriations
statutes, resulting in a change in scope,
purpose, budget, or period of
availability of funds requires an
amended State plan.
Example: Congress passes legislation to
amend the Title III requirements of HAVA.
(2) New or revised State law,
organization, or policy affecting HAVA
implementation. [Based on requirement
in 41 CFR 105–71.111(d)(2)]
New or amended State statutes,
organization, or policy resulting in a
change in scope, purpose, budget, or
period of availability of funds requires
an amended State plan.
Example: (1) State legislation is passed that
changes the voting equipment requirements
for the State, thus changing the method of
implementation of Title III Voting Systems
requirements; (2) The responsibility for
implementing the plan was previously with
the State Attorney General and has now
changed to Secretary of State.
(3) A budget change of 10 percent or
more of the HAVA fiscal year’s
cumulative budget across budgeted
programs, activities, functions or
activities. [Based on requirement in 41
CFR 105–71.130(c)(1)(ii)]
A change of more than 10 percent of
the cumulative budget of the fiscal
year’s requirement payment from one
budgeted category to another requires an
amended State plan.
Example: A portion of funds, greater than
10 percent of the requirements payment
received, budgeted for use in developing the
Computerized Statewide Voter Registration
List is determined to no longer be needed for
the budgeted purpose, and the State would
like to use the funds for improvements to the
administration of Federal elections.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
(4) A revision in the scope or
objective of the project. [Based on
requirement in 41 CFR 105–
71.130(d)(1)]
A change in the means by which a
State plans to achieve the HAVA
objectives requires an amended State
plan.
Example: (1) The State decides to purchase
equipment at the State level instead of
subgranting to the counties; (2) The State
changes the development of the
Computerized Statewide Voter Registration
List from a bottom up system to a state
centralized system; (3) The State files a
certification under HAVA Section
251(b)(2)(A), indicating that the State has
implemented the requirements of Title III
and will use the requirements payments to
carry out other activities to improve the
administration of elections for Federal office,
and did not account for post-Title III
compliance activities in the original State
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:58 Jul 09, 2008
Jkt 214001
plan; (4) The State changes the type of voting
system originally planned for use in Title III
compliance; the State decides to use an
optical scan system with ballot marking
devices instead of a direct recording
electronic (DRE) system.
(5) An extension in the period of
availability of HAVA funds. [Based on
requirement in 41 CFR 105–
71.130(d)(2)]
An increase in the amount of funding
authorized under HAVA appropriated to
the State not provided for in the original
State plan or funds remaining in a fiscal
year not covered by the original State
plan requires an amended State plan.
Example: (1) A new requirements payment
is appropriated for a fiscal year not covered
by the State plan; (2) The State has funds
from a previous fiscal year’s requirements
payment remaining in a fiscal year not
provided for under the current State plan.
Dated: July 2, 2008.
Thomas R. Wilkey,
Executive Director, U.S. Election Assistance
Commission.
[FR Doc. E8–15690 Filed 7–9–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820–KF–P
[Case No. CAC–011]
Energy Conservation Program for
Consumer Products: Decision and
Order Granting a Waiver to Daikin U.S.
Corporation From the Department of
Energy Commercial Package Air
Conditioner and Heat Pump Test
Procedures and Denying a Waiver
From the Residential Central Air
Conditioner and Heat Pump Test
Procedures
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–011, which
grants a waiver to Daikin U.S.
Corporation (Daikin) from the existing
Department of Energy (DOE)
commercial package air conditioner and
heat pump test procedures for specified
VRV (commercial) Variable Refrigerant
Volume multi-split heat pumps and heat
recovery systems. As a condition of this
waiver, Daikin must test and rate its
VRV multi-split products according to
the alternate test procedure as set forth
in this notice. DOE is denying as moot
Daikin’s request for a waiver from the
residential central air conditioner and
heat pump test procedures, because
those test procedures, as amended and
Frm 00035
Fmt 4703
This Decision and Order is
effective July 10, 2008, and will remain
in effect until the effective date of a DOE
final rule prescribing amended test
procedures appropriate for the model
series of Daikin VRV multi-split central
air conditioners and heat pumps
covered by this waiver.
DATES:
Dr.
Michael G. Raymond, U.S. Department
of Energy, Building Technologies
Program, Mailstop EE–2J, Forrestal
Building, 1000 Independence Avenue,
SW., Washington, DC 20585–0121.
Telephone: (202) 586–9611. E-mail:
Michael.Raymond@ee.doe.gov.
Ms. Francine Pinto or Mr. Eric Stas,
U.S. Department of Energy, Office of
General Counsel, Mailstop GC–72,
Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585–
0103. Telephone: (202) 586–9507. Email: 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), DOE gives notice
of the issuance of its Decision and Order
as set forth below. In the Decision and
Order, DOE grants Daikin a waiver from
the existing DOE commercial package
air conditioner and heat pump test
procedures 1 for its VRV multi-split
products, subject to a condition
requiring Daikin to test and rate its VRV
multi-split products pursuant to the
alternate test procedure provided in this
notice. Further, today’s Decision and
Order requires that Daikin 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 of the
alternate test procedure set forth in the
Decision and Order below, and such
representations fairly disclose the
results of such testing.2 (42 U.S.C.
6293(c); 42 U.S.C. 6314(d))
DOE is denying as moot Daikin’s
request for a waiver from the DOE
residential central air conditioner and
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
PO 00000
currently effective, can be used to test
Daikin’s VRV–S (residential) products.
Sfmt 4703
1 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); 42 U.S.C. 6314(d)).
E:\FR\FM\10JYN1.SGM
10JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 133 / Thursday, July 10, 2008 / Notices
heat pump test procedures 3 for its
VRV–S multi-split products. As
amended, the applicable DOE test
procedure for these residential products
will allow Daikin to test and rate its
residential VRV–S multi-split products.
Issued in Washington, DC, on June 23,
2008.
Alexander A. Karsner,
Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy.
Decision and Order
In the Matter of: Daikin U.S.
Corporation (Daikin) (Case No. CAC–
011).
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Background
Title III of the Energy Policy and
Conservation Act (EPCA) sets forth a
variety of provisions concerning energy
efficiency, including Part A of Title III
which establishes the ‘‘Energy
Conservation Program for Consumer
Products Other Than Automobiles.’’ 4
(42 U.S.C. 6291–6309) Similar to the
Program in Part A, Part A–1 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.5 (42
U.S.C. 6311–6317)
Today’s notice involves residential
products under Part A, as well as
commercial equipment under Part A–1.
Both parts specifically provide for
definitions, test procedures, labeling
provisions, energy conservation
standards, and the authority to require
information and reports from
manufacturers. Further, both parts
generally authorize the Secretary of
Energy (the Secretary) to prescribe test
procedures that are reasonably designed
to produce results which measure
energy efficiency, energy use, or
estimated annual operating costs, and
that are not unduly burdensome to
conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3); 42 U.S.C.
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.
On October 22, 2007, DOE amended the
test procedures for residential central air
3 For residential products, the applicable test
procedure is set forth in 10 CFR part 430, subpart
B, Appendix M.
4 This part was originally titled Part B; however,
it was redesignated Part A, after Part B of Title III
was repealed by Pub. L. 109–58.
5 This part was originally titled Part C; however,
it was redesignated Part A–1, after Part C of Title
III was repealed by Pub. L. 109–58.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:58 Jul 09, 2008
Jkt 214001
conditioners and central air
conditioning heat pumps to implement
test procedure changes for small-duct,
high-velocity systems, two-capacity
units, and to update references to the
current American Society of Heating,
Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning
Engineers (ASHRAE) standards. 72 FR
59906. The October 22, 2007, final rule
became effective on April 21, 2008.
These amendments to the DOE test
procedures set forth in 10 CFR part 430,
subpart B, Appendix M now allow
Daikin to test its VRV–S residential
multi-split air conditioners and heat
pumps. Therefore, a waiver is no longer
necessary for Daikin’s VRV–S
residential multi-split air conditioners
and heat pumps. Accordingly, the
following discussion will focus only on
Daikin’s commercial VRV products, for
which its waiver request remains
pertinent.
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), this section also 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. DOE
adopted ARI Standard 210/240–2003 for
commercial package air conditioning
and heating equipment with capacities
<65,000 British thermal units per hour
(Btu/h) and ARI Standard 340/360–2004
for commercial package air conditioning
and heating equipment with capacities
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h. Id.
at 71371. Pursuant to this rulemaking,
DOE’s regulations at 10 CFR
431.95(b)(2) incorporate by reference the
relevant ARI standards, and 10 CFR
431.96 directs manufacturers of
commercial package air conditioning
and heating equipment to use the
appropriate procedure when measuring
energy efficiency of those products.
(The capacities of Daikin’s commercial
VRV multi-split products fall in the
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
39681
ranges covered by ARI Standard 340/
360–2004.)
DOE’s regulations for covered
products contain provisions allowing a
person to seek a waiver from the test
procedure requirements for covered
consumer products, for which 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).
The waiver provisions for commercial
equipment are substantively identical to
those for covered consumer products
and are found at 10 CFR 431.401.
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);
10 CFR 431.401(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); 10 CFR 431.401(f)(4).
Waivers generally terminate 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); 10 CFR 430.401(g).
The waiver process contained in
DOE’s regulations 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); 10 CFR
431.401(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 of the Petition for Waiver.
10 CFR 430.27(g); 10 CFR 431.401(e)(3).
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); 10 CFR
431.401(e)(4).
On May 12, 2005, Daikin filed a
Petition for Waiver and an Application
for Interim Waiver from the test
E:\FR\FM\10JYN1.SGM
10JYN1
39682
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 133 / Thursday, July 10, 2008 / Notices
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
procedures applicable to its VRV–S and
VRV lines of residential and commercial
multi-split air conditioning and heating
equipment. Daikin’s petition requested a
waiver from both the residential and
commercial test procedures. As stated
above, the applicable residential test
procedures are contained in 10 CFR part
430, subpart B, Appendix M, and the
applicable commercial test procedures
are contained in ARI Standard 340/360–
2004 6 (incorporated by reference at 10
CFR 431.95(b)(2)). Daikin requested a
waiver from the applicable test
procedures because it argued that the
design characteristics of its VRV–S and
VRV systems prevent testing according
to the currently prescribed test
procedures.
On July 2, 2007, DOE published in the
Federal Register Daikin’s Petition for
Waiver and published notice of the
granting of the Application for Interim
Waiver which had been granted on
August 14, 2006. 72 FR 35986. In a
similar and relevant case, DOE
published a Petition for Waiver from
Mitsubishi Electric and Electronics
USA, Inc. (MEUS) for products very
similar to Daikin’s VRV–S and VRV
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 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 responded favorably to 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 no comments on the
Daikin Petition.
6 In its petition, Daikin also requested a waiver
from ARI Standard 210/240–2003 (incorporated by
reference at 10 CFR 431.95(b)(1)). However, based
on a review of the products listed by Daikin in its
petition, DOE has determined that none of these
products has the combined features (i.e., threephase power and rated capacity less than 65,000
Btu/h) as would necessitate a waiver from ARI
Standard 210/240–2003.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:58 Jul 09, 2008
Jkt 214001
Assertions and Determinations
Daikin’s Petition for Waiver
On May 12, 2005, Daikin submitted a
Petition for Waiver and an Application
for Interim Waiver from the test
procedures applicable to residential and
commercial package air conditioning
and heating equipment for its new
VRV–S and VRV multi-split products.
Daikin’s petition presented several
arguments in support of its claim that
the design characteristics of its VRV–S
and VRV multi-split systems prevent
testing according to the currently
prescribed test procedures. Daikin
claimed that there are the following
difficulties with applying the test
procedures: (1) There is no provision to
accommodate having indoor units
operating at several different static
pressure ratings during a single test; (2)
The precise number of part-load tests
required for fully or infinitely variable
speed products are not identified; (3)
There is no direction about how to test
systems that have millions of
combinations of indoor units
configurable to a single outdoor unit; (4)
There is no test method to measure partload performance of a system
performing both heating and cooling
functions at the same time.
Therefore, the Daikin 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. Daikin did not include an
alternate test procedure in its Petition
for Waiver. (However, DOE understands
that Daikin is actively working with ARI
to develop test procedures that
accurately reflect the operation and
energy consumption of these particular
product designs.7)
Regardless of their accuracy, DOE
believes that these assertions are
inapposite to the present case for the
following reasons. First, for commercial
systems, EPCA mandates use of the fullload energy efficiency ratio (EER)
descriptor, and the relevant energy
performance is the peak-load efficiency,
not the seasonal energy savings. (42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(1)(C)) A waiver can only
be granted if a test procedure does not
fairly represent the peak-load energy
consumption characteristics, which EER
measures. Nevertheless, there are
deficiencies in the current DOE test
methods and calculation algorithms
when applied to multi-split systems.
7 DOE understands that ARI is seeking to address
this issue through promulgation of ARI Standard
1230. Once this standard has been formally adopted
by ARI, it will then be ready for presentation to
ASHRAE to be considered for incorporation into
ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1.
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
DOE has previously acknowledged these
limitations in its current test procedure,
and accordingly, MEUS was granted a
waiver on the following grounds:
1. No existing test procedure provides
a method for testing and rating a system
that utilizes one outdoor unit and
sixteen indoor units.
2. No existing test procedure can
provide a method for rating systems
where the type and capacity of the
indoor unit can be mixed in the same
system. The multi-split system can mix
together six different indoor models
with seven different capacities, resulting
in over 1,000 combinations.
Given the present situation, Daikin
can make the same claims regarding its
VRV multi-split products. Therefore, the
bases for Daikin’s Petition for Waiver
involve: (1) The problem of being
physically unable to test most of the
complete systems in a laboratory; (2)
difficulties associated with the
regulatory requirement to test the
highest-sales-volume combination; and
(3) the lack of a method for predicting
the performance of untested
combinations.
As mentioned above, DOE recently
addressed a situation regarding multisplit products that is relevant to the
Daikin products at issue here.
specifically, on March 24, 2006, DOE
published in the Federal Register a
Petition for Waiver from MEUS relating
to its R410A CITY MULTI VRFZ
products, which are very similar to
Daikin’s VRV 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. That
alternate test procedure served as the
basis for the October 22, 2007 final
rule’s relevant amendments to the test
procedures for residential central air
conditioners and central air
conditioning heat pumps found at 10
CFR part 430, subpart B, Appendix M,
E:\FR\FM\10JYN1.SGM
10JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 133 / Thursday, July 10, 2008 / Notices
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
which became effective April 21, 2008.
Since the residential test procedure is
now in place for central air conditioners
and central air conditioning heat
pumps, this enables Daikin to make
energy efficiency representations for its
specified VRV–S residential multi-split
products. Accordingly, a waiver for
Daikin’s residential units is no longer
necessary. However, the same problem
described above still applies to Daikin’s
commercial products. Therefore, DOE is
issuing today’s Decision and Order
granting Daikin a test procedure waiver
for its commercial VRV multi-split heat
pumps and heat recovery systems, but is
requiring the use of the alternate test
procedure described below as a
condition of Daikin’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
Daikin 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. Second, provision of a DOE
test procedure that can be applied to
Daikin’s product allows it 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
provided 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, if method (1) is not
available, then (2) 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 allowing Daikin to
make energy efficiency representations
for non-tested combinations by adopting
this alternate test procedure for its
commercial products as described above
is reasonable because the outdoor unit
is the principal efficiency driver. The
current test procedures for commercial
products tend to rate these products
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:58 Jul 09, 2008
Jkt 214001
conservatively. This is because the
multi-zoning feature of these products,
which enables them to cool only those
portions of the building that require
cooling, would be expected to use 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. This
feature would not be captured by the
test procedure, which requires full-load
testing. Under full load, the entire
building would require cooling.
Additionally, the current test procedure
for commercial equipment requires fullload testing, which disadvantages these
products because they are optimized for
best efficiency when operating with less
than full loads. In fact, these products
normally operate at part-load
conditions. Therefore, the alternate test
procedure will provide a conservative
basis for assessing the energy efficiency
for such commercial products.
For today’s Decision and Order, the
changes made by the final rule
published in the Federal Register on
October 22, 2007 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 that apply
to residential central air conditioners
and heat pumps constitute mandatory
elements of the alternate test procedure
for the commercial products covered
under this waiver. 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 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 meet 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 must be
equipped with multiple airflow
measuring apparatuses (which is
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
39683
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 DOE 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. The comments
generally agreed that an alternate test
procedure is appropriate for an interim
period while a final test procedure for
these products is being developed. Such
action has been completed for
residential central air conditioners and
heat pumps.
Based on the discussion above, DOE
believes that the testing problems
described above would prevent testing
of Daikin’s VRV basic models according
to the test procedures currently
prescribed in ARI Standard 340/360–
2004. After careful consideration, DOE
has decided to adopt the alternate test
procedure for Daikin’s commercial
products, with the clarifications
discussed above.
Consultations With Other Agencies
DOE consulted with Federal Trade
Commission (FTC) staff concerning the
Daikin Petition for Waiver. The FTC
staff did not have any objections to the
issuance of a waiver to Daikin.
Conclusion
After careful consideration of all the
material that was submitted by Daikin
and consultation with the FTC staff, it
is ordered that:
(1) The ‘‘Petition for Waiver’’
submitted by Daikin U.S. Corporation
(Daikin) (Case No. CAC–011) is hereby
granted as set forth in the paragraphs
below.
(2) Daikin shall not be required to test
or rate its commercial Variable
Refrigerant Volume (VRV) products
listed below on the basis of the
currently applicable test procedures
(contained in ARI Standard 340/360–
2004 (incorporated by reference in 10
CFR 431.95(b)(2))), but shall be required
to test and rate such products according
to the alternate test procedure as set
forth in paragraph (3).
Outdoor units:
1. RXYQ Series Heat Pumps with
nominal capacities of 72 and 96 kBtu/
E:\FR\FM\10JYN1.SGM
10JYN1
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
39684
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 133 / Thursday, July 10, 2008 / Notices
h, when combined with two or more of
the below listed indoor units.
2. REYQ Series Heat Recovery units
with nominal capacities of 72 and 96
kBtu/h, when combined with two or
more of the below listed indoor units.
Indoor units:
1. FXAQ Series wall mounted indoor
units with nominally rated capacities of
7, 9, 12, 18, and 24 kBtu/h.
2. FXLQ Series floor mounted indoor
units with nominally rated capacities of
12, 18, and 24 kBtu/h.
3. FXNQ Series concealed floor
mounted indoor units with nominally
rated capacities of 12, 18, and 24 kBtu/
h.
4. FXDQ Series low static ducted
indoor units with nominally rated
capacities of 7, 9, 12, 18, and 24 kBtu/
h.
5. FXSQ Series medium static ducted
indoor units with nominally rated
capacities of 7, 9, 12, 24, 30, 36, and 48
kBtu/h.
6. FXMQ Series high static ducted
indoor units with nominally rated
capacities of 30, 36, and 48 kBtu/h.
7. FXZQ Series recessed cassette
indoor units with nominally rated
capacities of 7, 9, 12, 18, and 24 kBtu/
h.
8. FXFQ Series recessed cassette
indoor units with nominally rated
capacities of 12, 18, 24, 30, and 36 kBtu/
h.
9. FXHQ Series ceiling suspended
indoor units with nominally rated
capacities of 12, 24, and 36 kBtu/h.
(3) Alternate test procedure.
(A) Daikin shall be required to test the
products listed in paragraph (2) above
according to those test procedures for
central air conditioners and heat pumps
prescribed by DOE at 10 CFR part 431,
except that for those commercial
products covered by 10 CFR part 431,
Daikin shall test a ‘‘tested combination’’
selected in accordance with the
provisions of subparagraph (B) of this
paragraph. For every other system
combination using the same outdoor
unit as the tested combination, Daikin
shall make representations concerning
the VRV multi-split products covered in
this waiver according to the provisions
of subparagraph (C) below.
(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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:58 Jul 09, 2008
Jkt 214001
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 VRV multi-split
products, for compliance, marketing, or
other purposes, Daikin 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 VRV combinations tested in
accordance with this alternate test
procedure, Daikin must disclose these
test results.
(ii) For VRV combinations that are not
tested, Daikin 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 (ARM)
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
Decision and Order until the effective
date of a DOE final rule prescribing
amended test procedures appropriate to
the above model series manufactured by
Daikin.
(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.
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Issued in Washington, DC, on June 23, 2008.
Alexander A. Karsner,
Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy.
[FR Doc. E8–15705 Filed 7–9–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Case No. RF–008]
Energy Conservation Program for
Consumer Products: Publication of the
Petition for Waiver of Whirlpool
Corporation From the Department of
Energy Residential Refrigerator and
Refrigerator-Freezer Test Procedures
Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Notice of Petition for Waiver
and request for public comments.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This notice announces receipt
of and publishes Whirlpool
Corporation’s (Whirlpool’s) Petition for
Waiver (hereafter, ‘‘Petition’’) from parts
of the Department of Energy (DOE) test
procedure for determining the energy
consumption of electric refrigerators
and refrigerator-freezers. The waiver
request pertains to Whirlpool’s specified
French door bottom-mounted
residential refrigerators and refrigeratorfreezers, a product line that utilizes a
control logic that changes the wattage of
the anti-sweat heaters based upon the
ambient relative humidity conditions in
order to prevent condensation. The
existing test procedure does not take
humidity or adaptive control technology
into account. Therefore, Whirlpool has
suggested an alternate test procedure
that takes adaptive control technology
into account when measuring energy
consumption. DOE is soliciting
comments, data, and information
concerning Whirlpool’s Petition and the
suggested alternate test procedure.
DATES: DOE will accept comments, data,
and information with respect to
Whirlpool’s Petition until, but no later
than August 11, 2008.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by case number [RF–008], by
any of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• E-mail:
Michael.Raymond@ee.doe.gov. Include
either the case number [RF–008] and/or
‘‘Whirlpool Petition’’ in the subject line
of the message.
• Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S.
Department of Energy, Building
Technologies Program, Mailstop EE–2J,
E:\FR\FM\10JYN1.SGM
10JYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 133 (Thursday, July 10, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39680-39684]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-15705]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Case No. CAC-011]
Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Decision and
Order Granting a Waiver to Daikin U.S. Corporation From the Department
of Energy Commercial Package Air Conditioner and Heat Pump Test
Procedures and Denying a Waiver From the Residential Central Air
Conditioner and Heat Pump Test Procedures
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-011, which grants a waiver to Daikin U.S.
Corporation (Daikin) from the existing Department of Energy (DOE)
commercial package air conditioner and heat pump test procedures for
specified VRV (commercial) Variable Refrigerant Volume multi-split heat
pumps and heat recovery systems. As a condition of this waiver, Daikin
must test and rate its VRV multi-split products according to the
alternate test procedure as set forth in this notice. DOE is denying as
moot Daikin's request for a waiver from the residential central air
conditioner and heat pump test procedures, because those test
procedures, as amended and currently effective, can be used to test
Daikin's VRV-S (residential) products.
DATES: This Decision and Order is effective July 10, 2008, and will
remain in effect until the effective date of a DOE final rule
prescribing amended test procedures appropriate for the model series of
Daikin VRV multi-split central air conditioners and heat pumps covered
by this waiver.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Michael G. Raymond, U.S.
Department of Energy, Building Technologies Program, Mailstop EE-2J,
Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC
20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-9611. E-mail:
Michael.Raymond@ee.doe.gov.
Ms. Francine Pinto or Mr. Eric Stas, U.S. Department of Energy,
Office of General Counsel, Mailstop GC-72, Forrestal Building, 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) and 10
CFR 431.401(f)(4), DOE gives notice of the issuance of its Decision and
Order as set forth below. In the Decision and Order, DOE grants Daikin
a waiver from the existing DOE commercial package air conditioner and
heat pump test procedures \1\ for its VRV multi-split products, subject
to a condition requiring Daikin to test and rate its VRV multi-split
products pursuant to the alternate test procedure provided in this
notice. Further, today's Decision and Order requires that Daikin 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 of the
alternate test procedure set forth in the Decision and Order below, and
such representations fairly disclose the results of such testing.\2\
(42 U.S.C. 6293(c); 42 U.S.C. 6314(d))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 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); 42 U.S.C. 6314(d)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE is denying as moot Daikin's request for a waiver from the DOE
residential central air conditioner and
[[Page 39681]]
heat pump test procedures \3\ for its VRV-S multi-split products. As
amended, the applicable DOE test procedure for these residential
products will allow Daikin to test and rate its residential VRV-S
multi-split products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ For residential products, the applicable test procedure is
set forth in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, Appendix M.
Issued in Washington, DC, on June 23, 2008.
Alexander A. Karsner,
Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
Decision and Order
In the Matter of: Daikin U.S. Corporation (Daikin) (Case No. CAC-
011).
Background
Title III of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) sets
forth a variety of provisions concerning energy efficiency, including
Part A of Title III which establishes the ``Energy Conservation Program
for Consumer Products Other Than Automobiles.'' \4\ (42 U.S.C. 6291-
6309) Similar to the Program in Part A, Part A-1 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.\5\ (42 U.S.C. 6311-6317)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ This part was originally titled Part B; however, it was
redesignated Part A, after Part B of Title III was repealed by Pub.
L. 109-58.
\5\ This part was originally titled Part C; however, it was
redesignated Part A-1, after Part C of Title III was repealed by
Pub. L. 109-58.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Today's notice involves residential products under Part A, as well
as commercial equipment under Part A-1. Both parts specifically provide
for definitions, test procedures, labeling provisions, energy
conservation standards, and the authority to require information and
reports from manufacturers. Further, both parts generally authorize the
Secretary of Energy (the Secretary) to prescribe test procedures that
are reasonably designed to produce results which measure energy
efficiency, energy use, or estimated annual operating costs, and that
are not unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3); 42 U.S.C.
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. On October 22, 2007,
DOE amended the test procedures for residential central air
conditioners and central air conditioning heat pumps to implement test
procedure changes for small-duct, high-velocity systems, two-capacity
units, and to update references to the current American Society of
Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE)
standards. 72 FR 59906. The October 22, 2007, final rule became
effective on April 21, 2008. These amendments to the DOE test
procedures set forth in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, Appendix M now
allow Daikin to test its VRV-S residential multi-split air conditioners
and heat pumps. Therefore, a waiver is no longer necessary for Daikin's
VRV-S residential multi-split air conditioners and heat pumps.
Accordingly, the following discussion will focus only on Daikin's
commercial VRV products, for which its waiver request remains
pertinent.
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), this section also 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. DOE adopted ARI
Standard 210/240-2003 for commercial package air conditioning and
heating equipment with capacities <65,000 British thermal units per
hour (Btu/h) and ARI Standard 340/360-2004 for commercial package air
conditioning and heating equipment with capacities >=65,000 Btu/h and
<240,000 Btu/h. Id. at 71371. Pursuant to this rulemaking, DOE's
regulations at 10 CFR 431.95(b)(2) incorporate by reference the
relevant ARI standards, and 10 CFR 431.96 directs manufacturers of
commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment to use the
appropriate procedure when measuring energy efficiency of those
products. (The capacities of Daikin's commercial VRV multi-split
products fall in the ranges covered by ARI Standard 340/360-2004.)
DOE's regulations for covered products contain provisions allowing
a person to seek a waiver from the test procedure requirements for
covered consumer products, for which 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). The waiver
provisions for commercial equipment are substantively identical to
those for covered consumer products and are found at 10 CFR 431.401.
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); 10 CFR
431.401(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); 10
CFR 431.401(f)(4). Waivers generally terminate 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); 10 CFR
430.401(g).
The waiver process contained in DOE's regulations 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); 10 CFR 431.401(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 of the Petition for Waiver. 10 CFR 430.27(g); 10 CFR
431.401(e)(3). 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); 10 CFR 431.401(e)(4).
On May 12, 2005, Daikin filed a Petition for Waiver and an
Application for Interim Waiver from the test
[[Page 39682]]
procedures applicable to its VRV-S and VRV lines of residential and
commercial multi-split air conditioning and heating equipment. Daikin's
petition requested a waiver from both the residential and commercial
test procedures. As stated above, the applicable residential test
procedures are contained in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, Appendix M, and
the applicable commercial test procedures are contained in ARI Standard
340/360-2004 \6\ (incorporated by reference at 10 CFR 431.95(b)(2)).
Daikin requested a waiver from the applicable test procedures because
it argued that the design characteristics of its VRV-S and VRV systems
prevent testing according to the currently prescribed test procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ In its petition, Daikin also requested a waiver from ARI
Standard 210/240-2003 (incorporated by reference at 10 CFR
431.95(b)(1)). However, based on a review of the products listed by
Daikin in its petition, DOE has determined that none of these
products has the combined features (i.e., three-phase power and
rated capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h) as would necessitate a waiver
from ARI Standard 210/240-2003.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On July 2, 2007, DOE published in the Federal Register Daikin's
Petition for Waiver and published notice of the granting of the
Application for Interim Waiver which had been granted on August 14,
2006. 72 FR 35986. In a similar and relevant case, DOE published a
Petition for Waiver from Mitsubishi Electric and Electronics USA, Inc.
(MEUS) for products very similar to Daikin's VRV-S and VRV 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 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 responded favorably to
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 no comments on the Daikin Petition.
Assertions and Determinations
Daikin's Petition for Waiver
On May 12, 2005, Daikin submitted a Petition for Waiver and an
Application for Interim Waiver from the test procedures applicable to
residential and commercial package air conditioning and heating
equipment for its new VRV-S and VRV multi-split products. Daikin's
petition presented several arguments in support of its claim that the
design characteristics of its VRV-S and VRV multi-split systems prevent
testing according to the currently prescribed test procedures. Daikin
claimed that there are the following difficulties with applying the
test procedures: (1) There is no provision to accommodate having indoor
units operating at several different static pressure ratings during a
single test; (2) The precise number of part-load tests required for
fully or infinitely variable speed products are not identified; (3)
There is no direction about how to test systems that have millions of
combinations of indoor units configurable to a single outdoor unit; (4)
There is no test method to measure part-load performance of a system
performing both heating and cooling functions at the same time.
Therefore, the Daikin 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. Daikin
did not include an alternate test procedure in its Petition for Waiver.
(However, DOE understands that Daikin is actively working with ARI to
develop test procedures that accurately reflect the operation and
energy consumption of these particular product designs.\7\)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ DOE understands that ARI is seeking to address this issue
through promulgation of ARI Standard 1230. Once this standard has
been formally adopted by ARI, it will then be ready for presentation
to ASHRAE to be considered for incorporation into ASHRAE/IES
Standard 90.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regardless of their accuracy, DOE believes that these assertions
are inapposite to the present case for the following reasons. First,
for commercial systems, EPCA mandates use of the full-load energy
efficiency ratio (EER) descriptor, and the relevant energy performance
is the peak-load efficiency, not the seasonal energy savings. (42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(1)(C)) A waiver can only be granted if a test procedure
does not fairly represent the peak-load energy consumption
characteristics, which EER measures. Nevertheless, there are
deficiencies in the current DOE test methods and calculation algorithms
when applied to multi-split systems. DOE has previously acknowledged
these limitations in its current test procedure, and accordingly, MEUS
was granted a waiver on the following grounds:
1. No existing test procedure provides a method for testing and
rating a system that utilizes one outdoor unit and sixteen indoor
units.
2. No existing test procedure can provide a method for rating
systems where the type and capacity of the indoor unit can be mixed in
the same system. The multi-split system can mix together six different
indoor models with seven different capacities, resulting in over 1,000
combinations.
Given the present situation, Daikin can make the same claims
regarding its VRV multi-split products. Therefore, the bases for
Daikin's Petition for Waiver involve: (1) The problem of being
physically unable to test most of the complete systems in a laboratory;
(2) difficulties associated with the regulatory requirement to test the
highest-sales-volume combination; and (3) the lack of a method for
predicting the performance of untested combinations.
As mentioned above, DOE recently addressed a situation regarding
multi-split products that is relevant to the Daikin products at issue
here. specifically, on March 24, 2006, DOE published in the Federal
Register a Petition for Waiver from MEUS relating to its R410A CITY
MULTI VRFZ products, which are very similar to Daikin's VRV 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. That alternate test procedure served as the basis for the
October 22, 2007 final rule's relevant amendments to the test
procedures for residential central air conditioners and central air
conditioning heat pumps found at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, Appendix
M,
[[Page 39683]]
which became effective April 21, 2008. Since the residential test
procedure is now in place for central air conditioners and central air
conditioning heat pumps, this enables Daikin to make energy efficiency
representations for its specified VRV-S residential multi-split
products. Accordingly, a waiver for Daikin's residential units is no
longer necessary. However, the same problem described above still
applies to Daikin's commercial products. Therefore, DOE is issuing
today's Decision and Order granting Daikin a test procedure waiver for
its commercial VRV multi-split heat pumps and heat recovery systems,
but is requiring the use of the alternate test procedure described
below as a condition of Daikin'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 Daikin 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. Second, provision of a
DOE test procedure that can be applied to Daikin's product allows it 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
provided 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, if
method (1) is not available, then (2) 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 allowing Daikin to make energy efficiency
representations for non-tested combinations by adopting this alternate
test procedure for its commercial products as described above is
reasonable because the outdoor unit is the principal efficiency driver.
The current test procedures for commercial products tend to rate these
products conservatively. This is because the multi-zoning feature of
these products, which enables them to cool only those portions of the
building that require cooling, would be expected to use 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. This feature would not be captured by the test procedure,
which requires full-load testing. Under full load, the entire building
would require cooling. Additionally, the current test procedure for
commercial equipment requires full-load testing, which disadvantages
these products because they are optimized for best efficiency when
operating with less than full loads. In fact, these products normally
operate at part-load conditions. Therefore, the alternate test
procedure will provide a conservative basis for assessing the energy
efficiency for such commercial products.
For today's Decision and Order, the changes made by the final rule
published in the Federal Register on October 22, 2007 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 that apply to residential central air
conditioners and heat pumps constitute mandatory elements of the
alternate test procedure for the commercial products covered under this
waiver. 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 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 meet
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 must 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 DOE 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. The comments
generally agreed that an alternate test procedure is appropriate for an
interim period while a final test procedure for these products is being
developed. Such action has been completed for residential central air
conditioners and heat pumps.
Based on the discussion above, DOE believes that the testing
problems described above would prevent testing of Daikin's VRV basic
models according to the test procedures currently prescribed in ARI
Standard 340/360-2004. After careful consideration, DOE has decided to
adopt the alternate test procedure for Daikin's commercial products,
with the clarifications discussed above.
Consultations With Other Agencies
DOE consulted with Federal Trade Commission (FTC) staff concerning
the Daikin Petition for Waiver. The FTC staff did not have any
objections to the issuance of a waiver to Daikin.
Conclusion
After careful consideration of all the material that was submitted
by Daikin and consultation with the FTC staff, it is ordered that:
(1) The ``Petition for Waiver'' submitted by Daikin U.S.
Corporation (Daikin) (Case No. CAC-011) is hereby granted as set forth
in the paragraphs below.
(2) Daikin shall not be required to test or rate its commercial
Variable Refrigerant Volume (VRV) products listed below on the basis of
the currently applicable test procedures (contained in ARI Standard
340/360-2004 (incorporated by reference in 10 CFR 431.95(b)(2))), but
shall be required to test and rate such products according to the
alternate test procedure as set forth in paragraph (3).
Outdoor units:
1. RXYQ Series Heat Pumps with nominal capacities of 72 and 96
kBtu/
[[Page 39684]]
h, when combined with two or more of the below listed indoor units.
2. REYQ Series Heat Recovery units with nominal capacities of 72
and 96 kBtu/h, when combined with two or more of the below listed
indoor units.
Indoor units:
1. FXAQ Series wall mounted indoor units with nominally rated
capacities of 7, 9, 12, 18, and 24 kBtu/h.
2. FXLQ Series floor mounted indoor units with nominally rated
capacities of 12, 18, and 24 kBtu/h.
3. FXNQ Series concealed floor mounted indoor units with nominally
rated capacities of 12, 18, and 24 kBtu/h.
4. FXDQ Series low static ducted indoor units with nominally rated
capacities of 7, 9, 12, 18, and 24 kBtu/h.
5. FXSQ Series medium static ducted indoor units with nominally
rated capacities of 7, 9, 12, 24, 30, 36, and 48 kBtu/h.
6. FXMQ Series high static ducted indoor units with nominally rated
capacities of 30, 36, and 48 kBtu/h.
7. FXZQ Series recessed cassette indoor units with nominally rated
capacities of 7, 9, 12, 18, and 24 kBtu/h.
8. FXFQ Series recessed cassette indoor units with nominally rated
capacities of 12, 18, 24, 30, and 36 kBtu/h.
9. FXHQ Series ceiling suspended indoor units with nominally rated
capacities of 12, 24, and 36 kBtu/h.
(3) Alternate test procedure.
(A) Daikin shall be required to test the products listed in
paragraph (2) above according to those test procedures for central air
conditioners and heat pumps prescribed by DOE at 10 CFR part 431,
except that for those commercial products covered by 10 CFR part 431,
Daikin shall test a ``tested combination'' selected in accordance with
the provisions of subparagraph (B) of this paragraph. For every other
system combination using the same outdoor unit as the tested
combination, Daikin shall make representations concerning the VRV
multi-split products covered in this waiver according to the provisions
of subparagraph (C) below.
(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 VRV multi-split products, for compliance, marketing,
or other purposes, Daikin 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 VRV combinations tested in accordance with this alternate
test procedure, Daikin must disclose these test results.
(ii) For VRV combinations that are not tested, Daikin 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 (ARM) 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 Decision and Order until the effective date of a DOE final rule
prescribing amended test procedures appropriate to the above model
series manufactured by Daikin.
(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 June 23, 2008.
Alexander A. Karsner,
Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
[FR Doc. E8-15705 Filed 7-9-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
