Energy Efficiency Program for Certain Commercial and Industrial Equipment: Test Procedures for Commercial Refrigeration Equipment, 71596-71613 [2010-29210]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 226 (Wednesday, November 24, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 71596-71613]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-29210]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

10 CFR Part 431

[Docket No. EERE-2010-BT-TP-0034]
RIN 1904-AC40


Energy Efficiency Program for Certain Commercial and Industrial 
Equipment: Test Procedures for Commercial Refrigeration Equipment

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking and public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) proposes amendments to its 
test procedure for commercial refrigeration equipment (CRE). The 
amendments would update the referenced industry test procedures to the 
most current version, incorporate methods to evaluate the energy 
impacts resulting from the use of night curtains and lighting occupancy 
sensors, and allow testing of certain commercial refrigerators at their 
lowest application product temperature. These test procedures will 
apply to commercial refrigerators, freezers, and refrigerator-freezers, 
as defined in the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA), as 
amended. Use of any amended test procedures will be required on the 
compliance date of any standards developed in the associated energy 
conservation standard rulemaking. DOE will hold a public meeting to 
receive and discuss comments on the proposal.

DATES: DOE will hold a public meeting in Washington, DC on Thursday, 
January 6, 2011, from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. Additionally, DOE plans to 
conduct the public meeting via webinar. DOE will accept comments, data, 
and other information regarding this notice of proposed rulemaking 
(NOPR) before or after the public meeting, but no later than January 
24, 2011. See section V, ``Public Participation,'' of this NOPR for 
details.
    You can attend the public meeting via webinar, and registration 
information, participant instructions, and information about the 
capabilities available to webinar participants will be published on the 
following Web site: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/638471849. 
Participants are responsible for ensuring their systems are compatible 
with the webinar software.
    The purpose of the meeting is to receive comments and to help DOE 
understand potential issues associated with this proposed rulemaking. 
DOE must receive requests to speak at the meeting before 4 p.m., 
Thursday, December 22, 2010. DOE must receive a signed original and an 
electronic copy of statements to be given at the public meeting before 
4 p.m., Thursday, December 29, 2010.

ADDRESSES: The public meeting will be held at the U.S. Department of 
Energy, Forrestal Building, Room 1E-245, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., 
Washington, DC 20585-0121. Please note that foreign nationals planning 
to participate in the public meeting are subject to advance security 
screening procedures which require advance notice of 30 days prior to 
attendance of the public meeting. If a foreign national wishes to 
participate in the public meeting, please inform DOE of this fact as 
soon as possible by contacting Ms. Brenda Edwards at (202) 586-2945 so 
that the necessary procedures can be completed.
    Interested parties may submit comments, identified by docket number 
EERE-2010-BT-TP-0034 or Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) 1904-AC40, 
by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail: CRE-2010-TP-0034@ee.doe.gov. Include the docket 
number EERE-2010-BT-TP-0034 and/or RIN 1904-AC40 in the subject line of 
the message.
     Postal Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of 
Energy, Building Technologies Program, Mailstop EE-2J, 1000 
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Please submit one 
signed paper original.
     Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department 
of Energy, Building Technologies Program, 6th Floor, 950 L'Enfant 
Plaza, SW., Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: (202) 586-2945. Please 
submit one signed paper original.
    Written comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other 
aspects of the collection-of-information requirements contained in this 
proposed rule may be submitted to Office of Energy Efficiency and 
Renewable Energy through the methods listed above and by e-mail to 
Christine_J._Kymn@omb.eop.gov.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the docket number or RIN 
for this rulemaking. For detailed instructions on submitting comments 
and additional information on the rulemaking process, see section V, 
``Public Participation,'' of this document.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or 
comments received, visit the U.S. Department of Energy, 6th Floor, 950 
L'Enfant Plaza, SW., Washington, DC 20024, (202) 586-2945, between 9 
a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Please 
call Ms. Brenda Edwards at (202) 586-2945 for additional information 
regarding visiting the Resource Room.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Charles Llenza, U.S. Department of 
Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building 
Technologies, EE-2J, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 
20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-2192, Charles_Llenza@ee.doe.gov. In 
the Office of General Council contact Mr.

[[Page 71597]]

Michael Kido, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of General Counsel, GC-
71, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121, (202) 
586-8145, Michael.Kido@hq.doe.gov; or Ms. Elizabeth Kohl, U.S. 
Department of Energy, Office of General Counsel, GC-71, 1000 
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121, (202) 586-7796, 
Elizabeth.Kohl@hq.doe.gov.
    For information on how to submit or review public comments and on 
how to participate in the public meeting, contact Ms. Brenda Edwards, 
U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable 
Energy, Building Technologies Program, EE-2J, 1000 Independence Avenue, 
SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone (202) 586-2945. E-mail: 
Brenda.Edwards@ee.doe.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Authority and Background
    A. Authority
    B. Background
    C. Standby Mode and Off Mode
II. Summary of the Proposed Rule
III. Discussion
    A. Framework Comment Summary and DOE Responses
    1. Coordination With Other Programs
    2. Coordination With the Air-Conditioning, Heating and 
Refrigeration Institute
    3. Burden of Testing
    4. Testing of Transient Technologies and at Variable 
Refrigeration Load
    5. Rating Temperatures
    6. Energy Efficiency Features
    B. Summary of the Test Procedure Revisions
    1. Update References to Industry Test Procedures to Most Current 
Versions
    2. Include Method for Determining Energy Savings Due to the Use 
of Night Curtains on Open Cases
    3. Include Calculation for Determining Energy Savings Due to Use 
of Lighting Occupancy Sensors or Controls
    4. Include Provision for Testing at Lowest Application Product 
Temperature.
IV. Regulatory Review
    A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
    B. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act
    C. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act
    E. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
    F. Review Under the Treasury and General Government 
Appropriations Act, 1999
    G. Review Under Executive Order 13132
    H. Review Under Executive Order 12988
    I. Review Under the Treasury and General Government 
Appropriations Act, 2001
    J. Review Under Executive Order 13211
    K. Review Under Executive Order 12630
    L. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration 
Act of 1974
V. Public Participation
    A. Attendance at Public Meeting
    B. Procedure for Submitting Requests to Speak
    C. Conduct of Public Meeting
    D. Submission of Comments
    E. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment
VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

I. Authority and Background

A. Authority

    Title III of EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6291 et seq.) as amended by the Energy 
Policy Act of 2005 (EPACT 2005) establishes an energy conservation 
program for certain commercial and industrial equipment (42 U.S.C. 
6311-6317). EPCA prescribes energy conservation standards for certain 
self-contained commercial refrigerators, freezers, and refrigerator-
freezers with solid or transparent doors and designed for a pull-down 
or holding temperature application. (42 U.S.C. 6313(c)(2)-(3)) EPCA 
also requires DOE to develop standards for ice-cream freezers; self-
contained commercial refrigerators, freezers, and refrigerator-freezers 
without doors; and remote condensing commercial refrigerators, 
freezers, and refrigerator-freezers. (42 U.S.C. 6313(c)(4)(A)) DOE 
published a final rule establishing standards for these equipment 
classes on January 9, 2009. 74 FR 1091.
    Manufacturers of covered equipment, including commercial 
refrigeration equipment, must use prescribed test procedures to measure 
energy efficiency or use and certify to DOE that equipment complies 
with energy conservation standards. (42 U.S.C. 6311(3) and (4)) The 
current test procedures for commercial refrigeration equipment appear 
under Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 431, 
subpart C.
    EPCA requires DOE to conduct an evaluation of each class of covered 
equipment at least once every 7 years to determine whether to, among 
other things, amend the test procedures for such equipment. Any amended 
test procedures must be reasonably designed to produce test results 
that reflect energy efficiency, energy use, and estimated operating 
costs during a representative average use cycle and must not be unduly 
burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2))
    In addition, EPCA contains specific provisions relating to test 
procedures for commercial refrigeration equipment. Test procedures for 
commercial refrigerators, freezers, and refrigerator-freezers must be: 
(1) The test procedures determined to be generally accepted industry 
testing procedures; or (2) rating procedures developed or recognized by 
the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning 
Engineers (ASHRAE) or by the American National Standards Institute 
(ANSI). (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(6)(A)(i)) EPCA also establishes initial test 
procedures for self-contained refrigerators, freezers, and 
refrigerator-freezers with doors. These test procedures are the ASHRAE 
117 test procedures that went into effect on January 1, 2005. (42 
U.S.C. 6314(a)(6)(A)(ii))
    If ASHRAE 117 is amended, however, the Secretary must, by rule, 
amend the DOE test procedure to ensure consistency with the amended 
ASHRAE 117 unless certain findings are made by clear and convincing 
evidence. In addition, if a test procedure other than ASHRAE 117 is 
approved by ANSI, the Secretary must review the relative strengths and 
weaknesses of the new test procedure relative to the ASHRAE 117 test 
procedure and, based on that review, adopt one new test procedure for 
use in the standards program. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(6)(E)-(F))
    In 2006 DOE published a final rule that adopted ANSI/Air-
Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute (ARI) Standard 1200-2006 
(hereafter referenced as ARI Standard 1200-2006) as the referenced test 
procedure for measuring energy consumption and ANSI/Association of Home 
Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM) Standard HRF-1-2004 (hereafter referred 
to as AHAM HRF-1-2004) for measuring refrigerated compartment volume. 
71 FR 71370. These industry standards for commercial refrigeration 
equipment have since been updated from the procedures currently 
referenced in the regulations. As stated previously, EPCA authorizes 
DOE to review the merits of the updated industry test procedures. If 
DOE determines that a test procedure amendment is warranted, DOE must 
publish proposed test procedures and offer the public an opportunity to 
present oral and written comments on the amendment. (42 U.S.C. 6314(b))

B. Background

    ASHRAE Standard 117-2002, ``Method of Testing Closed 
Refrigerators,'' was the test procedure for commercial refrigeration 
equipment for which standards were specified in EPACT 2005. EPACT 2005 
mandated use of the ASHRAE 117 standard in effect on January 1, 2005. 
(42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(6)(A)(ii)) Subsequently, ASHRAE amended this test 
procedure and adopted ASHRAE Standard 72-2005, ``Method of Testing 
Commercial Refrigerators and Freezers,'' which was approved by ANSI on 
July 29, 2005. DOE reviewed ASHRAE Standard 72-2005, as well as ARI 
Standard 1200-2006, which was approved by ANSI on August 28, 2006. (42 
U.S.C.

[[Page 71598]]

6314(a)(6)(E)-(F)) DOE determined that ARI Standard 1200-2006 includes 
the test procedures in ASHRAE Standard 72-2005 as well as the rating 
temperatures prescribed in EPACT 2005. As a result, DOE published a 
final rule on December 8, 2006 in which it adopted ARI Standard 1200-
2006, ``Performance Rating of Commercial Refrigerated Display 
Merchandisers and Storage Cabinets,'' as the DOE test procedure for 
commercial refrigeration equipment. 71 FR 71370; 10 CFR 431.63-431.64. 
ARI Standard 1200-2006 contains rating temperature specifications of 38 
degrees Fahrenheit ([deg]F) (2 [deg]F) for commercial 
refrigerators and refrigerator compartments, 0 [deg]F (2 
[deg]F) for commercial freezers and freezer compartments, and -5 [deg]F 
(2 [deg]F) for commercial ice-cream freezers. In the test 
procedure final rule, DOE adopted a -15 [deg]F (2 [deg]F) 
rating temperature for commercial ice-cream freezers, rather than the -
5 [deg]F (2 [deg]F) prescribed in the ARI Standard 1200-
2006. During the 2006 test procedure rulemaking, DOE determined that 
testing at a -15 [deg]F (2 [deg]F) rating temperature was 
more representative of the actual energy consumption of commercial 
freezers specifically designed for ice cream application. 71 FR 71357. 
In addition, DOE adopted AHAM Standard HRF-1-2004, ``Energy, 
Performance and Capacity of Household Refrigerators, Refrigerator-
Freezers and Freezers,'' for measuring compartment volumes for 
equipment covered under this rule. 71 FR 71370 (Dec. 8, 2006).
    Since the publication of the final rule, ARI has merged with the 
Gas Appliance Manufacturers Association (GAMA) to form the Air-
Conditioning, Heating and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) and updated 
its test procedure, the most recent version of which is AHRI Standard 
1200-2010. AHRI Standard 1200-2010 includes changes to the equipment 
class nomenclature used in the test procedure, the method of 
normalizing equipment energy consumption, the ice-cream freezer test 
temperature, and other minor differences. These changes aligned the 
AHRI test procedure with the nomenclature and methodology used in DOE's 
2009 standards rulemaking on commercial refrigeration equipment. DOE 
proposes to reference AHRI 1200-2010, the test procedure currently used 
in industry.
    Similarly, AHAM has updated Standard HRF-1-2004 to the most recent 
version, AHAM HRF-1-2008. The changes to this standard are mostly 
editorial and involved reorganizing some of the sections for simplicity 
and usability. As part of the reorganization, the HRF-1-2004 section 
numbers that are referenced within the DOE test procedure were updated 
to the structure in HRF-1-2008. However, the content of those sections 
was not substantially changed. The newly updated AHRI Standard 1200-
2010 references the most recent version of the AHAM standard, AHAM HRF-
1-2008. As such, DOE proposes to update the referenced test procedure 
to adopt AHAM HRF-1-2008 as the prescribed method for determining 
refrigerated compartment volume.
    DOE also proposes changes to the test procedure to better address 
certain energy efficiency features for which the current test procedure 
cannot account. During the 2009 energy conservation standards 
rulemaking, DOE screened out several energy efficiency technologies 
because their effects were not captured by the current test procedure. 
72 FR 41162, 41179-80 (July 26, 2007). DOE proposes modifications to 
its test procedure to better address some of these technologies. 
Specific changes include provisions for measuring the impact of night 
curtains and lighting occupancy sensors and controls.
    On May 18, 2010, DOE held a public meeting (the May 2010 Framework 
public meeting) to discuss the rulemaking framework for the concurrent 
commercial refrigeration equipment (CRE) energy conservation standard 
(docket number EERE-2010-BT-STD-0003). During this May 2010 Framework 
public meeting, DOE received comments from several interested parties 
that additional rating temperatures should be considered in the test 
procedure. Some equipment is designed for storing goods such as wine, 
candy, and flowers at temperatures that are held constant, but are 
higher than the temperatures typically used in commercial 
refrigerators. The commenters stated that some covered refrigeration 
equipment designed for operation at higher temperatures is not able to 
be tested at the prescribed 38 [deg]F, and they suggested that DOE 
consider this in the test procedures and standards rulemakings. 
Consequently, DOE proposes provisions for testing commercial 
refrigeration equipment that is designed to operate at temperatures 
higher than 38 [deg]F at the lowest possible application product 
temperature.

C. Standby Mode and Off Mode

    The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007; Pub. 
L. 110-140) amended EPCA to require DOE, for each covered product for 
which current test procedures do not account for standby and off mode 
energy consumption, to modify the test procedures to integrate such 
energy consumption into the energy descriptor(s) for that product, if 
technically feasible. Otherwise, DOE must prescribe a separate standby 
and off mode energy use test procedure, if technically feasible. (42 
U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A)) EISA 2007 also requires any final rule to 
establish or revise a standard for a covered product, adopted after 
July 1, 2010, to incorporate standby mode and off mode energy use into 
a single amended or new standard, if feasible. (42 U.S.C. 
6295(gg)(3)(A)) DOE currently believes that the ``off mode'' and 
``standby mode'' conditions of operation do not apply to the equipment 
covered by this rulemaking because the provision within EISA which 
stipulates that off mode and standby mode energy usage must be 
quantified only appears in relation to consumer products and is not 
required for commercial equipment. Additionally, commercial 
refrigeration equipment, whether in retail, foodservice, or other 
applications, operates 24 hours a day, 7 days a week to maintain 
product at the necessary temperature for safe storage or retailing. 
Therefore, standby and off modes will not be considered for commercial 
refrigeration equipment.

II. Summary of the Proposed Rule

    DOE is considering modifications to its test procedure to 
incorporate the current industry-accepted test procedures, address 
certain energy efficiency features that currently are not accounted for 
in the test procedure (light occupancy sensors and night curtains), and 
allow testing of commercial refrigeration equipment that cannot be 
tested at one of the three currently specified product test 
temperatures.
    EPCA prescribes that if any rulemaking amends a test procedure, DOE 
must determine ``to what extent, if any, the proposed test procedure 
would alter the measured energy efficiency * * * of any covered product 
as determined under the existing test procedure.'' (42 U.S.C. 
6293(e)(1); 6314(a)(6)) Further, if DOE determines that the amended 
test procedure would alter the measured efficiency of a covered 
product, DOE must amend the applicable energy conservation standard 
accordingly. (42 U.S.C. 6293(e)(2); 6314(a)(6)) DOE recognizes that the 
proposed test procedure amendments would affect the measured energy use 
of commercial refrigeration equipment. DOE is considering amending the 
standards currently in effect for commercial refrigeration equipment in 
a concurrent rulemaking. DOE will

[[Page 71599]]

consider these proposed test procedure amendments as any final energy 
conservation standards are developed.
    DOE also proposes to require use of any amended test procedures to 
be consistent with the compliance date of any revised energy 
conservation standards. DOE would add language to any final test 
procedure amendments to the effect that the amendments need not be 
performed at that time to determine compliance with the current energy 
conservation standards. Instead, manufacturers would be required to use 
the amended test procedures to demonstrate compliance with DOE's energy 
conservation standards on the compliance date of any final rule 
establishing amended energy conservation standards for commercial 
refrigeration equipment.
    Further clarification would also be provided that, as of 360 days 
after publication of any test procedure final rule, representations as 
to the energy consumption of any covered products would need to be 
based on results generated using the amended test procedure. (42 U.S.C. 
6314(d))

III. Discussion

    As part of the current rulemaking on the energy conservation 
standard for commercial refrigeration equipment, DOE held a public 
meeting on May 18, 2010 to present its framework document (https://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/commercial/pdfs/cre_framework_04-30-10.pdf and to receive comments from interested 
parties. DOE considered the comments received as a result of the 
framework document public meeting and incorporated recommendations, 
where appropriate, that applied to the test procedure.
    In Section 0, DOE provides responses to comments in the following 
subject areas:
    1. Coordination With Other Programs;
    2. Coordination with AHRI;
    3. Burden of Testing;
    4. Transient Testing;
    5. Rating Temperatures; and
    6. Energy Efficiency Features.
    Section III.B provides a summary of the proposed revisions to the 
test procedure at 10 CFR part 431, subpart C, ``Uniform test method for 
measuring the energy consumption of commercial refrigerators, freezers, 
and refrigerator-freezers.'' These proposed revisions include:
    1. Update References to Industry Test Procedures to Most Current 
Version;
    2. Include Method for Determining Energy Savings Due to the Use of 
Night Curtains on Open Cases;
    3. Include Calculation for Determining Energy Savings Due to Use of 
Lighting Occupancy Sensors or Controls;
    4. Include Provision for Testing at Lowest Application Product 
Temperature.
    Comments relevant to these subject areas are also addressed in 
section III.B.

A. Framework Comment Summary and DOE Responses

1. Coordination With Other Programs
    During the Framework public meeting, DOE received several comments 
regarding the potential overlap between testing performed for the 
purposes of compliance with DOE standards and testing performed for 
certification for voluntary energy efficiency programs. Continental 
stated that testing requirements should be unified between ENERGY 
STAR[supreg] and DOE standards. (Continental, No. 1.2.006 at p. 190 
\1\) Continental also stated that a common database of certified 
equipment should be shared between DOE and the U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency ENERGY STAR program. (Continental, No. 1.2.006 at pp. 
190-191)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In the following discussion, comments will be presented 
along with a notation in the form ``Continental, No. 1.2.006 at p. 
190,'' which identifies a written comment DOE received and included 
in the docket of this rulemaking. DOE refers to comments based on 
when the comment was submitted in the rulemaking process. Section 
1.1.XXX refers to Federal Register documents, section 1.2.XXX refers 
public meeting support documents, and 1.3.XXX refers to comments 
submitted by interested parties. This particular notation refers to 
a comment (1) By Continental, (2) in document number 6 in the public 
meeting support materials, and (3) appearing on page 190.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The use of common test procedures, reporting, and test data 
repository pertains to many commercial and residential products, 
including commercial refrigeration equipment. ENERGY STAR currently 
requires testing according to ASHRAE Standard 72-2005. ASHRAE Standard 
72-2005 is referenced as the method of test in ARI Standard 1200-2006, 
DOE's current referenced test procedure, as well as AHRI Standard 1200-
2010, which DOE proposes to incorporate by reference in today's test 
procedure. As a result, DOE believes that testing according to ARI 
standard 1200-2006 or 1200-2010 would be sufficient for purposes of 
ENERGY STAR certification.
    DOE acknowledges that manufacturers may have to submit separate 
reports for showing compliance with ENERGY STAR and DOE energy 
conservation standards. Reporting requirements for the purposes of 
certification and compliance with DOE energy conservation standards are 
currently being addressed under a separate rulemaking (docket number 
EERE-2010-BT-STD-0003). DOE believes that further analysis or effort to 
coordinate a common database or other aspects with the ENERGY STAR 
program pertain to many covered products, both commercial and 
residential, and should be addressed in the context of that rulemaking 
rather than this test procedure rulemaking.
2. Coordination with the Air-Conditioning, Heating and Refrigeration 
Institute
    Many interested parties provided DOE with comments regarding 
coordination between DOE and AHRI in the development of test 
procedures. AHRI reminded stakeholders that AHRI Standard 1200, which 
is referenced in the DOE test procedure, is under constant review, and 
invited interested parties, including DOE, to participate in this 
review. (AHRI, No. 1.2.006 at p. 71, No. 1.3.008 at p. 3) AHRI also 
expressed support for DOE's plan to adopt the 2008 version of AHRI 
Standard 1200. (AHRI, No. 1.3.008 at p. 3) Similarly, DOE was 
encouraged to participate in the ASHRAE and AHRI standards revision 
processes to ensure continuity between Federal and industry standards. 
(True, No. 1.2.006 at p. 72) California Codes and Standards likewise 
agreed that DOE should coordinate with AHRI to update AHRI Standard 
1200. (California Codes and Standards, No. 1.3.005 at pp. 2-3) A joint 
comment submitted by the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance and the 
Northwest Power and Conservation Council (Northwest Joint Comment) 
agreed with the use of AHRI Standard 1200 as the basis for testing, but 
urged DOE to begin updating its own test procedure in parallel with its 
efforts to clarify equipment classes. (Adjuvant Consulting, No. 1.3.003 
at p. 3) Further, the Northwest Joint Comment stated that AHRI Standard 
1200 will need updating for this rulemaking because it excludes some 
equipment classes, may not have universally applicable test conditions, 
and is unable to quantify the effects of some technology options. The 
Northwest Joint Comment also stated that AHRI Standard 1200 should be 
modified to capture the impacts of all technologies considered by DOE 
in the rulemaking and appropriate operating regimes. (Adjuvant 
Consulting, No. 1.3.003 at pp. 2-3)
    During the development of these proposed test procedures 
amendments, DOE closely followed the activities of engineering 
committees that oversee AHRI Standard 1200 and ASHRAE

[[Page 71600]]

Standard 72 and will continue to stay abreast of AHRI and ASHRAE 
efforts to revise and update their respective test procedures and 
standards. In the interest of coordinating with AHRI, DOE proposes to 
update the references in the DOE test procedure to the most recent 
version of AHRI Standard 1200, AHRI Standard 1200-2010. DOE also 
proposes to amend aspects of this testing protocol as part of the DOE 
procedure to capture the performance of certain energy efficiency 
features, as described in section III.B. Regarding equipment classes 
that may be excluded from AHRI Standard 1200, DOE believes that all 
equipment classes for which DOE intends to set standards are able to be 
tested using AHRI Standard 1200-2010. Also, DOE believes the test 
conditions currently prescribed in AHRI Standard 1200-2010 are 
applicable to all commercial refrigeration equipment covered under this 
rulemaking with the exception of equipment that cannot be tested at the 
38 [deg]F integrated average product temperature, see further 
discussion in sections III.A.5 and III.B.4.
3. Burden of Testing
    During the Framework public meeting, and in written comments, 
several interested parties expressed concern regarding the burden of 
testing. Master-Bilt stated that transitioning to a system of third-
party testing would more than double its testing costs. (Master-Bilt, 
No. 1.2.006 at p. 200) Zero Zone commented that changes to the test 
procedure would make existing test data invalid, would possibly require 
multiple tests at different configurations, and would increase costs. 
(Zero Zone, No. 1.3.007 at p. 1) True expressed a concern that there is 
a learning curve associated with how to test equipment at standard 
conditions (True, No. 1.2.006 at pp. 133-134) and that introducing 
additional test conditions would significantly increase the cost and 
burden of testing. (True, No. 1.2.006 at pp. 131-132)
    DOE understands that amending test procedures or including 
additional provisions in those test procedures could increase the 
burden on manufacturers to quantify the performance of their equipment. 
EPCA requires that the test procedures promulgated by DOE be reasonably 
designed to produce test results that reflect energy efficiency, energy 
use, and estimated operating costs of the covered equipment during a 
representative average use cycle. It also requires that the test 
procedure not be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2))
    DOE has analyzed the expected incremental cost of the proposed test 
procedure changes and its impact on manufacturers. The proposed changes 
to the test procedure consist of: Updating the referenced industry test 
procedures to the most current versions; testing requirements for units 
sold with night curtains and lighting occupancy sensors or controls 
installed; and provisions for testing units that cannot operate at the 
specified 38 [deg]F integrated average product temperature.
    All commercial refrigeration equipment for which standards were set 
in EPACT 2005 are currently required to be tested using the DOE test 
procedure to show compliance with the EPACT 2005 standard levels. 
Equipment for which standards were set in the 2009 final rule will 
similarly be required to test units using the DOE test procedure to 
show compliance with the 2009 standards levels beginning January 1, 
2012. The current DOE test procedure references AHRI Standard 1200-2006 
and AHAM HRF-1-2004. This test procedure consists of one 24-hour test 
at standard rating conditions to determine daily energy consumption.
    The updated versions of AHRI Standard 1200-2010 and AHAM HRF-1-2008 
do not vary substantially from the previously referenced versions. 
Aligning the DOE test procedure with the most recent industry test 
procedures currently in use--AHRI standard 1200-2010 and AHAM HRF-1-
2008--will simplify testing requirements and reduce the burden of 
testing for both small and large manufacturers.
    For equipment that could be sold with night curtains installed, the 
current test procedure requires one 24-hour test without the night 
curtain installed. To minimize the additional burden of test on 
manufacturers, under the proposed revisions, if a unit is tested and 
shows compliance with the relevant energy conservation standard without 
night curtains installed, that unit can also be sold with night 
curtains installed without additional testing. In addition, if a 
manufacturer chose to sell cases only with night curtains installed, 
only one 24-hour test would be required. If, however, a piece of 
equipment does not meet DOE's energy conservation standards without 
night curtains installed, DOE proposes to allow the unit to be tested a 
second time with night curtains installed. In this instance, assuming 
the energy conservation standard is met, the case would also be 
required to be sold with night curtains installed. This would require 
an increased burden of test on only those units that cannot show 
compliance with DOE energy conservation standards without night 
curtains installed. As DOE proposes to incorporate provisions for 
testing a unit with night curtains installed into the same 24-hour 
test, the burden of conducting the test with and without night curtains 
is approximately the same.
    For units sold with lighting occupancy sensors and scheduled 
controls installed, no additional testing or measurements will be 
required. Manufacturers will use a calculation method to determine the 
energy savings due to lighting occupancy sensors and scheduled 
controls. DOE believes that additional calculations will only require a 
few additional minutes of testing time, which represents approximately 
a 25-percent increase in the calculation intensity of the test. When 
compared to the physical testing segment of the procedure, which takes, 
a minimum of 24 hours, the additional calculations required by the 
lighting occupancy sensor and scheduled control requirements would 
increase the total burden of the test by less than an estimated 0.01 
percent. In addition, this additional burden would be required only for 
units that cannot comply with the energy conservation standard with 
lighting occupancy sensors or controls installed. Thus, DOE believes 
that the proposed additional calculations for lighting occupancy 
sensors and controls would not significantly increase the burden of 
test for manufacturers of covered products.
    For equipment that cannot be tested at the 38 [deg]F integrated 
average product temperature, manufacturers are currently required to 
test the unit using AHRI Standard 1200 at the 38 [deg]F test 
temperature. Under the proposed revisions, these manufacturers would be 
allowed to test units that cannot meet the 38 [deg]F test temperature 
to be tested at the lowest application product temperature, with the 
only difference being the integrated average product temperature. Since 
the same test is being performed in both cases, DOE believes that this 
will not increase the burden of test for those manufacturers and is 
likely to lead to more representative energy consumption values. DOE 
notes that AHRI Standard 1200-2010 test is often already performed by a 
manufacturer for participation in voluntary programs, independent 
collection of energy consumption information, or other reasons.
    The proposed changes to the test procedure for commercial 
refrigeration equipment were chosen to help minimize the impact of 
additional testing while updating industry standards to reflect the 
most current

[[Page 71601]]

versions, capture new energy efficiency technologies, and provide more 
accurate test procedures for equipment that cannot be tested at the 
currently prescribed integrated average product temperature. For the 
reasons stated above, DOE believes that the proposed test procedures 
would not be unduly burdensome to conduct.
    For further discussion of the economic impact of additional testing 
on the small CRE manufacturers, as the entities that would be the most 
impacted from additional testing requirements, please see section IV.C 
of today's NOPR.
    DOE requests comment on its conclusion that the proposed test 
procedure changes would not be unduly burdensome to conduct.
4. Testing of Transient Technologies and at Variable Refrigeration Load
    During the Framework public meeting and comment period, several 
interested parties commented on incorporating provisions into the test 
procedure to capture the effects of features that operate to reduce 
energy consumption at variable refrigeration load or at variable time 
periods. California Codes and Standards stated that ASHRAE Standard 72 
is only a steady-state test, and that the test would not capture a 
number of transient measures that may produce significant energy 
savings in the field. (California Codes and Standards, No. 1.2.006 at 
p. 13) The American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) 
emphasized that it believes that a single metric is not adequate to 
describe CRE operation and that DOE should at least look at part-load 
and full-load metrics. (ACEEE, No. 1.2.006 at pp. 69-70) California 
Codes and Standards also stated that test methods should be developed 
for the purpose of measuring the maximum possible energy savings, and 
that this should include a part-load test. (California Codes and 
Standards, No. 1.3.005 at p. 1)
    DOE finds that there are two types of transient technologies: Those 
that operate as a function of variable ambient conditions and those 
that operate at variable times to reduce refrigeration load. DOE 
discussed the technologies that operate at variable times (night 
curtains and occupancy sensors) in section A.3 above; a discussion of 
the technologies that operate as a function of variable ambient 
conditions is provided below.
    Technologies that operate as a function of variable ambient 
conditions can reduce annual energy consumption of commercial 
refrigeration equipment by adapting to changes in refrigeration load 
that result from changes in ambient conditions. These variable load, or 
part-load, technologies include higher efficiency expansion valves, 
condenser fan motor controllers, and anti-sweat heater controllers. 
ASHRAE Standard 72-2005 calls for testing at a single ambient 
temperature and relative humidity, so technologies that are designed to 
reduce energy use under variable ambient conditions will not affect the 
measured combined daily energy consumption (CDEC) per the existing test 
procedure.
    An independent test to quantify the performance of technologies 
that decrease energy use at variable refrigeration load would most 
likely involve testing a unit at different ambient conditions, 
including lower temperatures and humidities. However, section 342 of 
EPCA requires that test procedures ``shall be reasonably designed to 
produce test results which reflect energy efficiency, energy use, and 
estimated operating costs of a type of industrial equipment (or class 
thereof) during a representative average cycle of use (as determined by 
the Secretary), and shall not be unduly burdensome to conduct.'' (42 
U.S.C. 6314(2))
    It is DOE's understanding that, although ASHRAE Standard 72-2005 is 
a steady-state test, some variation in refrigeration load is 
experienced in display cases with doors as part of the door opening 
requirement included in that test. When the doors are opened, the 
refrigeration load increases because warm ambient air has entered the 
case. If the equipment being tested has more efficient operation at 
variable refrigeration load, the case will use less energy overall. In 
this way, the effects of variable load, or part-load, features are 
already captured to some degree in the current test procedure for 
commercial refrigeration equipment with doors. Similarly, if the test 
procedure is altered to capture decreased energy consumption as a 
result of night curtain use, the efficacy of many part-load 
technologies in open cases will also be captured.
    Further, additional independent or explicit part-load testing will 
result in increased cost and burden for manufacturers of covered 
products. During the May 2010 Framework public meeting, True expressed 
a concern that there is a learning curve associated with how to test 
equipment at standard conditions (True, No. 1.2.006 at pp. 133-134) and 
that introducing additional test conditions would significantly 
increase the cost and burden of testing. (True, No. 1.2.006 at pp. 131-
132) From conversations with manufacturers, DOE estimates that part-
load testing at additional rating conditions could more than double the 
cost and burden of testing for all commercial refrigeration equipment. 
DOE believes that explicit testing at multiple sets of conditions is 
not justified because of this increased burden. Thus, the DOE test 
procedure will continue to rely on one standard rating condition, 
relying on the transient effects inherent in the proposed test 
procedure to capture part-load performance.
5. Rating Temperatures
    During the Framework public meeting, True stated that the current 
standard only directly addresses a standard ambient test condition of 
75 [deg]F and 55 percent relative humidity, but that the Food and Drug 
Administration and NSF standards also include an 80 [deg]F ambient 
condition. (NSF International was founded in 1944 as the National 
Sanitation Foundation; the organization's name is now simply NSF.) True 
also stated that higher real-world operating temperatures will impact 
the energy use of commercial refrigeration equipment in some 
applications. (True, No. 1.2.006 at p. 38) California Codes and 
Standards added that it is important to verify that systems operating 
under extreme ambient conditions can perform safely at those 
temperatures and humidities. (California Codes and Standards, No. 
1.2.006 at p. 133) True further asserted that equipment tested at 75 
[deg]F and 55 percent relative humidity will perform differently than 
if operated at 95 [deg]F and 95 percent relative humidity. (True, No. 
1.2.006 at p. 129) ACEEE added that perhaps there should be an adverse 
temperature and humidity rating condition to ensure that equipment will 
operate effectively in those scenarios. (ACEEE, No. 1.2.006 at p. 131) 
Southern Store Fixtures commented that if additional test conditions 
are used, equipment that operates outside of these conditions should be 
exempt. (Southern Store Fixtures, No. 1.2.006 at p. 133) Zero Zone, 
however, stated that testing at a variety of ambient conditions could 
become burdensome and the 75/55 condition is a sound compromise. (Zero 
Zone, No. 1.2.006 at p. 130)
    DOE received similar comments on the 2009 CRE energy conservation 
standard NOPR. Those comments encouraged DOE to differentiate between 
NSF Type I equipment, which is tested at standard test conditions, and 
NSF Type II equipment, which is tested at 80 [deg]F. DOE found that the 
relative difference between Type I equipment designed to be operated at 
the standard

[[Page 71602]]

test condition of 75 [deg]F and Type II equipment designed to operate 
at 80 [deg]F would not significantly impact the energy use of the 
equipment as tested at the 75 [deg]F test condition. Thus, DOE 
concluded it was unnecessary to institute a distinction between Type I 
and Type II commercial refrigeration equipment. 74 FR 1092, 1117 (Jan. 
9, 2009).
    The current DOE test procedure requires that energy consumption 
testing for all commercial refrigeration equipment covered in these 
rulemakings be conducted according to ASHRAE Standard 72-2005, which 
prescribes specific ambient conditions. DOE believes that equipment 
classified as NSF Type II can be tested at the standard rating 
conditions prescribed in the DOE test procedure without any significant 
additional burden on manufacturers. Accordingly, DOE proposes to 
continue to rate all commercial refrigeration equipment at the standard 
rating condition prescribed in the referenced industry test procedure.
    DOE requests comment on the burden to manufacturers associated with 
testing NSF Type II equipment at the standard test condition.
6. Energy Efficiency Features
    DOE received a number of comments from stakeholders concerning 
energy efficiency features that exist for the explicit purpose of 
lowering energy consumption, such as lighting occupancy sensors and 
controls, night curtains, higher efficiency expansion valves, condenser 
fan motor controllers, and anti-sweat heater controllers. The Northwest 
Joint Comment stated that the current test procedure does not have the 
capacity to test all of the equipment classes and technology options 
that are likely to be within the scope of coverage for this rulemaking. 
(Adjuvant Consulting, No. 1.3.003 at pp. 1-2) True commented that the 
test procedure should represent a baseline level of energy consumption 
with no energy efficiency devices enabled. (True, No. 1.2.006 at pp. 
63-64) Southern Store Fixtures commented that some of these devices, 
such as night curtains, may not be used by 24-hour stores (Southern 
Store Fixtures, No. 1.2.006 at pp. 66-67), and also suggested that DOE 
consult with end users of these energy efficiency features before 
considering them. (Southern Store Fixtures, No. 1.2.006 at p. 67) True 
stated that energy controls have a variety of different features and 
energy conservation levels, and that they are sometimes already tested 
by manufacturers. (True, No. 1.2.006 at p. 65) The Northwest Joint 
Comment added that a percent time off assumption or scaling factor 
might not be adequate to capture the effects of all time-dependent 
technology options. (Adjuvant Consulting, No. 1.3.003 at p. 3)
    As part of this rulemaking effort, DOE has evaluated technology 
options suggested by interested parties and has developed provisions to 
quantify the performance of those options that can be specifically 
addressed while still meeting the statutory requirements of a test 
procedure. Specific proposed changes include provisions for measuring 
the energy impacts of lighting occupancy sensors and controls, and 
night curtains. Other technologies, such as higher efficiency expansion 
valves, condenser fan motor controllers, and anti-sweat heater 
controllers, are technologies that function to reduce energy 
consumption at part-load conditions. As discussed in section III.A.4, 
``Testing of Transient Technologies and at Variable Refrigeration 
Load,'' the energy saving potential of these technologies is already 
captured to some degree in the current test procedure. Further, DOE 
believes that explicit testing for these energy efficiency technologies 
that reduce energy consumption at part load is not justified because it 
would significantly increase the testing burden.
    DOE requests comment on the burden to test energy efficiency 
technologies other than those explicitly accounted for in this test 
procedure revision, namely night curtains and lighting occupancy 
sensors and scheduled control.

B. Summary of the Test Procedure Revisions

    Today's proposed rule contains the following proposed changes to 
the test procedure in 10 CFR part 431, subpart C.
1. Update References to Industry Test Procedures to Most Current 
Versions
    The current DOE test procedure for commercial refrigeration 
equipment adopted ARI Standard 1200-2006, with additional provisions 
for testing ice-cream freezers at -15 [deg]F, as the test procedure 
used to measure the energy consumption of a piece of commercial 
refrigeration equipment to establish compliance with the applicable 
energy conservation standard. Since the publication of the 2006 test 
procedure final rule, AHRI has released an updated version of the test 
procedure, AHRI Standard 1200-2010. The updated test procedure includes 
both editorial and technical changes to the equipment class 
nomenclature used within the test procedure, the test product 
temperature for ice-cream freezers, and the method of normalizing and 
reporting units for equipment energy consumption. These changes align 
the test procedure with the nomenclature and methodology used in the 
2009 DOE energy conservation standard final rule. AHRI Standard 1200-
2010 is the test procedure currently used in industry, and DOE proposes 
to adopt it as the DOE test procedure.
    The current DOE test procedure also references AHAM HRF-1-2004 as 
the protocol for determining refrigerated compartment volume. AHAM has 
also updated its Standard HRF-1-2004. The most recent version is AHAM 
HRF-1-2008, which makes editorial changes including reorganizing some 
of the sections for simplicity and usability. The newly updated AHRI 
1200-2010 also references AHAM HRF-1-2008. For consistency, DOE 
proposes to adopt the more recent AHAM HRF-1-2008 for measuring 
refrigerated compartment volume.
    DOE requests comment on updating the referenced industry test 
procedures to the most current versions.
2. Include Method for Determining Energy Savings Due to the Use of 
Night Curtains on Open Cases
    The current test procedure, ARI Standard 1200-2006, and method of 
test, ASHRAE Standard 72-2005, do not account for potential energy 
savings resulting from the use of night curtains on open cases. Night 
curtains are devices made of an insulating material, typically 
insulated aluminum fabric, designed to be pulled down over the open 
front of the case (similar to the way a window shade operates) when the 
merchandizing establishment is closed or the customer traffic is 
significantly decreased. The insulating shield, or night curtain, 
decreases infiltration and mixing of the cool air inside the case with 
the relatively warm, humid air in the store interior. It also reduces 
conductive and radiative heat transfer into the case. This can reduce 
compressor loads and defrost cycles, significantly decreasing energy 
use. A 1997 study by the Southern California Edison Refrigeration 
Technology and Test Center found that, when used for 6 hours per day, 
night curtains reduce total energy use of the case by approximately 8 
percent.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Southern California Edison, Refrigeration and Technology and 
Test Center, Energy Efficiency Division. Effects of the Low 
Emissivity Shields on Performance and Power Use of a Refrigerated 
Display Case. August 1997. Available at https://www.econofrost.com/acrobat/sce_report_long.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To allow manufacturers to account for the possible energy savings 
of cases sold

[[Page 71603]]

with night curtains, DOE intends to adopt a standardized physical test 
method. A physical test would accurately capture differences in energy 
use reduction as a function of similar technologies and case 
dimensions. It is important to capture the differences in energy use 
reduction from similar technologies because of the large performance 
disparities that can exist. For example, night curtains made of low-
emissivity materials, such as aluminum, decrease the radiative losses 
from the case and therefore are much more effective at reducing heat 
loss than night curtains made of plastic, linoleum, or other non-
reflective materials. In addition, each night curtain may reduce 
infiltration differently depending on its insulating characteristics 
and design. The case dimensions and default infiltration load also 
impact night curtain performance. As such, a physical test will also 
accurately capture differences in the energy conservation utility of 
night curtains as a function of case dimension.
    DOE proposes using the following physical test method, as specified 
by ASHRAE Standard 72-2005. This method would be similar to section 7.2 
in ASHRAE Standard 72-2005, ``Door-Opening Requirements,'' and would 
read as follows:

    Night Curtain Requirements. For open display cases sold with 
night curtains installed, the night curtain shall be employed 
according to manufacturer instructions for a total of 6 hours, 3 
hours after the start of a defrost period. Upon the completion of 
the 6-hour period, the night curtain shall be raised until the 
completion of the 24-hour test period.

    DOE proposes a 6-hour test period to approximate the typical usage 
of a night curtain. In studies analyzing the effects of night curtain 
use, such as the previously cited 1997 study by the Southern California 
Edison Refrigeration Technology and Test Center, a similar 6-hour time 
period has been used. The test for night curtains would apply only to 
cases sold with night curtains installed. The assumptions made in the 
testing of night curtains may not reflect their use in the field in all 
applications. However, this test would be a standard for all cases sold 
with night curtains, regardless of their anticipated use.
    DOE requests comment on the proposal for the incorporation of night 
curtains into the DOE test procedure.
3. Include Calculation for Determining Energy Savings Due to Use of 
Lighting Occupancy Sensors or Controls
    The current test procedure, ARI Standard 1200-2006, and method of 
test, ASHRAE Standard 72-2005, do not account for potential energy 
savings resulting from the use of lighting occupancy sensors and 
scheduled controls. The energy savings due to the use of occupancy-
based sensors or schedule-based controls will vary in the field due to 
differing environmental and operating conditions. However, studies, 
including a demonstration project conducted through the DOE GATEWAY 
program, have shown that lighting occupancy sensors or controls could 
reduce the total energy use of a typical refrigerated merchandising 
unit operating in a grocery store by up to 40 percent.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ U.S. Department of Energy. Demonstration Assessment of 
Light-Emitting Diode (LED) Freezer Case Lighting. October 2009. 
Prepared by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory for the U.S. DOE 
Solid State Lighting Technology Demonstration GATEWAY Program. 
Available at https://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/publications/pdfs/ssl/gateway_freezer-case.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Lighting occupancy sensors and schedule-based control systems are 
designed to reduce the amount of time that lights are on within 
commercial refrigeration equipment. Lighting occupancy sensors use 
passive infrared, ultrasonic, or other motion-sensing technology to 
detect the presence of a customer or employee. These sensors turn off 
or dim the lights within the equipment when no motion is detected in 
the sensor's coverage area. Schedule-based lighting controls allow 
lights to be turned off or dimmed at scheduled times throughout the 
day. The energy efficiency benefits from reducing case lighting energy 
use are two-fold, because both the direct electricity consumption of 
the lights and the heat load on the refrigeration system are decreased. 
Light-emitting diode technology, used in much of today's new commercial 
refrigeration equipment, lends itself to rapid on/off cycling or 
dimming, which enables the use of occupancy sensors or scheduled 
controls, or both. Lighting occupancy sensors and scheduled controls 
can be addressed similarly based on available energy usage data.
    DOE proposes using an analytical method similar to equation 4, 
section 5.2.3 of AHRI Standard 1200-2010, to calculate the energy use 
of lighting within the refrigerated volume. Equation 1 presents a 
method to calculate the direct lighting energy consumption (LECsc) with 
lighting occupancy sensors and controls deployed for either remote 
condensing or self-contained units.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24NO10.364

    Where:

LECsc = lighting energy consumption of internal case lights with 
lighting occupancy sensors and controls deployed (kilowatt-hours);
Pli = rated power of lights when they are fully on (watts);
Pli(off) = power of lights when they are off (watts);
Pli(dim) = power of lights when they are dimmed (watts);
tsc = time period when lighting is fully on with lighting occupancy 
sensors and controls enabled (hours);
toff = time period which the lights are off due to the use of 
lighting occupancy sensors or scheduled controls (hours); and
tdim = time period which the lights are dimmed due to the use of 
lighting occupancy sensors or scheduled controls (hours).

    In equation 1, toff and tdim are determined based on the 
sum of any contribution from lighting occupancy sensors and scheduled 
controls that turn off or dim lighting, respectively. These values are 
summed, as shown in equation 2, to determine the total amount of time 
lighting is dimmed or off.

[[Page 71604]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24NO10.365

Where:
toff = time period which the lights are off due to the use of 
lighting occupancy sensors or scheduled controls (hours);
tdim = time period which the lights are dim due to the use of 
lighting occupancy sensors or scheduled controls (hours);
toff,controls = time case lighting is off due to the use of lighting 
controls (hours);
tdim,controls = time case lighting is dimmed due to the use of 
lighting controls (hours);
toff,sensors = time case lighting is off due to the use of lighting 
occupancy sensors (hours); and
tdim,sensors = time case lighting is dimmed due to the use of 
lighting occupancy sensors (hours).

    As the test procedure is for 24-hour time period, the sum of 
tsc, Toff, and tdim should equal 24 hours. DOE also proposes 
that the total time period during which the lights are off or dimmed 
shall not exceed 10.8 hours based on the maximum estimated energy 
savings from lighting occupancy sensors and controls. This limit is 
established to prevent double counting of energy savings in equipment 
where both lighting occupancy sensors and schedule based controls are 
installed.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24NO10.366

Where:

toff = time period which the lights are off due to the use of 
lighting occupancy sensors or scheduled controls (hours);
tdim = time period which the lights are dimmed due to the use of 
lighting occupancy sensors or scheduled controls (hours);
tsc= time period when lighting is fully on with lighting occupancy 
sensors and controls enabled (hours);
tl = time period when lighting would be on without lighting 
occupancy sensors or controls (24 hours);
with the sum of all toff and tdim from both lighting occupancy 
sensors and controls not to exceed 10.8 hours.

    In equation 2, the time the case lighting is dimmed or off due to 
scheduled lighting controls (toff,controls or tdim,controls, as 
applicable) will be 8 hours for those cases with lighting controls 
installed. This will depend on whether the controls dim or turn off 
lights. A time off period of 8 hours was chosen for scheduled controls 
to approximate the typical usage of lighting control products based on 
comments received during previous DOE rulemakings for this equipment. 
Specifically, during the previous rulemaking for commercial 
refrigeration equipment, California Utilities commented that 8 hours 
reflected the California predicted ``low load'' period. (Docket number 
EERE-2006-BT-STD-0126, California Joint Comment, No. 41, at p. 12)
    The time the case lighting is off or dimmed due to lighting 
occupancy sensors (toff,sensors or tdim,sensors, as applicable) will be 
2.8 or 10.8 hours for cases with lighting occupancy sensors installed, 
depending on whether scheduled controls are also installed. For 
equipment with only lighting occupancy sensors installed toff,sensors 
or tdim,sensors, as applicable, will be 10.8 hours. For equipment with 
both lighting occupancy sensors and lighting controls installed, the 
lighting controls will be assumed to override the occupancy sensor 
during the time the lighting control is used to reduce case lighting. 
Thus, the time the case lighting is off or dimmed due to lighting 
occupancy sensors (toff,sensors or tdim,sensors, as applicable) will be 
2.8 hours for equipment with lighting occupancy sensors and lighting 
controls installed. The time off period for lighting occupancy sensors 
was derived based on the previously cited demonstration project 
conducted through the DOE GATEWAY program.
    Equations 1, 2, and 3 can be used to calculate the energy use of 
CRE whether the equipment utilizes lighting occupancy sensors or 
control, and whether the light settings are set at fully on, fully off, 
or dimmed. For example, consider a situation in which lighting that is 
dimmed throughout the day by occupancy sensors and is turned off 
completely by scheduled controls during closing hours. In this example, 
tdim for the dimmed occupancy sensor would be 2.8 hours, and toff for 
the scheduled lighting control, which turns off the lights, would be 8 
hours. The sum of toff and tdim would be equal to the maximum 10.8 
hours. In this example, both tdim,controls and toff,sensors would equal 
zero.
    In addition to conserving energy directly through decreased 
lighting electrical load, occupancy sensors also decrease the heat load 
from lights that are located inside the refrigerated space on the 
refrigeration equipment. Therefore, a second calculation is necessary 
to account for these energy impacts. This second calculation quantifies 
the reduced compressor energy use, which is then used to calculate 
total energy use, as described below.
    For remote condensing equipment, the calculation of Alternate 
Component Indirect Effect in section 5.4 of AHRI Standard 1200-2010 can 
be used to measure the energy impacts on the compressor. Thus, for 
remote condensing equipment, equation 4, from AHRI Standard 1200 
equations 5.4 and 5.4.2, can be applied to calculate the decreased 
compressor power due to use of lighting occupancy sensors and controls.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24NO10.367

Where:

CECA= Alternate Compressor Energy Consumption (kilowatt-hours);
LECsc = lighting energy consumption of internal case lights with 
lighting occupancy sensors and controls deployed (kilowatt-hours);
Pli = rated power of lights when they are fully on (watts);
tl = time lighting would be on without lighting occupancy sensors or 
controls (24 hours); and
EER = energy efficiency ratio from Table 1 in AHRI Standard 1200-
2010 for remote condensing equipment and the values shown in Table 
III.1 of this document for self-contained equipment (British thermal 
units/watt).


   Table III.1. EER for Self-Contained Commercial Refrigerated Display
                   Merchandisers and Storage Cabinets
------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Operating temperature class                   EER Btu/W
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Medium..................................................           11.26
Low.....................................................            7.14

[[Page 71605]]

 
Ice Cream...............................................            4.80
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note:
\1\ EER values for operating temperature classes are calculated based on
  the average EER value of all equipment in that class which was
  analyzed as part of the previous (2009) rulemaking. This does not
  include equipment for which standards were set by Congress in EPACT
  2005 (VCT, VCS, HCT, HCS, and SOC at M and L temperatures) or classes
  for which standards were set using extension multipliers in the 2009
  rulemaking (VOP.SC.L, SVO.SC.L, VOP.SC.I, SVO.SC.I, HZO.SC.I,
  VOP.SC.I, SVO.SC.I, HZO.SC.I, HCS.SC.I, SOC.SC.I).
\2\ These values only represent compressor EER and do not include
  condenser fan energy use.

    The CECA includes a multiplication factor of 0.75 to account for 
the fact that not all of the heat produced from the lights will impact 
the compressor load. The factor of 0.75 was suggested by manufacturers 
during discussions with the AHRI Standard 1200 engineering committee.
    For remote condensing commercial refrigerators, freezers, and 
refrigerator-freezers with lighting occupancy sensors, controls, or 
both installed, the revised compressor energy consumption (CECR) shall 
be the CECA added to the compressor energy consumption (CEC) measured 
in AHRI Standard 1200-2010, as shown in equation 5.
[G