Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Test Procedures for Residential Central Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps, 18105-18127 [2011-7437]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 63 (Friday, April 1, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 18105-18127]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-7437]



[[Page 18105]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

10 CFR Part 430

[Docket No. EERE-2009-BT-TP-0004]
RIN 1904-AB94


Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Test 
Procedures for Residential Central Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps

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

ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE or the Department) proposes 
amendments to those it proposed to the DOE test procedures for 
residential central air conditioners and heat pumps released in a June 
2010 notice of proposed rulemaking (June 2010 NOPR). The proposed 
amendments in this supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNOPR) 
would change the off-mode laboratory test steps and calculation 
algorithm to determine off-mode power consumption for residential 
central air conditioners and heat pumps, as well as change the 
requirements for selection and metering of the low-voltage transformer 
used when testing coil-only residential central air conditioners and 
heat pumps. Additionally, the amendments proposed today provide a 
method of calculation to determine the energy efficiency ratio (EER) 
during cooling mode steady-state tests for use as a regional metric. 
Finally, today's notice proposes amendments that would combine the two 
seasonal off-mode ratings of P1 and P2 for residential central air 
conditioners and heat pumps, as set forth in the June 2010 NOPR, to 
yield a single overall rating, PWOFF.

DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, and other information regarding 
this supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNOPR) no later than 
May 2, 2011. See section 0, ``Public Participation,'' of this SNOPR for 
details.

ADDRESSES: Interested parties may submit comments, identified by docket 
number EERE-2009-BT-TP-0004 or Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) 1904-
AB94, by any of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow 
the instructions for submitting comments.
    2. E-mail: RCAC-HP-2009-TP-0004@ee.doe.gov. Include the docket 
number EERE-2009-BT-TP-0004 and/or RIN 1904-AB94 in the subject line of 
the message.
    3. Postal Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy, 
Building Technologies Program, Mailstop EE-2J, 1000 Independence 
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. If possible, please submit all 
items on a compact disc (CD), in which case it is not necessary to 
include printed copies. Otherwise, please submit one signed paper 
original.
    4. Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of 
Energy, Building Technologies Program, 950 L'Enfant Plaza, SW., Suite 
600, Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: (202) 586-2945. If possible, 
please submit all items on a CD, in which case it is not necessary to 
include printed copies. Otherwise, please submit one signed paper 
original.
    Instructions: No telefacsimilies (faxes) will be accepted. 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 0, ``Public 
Participation,'' of this document.
    Docket: The docket is available for review at www.regulations.gov, 
including Federal Register notices, framework documents, public meeting 
attendee lists and transcripts, comments, and other supporting 
documents/materials. All documents in the docket are listed in the 
https://www.regulations.gov index. However, not all documents listed in 
the index may be publicly available, such as information that is exempt 
from public disclosure.
    A link to the docket Web page can be found at: https://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/residential/cac_heatpumps_new_rulemaking.html. This Web page will contain a link to 
the docket for this notice on the Web site https://www.regulations.gov. 
The https://www.regulations.gov Web page will contain simple 
instructions on how to access all documents, including public comments, 
in the docket. See section 0, ``Public Participation,'' for information 
on how to submit comments through regulations.gov.
    For further information on how to submit or review public comments 
or view hard copies of the docket in the Resource Room, contact Ms. 
Brenda Edwards at (202) 586-2945 or e-mail: Brenda.Edwards@ee.doe.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Wes Anderson, 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) 586-7335. E-mail: 
Wes.Anderson@ee.doe.gov.
    Ms. Jennifer Tiedeman, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the 
General Counsel, GC-71, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 
20585. Telephone: (202) 287-6111. E-mail: Jennifer.Tiedeman@hq.doe.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Authority and Background
    A. Authority
    B. Background
II. Summary of the Proposal
III. Discussion
    A. Test Methods and Calculations for Off-Mode Power and Energy 
Consumption of Residential Central Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps
    B. Selecting the Low-Voltage Transformer Used When Testing Coil-
Only Central Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps and Required Metering 
of Low-Voltage Components During Off-Mode Test(s)
    C. Withdrawal of the Proposal To Add the New Regional 
Performance Metric SEER Hot-Dry
    D. Calculation of the Energy Efficiency Ratio for Cooling Mode 
Steady-State Tests
    E. Off-Mode Performance Ratings
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
    A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
    B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
    C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
    D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
    E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
    F. Review Under Executive Order 12988
    G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
    H. Review Under the Treasury and General Government 
Appropriations Act, 1999
    I. Review Under Executive Order 12630
    J. Review Under the Treasury and General Government 
Appropriations Act, 2001
    K. Review Under Executive Order 13211
    L. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration 
Act of 1974
V. Public Participation
    A. Submission of Comments
    B. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment
VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

I. Authority and Background

A. Authority

    Title III, Part B of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 
(EPCA or the Act), Public Law 94-163 (42 U.S.C. 6291-6309, as 
codified), established the Energy Conservation Program for Consumer 
Products Other Than Automobiles, a program covering most major 
household appliances, including the residential central air 
conditioners and heat pumps with rated cooling capacities less than 
65,000 British thermal units per hour (Btu/h) that are

[[Page 18106]]

the focus of this notice.\1\ (42 U.S.C. 6291(1)-(2), (21) and 
6292(a)(3))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code, 
Part B was re-designated Part A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the Act, this program consists essentially of three parts: 
(1) Testing; (2) labeling; and (3) establishing Federal energy 
conservation standards. The testing requirements consist of test 
procedures that manufacturers of covered products must use as the basis 
for certifying to DOE that their products comply with applicable energy 
conservation standards adopted pursuant to EPCA and for representing 
the efficiency of those products. (42 U.S.C. 6293(c); 42 U.S.C. 
6295(s)) Similarly, DOE must use these test procedures in any 
enforcement action to determine whether covered products comply with 
these energy conservation standards. (42 U.S.C. 6295(s)) Under 42 
U.S.C. 6293, EPCA sets forth criteria and procedures for DOE's adoption 
and amendment of such test procedures. Specifically, EPCA provides that 
``[a]ny test procedures prescribed or amended under this section shall 
be reasonably designed to produce test results which measure energy 
efficiency, energy use * * * or estimated annual operating cost of a 
covered product during a representative average use cycle or period of 
use, as determined by the Secretary [of Energy], and shall not be 
unduly burdensome to conduct.'' (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) In addition, if 
DOE determines that a test procedure amendment is warranted, it must 
publish proposed test procedures and offer the public an opportunity to 
present oral and written comments on them. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(2)) 
Finally, in any rulemaking to amend 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)) 
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)) The 
amendments proposed in today's SNOPR will not alter the measured 
efficiency, as represented in the regulating metrics of seasonal energy 
efficiency ratio (SEER) and heating seasonal performance factor (HSPF) 
of residential central air conditioners and heat pumps. Thus, today's 
proposed test procedure changes can be adopted without amending the 
existing standards. (42 U.S.C. 6293(e)(2))
    On December 19, 2007, the President signed the Energy Independence 
and Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007), Public Law 110-140, which 
contains numerous amendments to EPCA. Section 310 of EISA 2007 
established that the Department's test procedures for all covered 
products must account for standby mode and off-mode energy consumption. 
(42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A)) In addition, section 306(a) of EISA 2007 
amended EPCA section 325(o)(6) to consider one or two regional 
standards for residential central air conditioners and heat pumps 
(among other products) in addition to a base national standard. (42 
U.S.C. 6295(o)(6)(B)) Today's SNOPR includes proposals relevant to 
these statutory provisions.
    DOE's existing test procedures for residential central air 
conditioners and heat pumps adopted pursuant to these provisions appear 
under Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 430, 
subpart B, appendix M (``Uniform Test Method for Measuring the Energy 
Consumption of Central Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps''). These 
procedures establish the currently permitted means for determining 
annual energy efficiency and annual energy consumption of these 
products.

B. Background

    DOE's initial proposals for calculating a regional performance 
metric, estimating off-mode energy consumption, and selecting the low-
voltage transformer in the test procedure for residential central air 
conditioners and heat pumps were first shared with interested parties 
in a notice of proposed rulemaking published in the Federal Register on 
June 2, 2010 (June 2010 NOPR) and at a public meeting at DOE 
headquarters in Washington, DC on June 11, 2010. 75 FR 31224. Comments 
received in response to the June 2010 NOPR, as well as a transcript of 
the public meeting are available at https://www.regulations.gov. DOE 
received comments from twelve interested parties on or before the 
closing date of the June 2010 NOPR public review period, August 16, 
2010. These parties raised significant issues and suggested changes to 
the test procedure proposals in the 2010 June NOPR, described below. 
Based on these comments and laboratory testing conducted by DOE, DOE's 
position on these topics has evolved. Today's SNOPR shares DOE's 
current position on the test procedure for residential central air 
conditioners and heat pumps, and provides interested parties with a 
second opportunity to comment.

II. Summary of the Proposal

    Today's SNOPR revisits three issues proposed in the June 2010 NOPR: 
(1) Test methods and calculations for off-mode power and energy 
consumption; (2) the selection and metering of the low-voltage 
transformer used when testing coil-only units; and (3) the use of a 
regional SEER Hot-Dry metric.\2\ 75 FR 31238-42. Today's SNOPR also 
proposes two additional items not covered in the June 2010 NOPR: (1) 
Calculation of the EER for use as a regional metric in the proposed 
hot-dry region and (2) combination of seasonal off-mode energy 
descriptors, P1 and P2, into a single off-mode descriptor, PWOFF.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The region specified as hot and dry for which this metric 
was proposed NOPR consists of Arizona, California, New Mexico, and 
Nevada. These States and the basis for their selection are described 
in the technical support document (TSD) prepared as part of the 
development of the residential central air conditioner and heat pump 
standards rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regarding the first issue, test methods and calculations for off-
mode power and energy consumption, DOE now proposes to revise the off-
mode laboratory tests and calculation algorithms set forth in the June 
2010 NOPR to be more specific to the hardware and controls of the 
tested residential central air conditioner or heat pump. For units with 
a crankcase heater, DOE now proposes that the specific test and 
calculation combination will depend on whether (1) The heater is 
applied to a central air conditioner or heat pump; (2) the heater is 
fixed output or self-regulating; (3) the heater is thermostatically 
controlled or on continuously when the compressor is off; and (4) the 
thermostatic control is based on a local measurement that senses the 
temperature increase caused by the heater or based on a ``global'' 
measurement that is not influenced by the heater. For central air 
conditioning and heat pump units tested without an indoor blower 
installed, and for central air conditioners and heat pumps tested and 
rated with a particular furnace or modular blower, DOE proposes steps 
to separate out the power that will be reflected in the off-mode 
ratings of the furnace or modular blower, thus avoiding miscalculation 
of the off-mode energy consumption. Furthermore, DOE proposes to 
introduce the seasonal descriptor PWOFF to describe the overall off-
mode rating for residential central air conditioners and heat pumps.
    Regarding the requirements proposed in the June 2010 NOPR for 
selecting and metering the lab-added, low voltage transformer used when 
testing coil-only residential central air conditioners and heat pumps, 
75 FR 31238, DOE now

[[Page 18107]]

proposes an additional requirement that the lab-added, low voltage 
transformer be a toroidal design. Further, today's proposal calls for 
the manufacturer to provide specifications for selecting the lab-added 
transformer. If the manufacturer fails to provide specifications for 
the low-voltage transformer, a set of default specifications are 
provided within the proposed test procedure. DOE also proposes today 
that the requirement to measure the power input to the lab-added 
transformer, and the low-voltage components that are connected to it, 
should apply only during off-mode tests as opposed to during all tests, 
as proposed in the June 2010 NOPR. 75 FR 31238. For all other tests on 
coil-only units tested using a lab-added transformer, metering the 
power consumed by the low voltage components would not be required 
under today's proposal.
    Today's SNOPR also proposes an addition to the test procedure to 
calculate an EER metric for steady-state cooling mode testing. In this 
regard, the SNOPR proposes to add testing and calculation steps for 
estimating residential central air conditioners and heat pumps' cooling 
seasonal performance when applied in the proposed hot-dry region of 
Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Nevada. 75 FR 31239-41. DOE 
proposes to eliminate the descriptor proposed in the June 2010 NOPR for 
this regional rating, SEER Hot-Dry.
    DOE proposes to make the off-mode test procedure additions in 
today's SNOPR effective 180 days after publication of the test 
procedure final rule in the Federal Register. By doing so, DOE would 
not require manufacturers to publish the new rating metrics by this 
time, but rather, would require that manufacturers use the amended test 
procedure as of this date. In addition, DOE proposes to make the 
compliance date for these test procedure amendments correspond to the 
compliance date for the amended energy conservation standards for 
residential central air conditioners and heat pumps.

III. Discussion

    This section provides discussion on the revisions and additions to 
the test procedure that DOE proposes in this SNOPR, based in part on 
comments DOE received in response to the June 2010 NOPR. Section 0 
describes DOE's proposed changes to test methods and calculations for 
off-mode power and energy consumption. Section 0 discusses DOE's 
proposed changes to the requirements for selecting and metering the 
lab-added low voltage transformer used when testing coil-only 
residential central air conditioners and heat pumps without a specific 
furnace or modular blower. Section 0 discusses DOE's proposal to 
abandon the regional SEER Hot-Dry metric that was proposed in the June 
2010 NOPR. Sections 0 and 0 describe proposed amendments to the test 
procedure that were not included in the June 2010 NOPR; specifically, 
calculation of EER during cooling mode steady-state testing and the 
combination of the two seasonal off-mode ratings for residential 
central air conditioners proposed in the June 2010 NOPR, P1 and P2, to 
yield a single overall rating, PWOFF.
    As part of today's rulemaking, DOE provides the specific proposed 
revisions to 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix M, ``Uniform Test 
Method for Measuring the Energy Consumption of Central Air Conditioners 
and Heat Pumps.''

A. Test Methods and Calculations for Off-Mode Power and Energy 
Consumption of Residential Central Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps

    In the June 2010 NOPR, DOE proposed test procedure amendments that 
quantified off-mode power consumption of residential central air 
conditioners and heat pumps, as required by 42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A). 
75 FR 31238-39. These proposals included testing and calculation 
methods for estimating the energy consumption of a residential central 
air conditioner during the heating season when the unit is typically 
turned off at the thermostat, but when its controls and protective 
devices remain energized. Additional amendments proposed in today's 
SNOPR consider those times when the products are idle during the 
shoulder season. The shoulder season is the period of time during the 
year when a residential central air conditioner or heat pump is 
providing neither heating nor cooling. The duration of the shoulder 
season for each generalized climatic region equals the difference 
between a full 8,760-hour year and the number of hours assigned to the 
cooling and heating seasons of each region as identified in Table 19 of 
appendix M to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430 (shown as Table 0.1 below).

    Table 0.1--Representative Cooling and Heating Load Hours for Each
                       Generalized Climatic Region
------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Region                      * CLHR            ** HLHR
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I.................................               2400                750
II................................               1800               1250
III...............................               1200               1750
IV................................                800               2250
V.................................                400               2750
VI................................                200               2750
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* CLHR--Cooling Load Hours (representative).
** HLHR- Heating Load Hours (representative).

    DOE proposed in the June 2010 NOPR to modify the EISA 2007 
definition of the term ``off-mode,'' \3\ pursuant to the authority 
granted under 42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(1)(B), to include the operation of a 
residential central air conditioner or heat pump during the shoulder 
season and, for central air conditioners only, during the heating 
season. 75 FR 31231. DOE proposed new laboratory tests and calculation 
algorithms for estimating the average power consumption of residential 
central air conditioners and heat pumps operating during off-mode. 75 
FR 31238-39. The June 2010 NOPR also proposed that the average off-mode 
power consumption for central air conditioners and heat pumps during 
the shoulder season be represented by the parameter P1, and the average 
off-mode power consumption of a residential central air conditioner 
during the heating season be represented by the parameter P2. 75 FR 
31239.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Section 325(gg) of EPCA defines the term ``off mode'' as 
``the condition in which an energy-using product is connected to a 
main power source and is not providing any standby or active mode 
function.'' 42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(1)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) 
and the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) both 
agreed

[[Page 18108]]

with DOE that the off-mode rating should be separated from the existing 
regulating metrics of SEER and HSPF. (AHRI, Public Meeting Transcript, 
No. 5 at p. 161; ACEEE, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 5 at p. 161) \4\ 
Trane acknowledged that inclusion of off-mode energy consumption in the 
basic performance descriptors was not feasible. (Trane, No. 10.1 at p. 
3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ In this discussion, comments presented in the form ``AHRI, 
Public Meeting Transcript, No. 5 at p. 161'' indicate a comment that 
was recorded in the public meeting transcript for the June 2010 NOPR 
and is included in docket for this rulemaking. This particular 
notation refers to a comment (1) by AHRI, (2) in document number 5 
in the public meeting support materials, and (3) appearing on page 
161.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance (NEEA) concurred with 
DOE's proposed definition of ``off-mode.'' (NEEA, No. 7.1 at p. 7) 
However, the People's Republic of China (China) stated that DOE should 
define off-mode for central air conditioners and heat pumps to be 
consistent with International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) 
Standard 62301 (1st edition). (China, No. 18.1 at p. 5) China also 
commented that off-mode, as set forth in the June 2010 NOPR, is defined 
as a period of time, without including a description of the specific 
status of the product. China hoped DOE would clarify the specific 
status of the product in its definition of off-mode. (China, No. 18.1 
at p. 5) Finally, China expressed its hope that DOE would further 
clarify the proposed test procedure for off-mode energy consumption, 
and whether off-mode energy consumption includes the energy consumption 
of protective devices. (China, No. 18.1 at p. 5)
    The off-mode definition presented in the June 2010 NOPR is 
consistent with the objectives of EISA 2007. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A)) 
The energy consumed by any protective device (e.g., a crankcase heater) 
that operates while the central air conditioner sits idle during the 
off-mode is included in the off-mode rating. The proposed off-mode 
definition accounts for all modes and intervals of energy consumption 
that are not captured in the existing regulating performance metrics. 
By comparison, IEC 62301 applies to a wide range of household 
appliances and seeks to quantify the standby power of these appliances, 
which is loosely defined as the power consumed when the appliance is 
not performing its main function. This simple definition is not readily 
applicable to residential central air conditioners and heat pumps 
because SEER and HSPF include power consumption during all possible 
operating modes. A more product-specific definition was needed and was 
proposed in the June 2010 NOPR. 75 FR 31238-39. DOE considered the 
comments received pertaining to the definition of off-mode, but has 
tentatively chosen to leave the definition proposed in the June 2010 
NOPR unchanged.
    At the June 2010 NOPR public meeting, Trane stated that the cooling 
load hours proposed in the amended test procedure do not correlate with 
the compressor running hours and, as a result, DOE is in danger of 
incorrectly counting the time when the compressor is running as time 
attributable to off-mode. (Trane, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 5 at 
p. 143) The Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute 
(AHRI) stated that the cooling load hours have been used since the test 
procedure was established and that it may be time to review that. 
(AHRI, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 5 at p. 145) DOE agrees that it 
may be time to revisit the cooling load hour distributions, but lacks 
sufficient data to do so at this time. DOE requests input from 
interested parties that may be relevant to an update of the cooling 
load hour and heating load hour distributions.
    DOE has evaluated these comments and determined that the approach 
for establishing the duration of the off-mode seasons proposed in the 
June 2010 NOPR, 75 FR at 31239, 31269-70, and repeated in today's 
SNOPR, remains the most defensible option. The approach obtains the 
hours for each off-mode season directly from the cooling and heating 
load hour combinations that have been used since the test procedure for 
residential central air conditioners and heat pumps was established in 
1979. Until those load hour maps (Figures 2 and 3 from 10 CFR part 430, 
subpart B, appendix M), are updated based on newly available data, or 
an alternative approach is identified for defining the magnitude of the 
seasonal building loads (when expressed on an energy basis and, as a 
consequence, the hours in each season), DOE concludes that the proposed 
approach is appropriate.
    With regard to the off-mode tests proposed in the June 2010 NOPR, 
Trane stated that it is unrealistic to expect that a thermostat would 
be accurate to 65 degrees plus or minus 2 degrees. (Trane, Public 
Meeting Transcript, No. 5 at p. 146) ACEEE stated that thermostatic 
controller testing will vary because the time constant for changing the 
temperature of the test chamber will differ based on the response of 
the system. (ACEEE, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 5 at p. 156) Johnson 
Controls concurred with the ACEEE comment. (Johnson Controls, Public 
Meeting Transcript, No. 5 at p. 158)
    The proposed revisions to the off-mode test method in today's SNOPR 
address the above comments. For crankcase heaters whose ON/OFF 
operation is regulated by an ambient temperature thermostat, the 
manufacturer-provided ON and OFF temperatures--T00 and T100, 
respectively--would be deemed verified if the lab-measured values are 
within 5 [deg]F of the manufacturer-provided values. If the 
manufacturer's values for T00 or T100 are not verified, the lab-
measured value would be rounded to the nearest 5 [deg]F increment of 65 
[deg]F, instead of to the nearest 2.5 [deg]F increment, as proposed in 
the June 2010 NOPR. 75 FR 31261. For off-mode tests that will require 
longer intervals to complete because of the relatively slow thermal 
response of the compressor and crankcase heater system, options are 
provided in today's proposal for shortening the duration of the test. 
In the case of self-regulating crankcase heaters, rather than requiring 
the heater to achieve steady-state operation before measuring steady-
state performance, collected data with respect to the heater's power 
output as a function of elapsed time would be extrapolated to 
reasonably approximate steady-state performance. Similarly, 
manufacturers would be given the option of taking a slightly 
conservative estimate of the off-mode power consumption for crankcase 
heaters whose operation is regulated based on local control, rather 
than extending the off-mode test for several extra hours.
    At the public meeting, AHRI asked DOE if testing had been done to 
measure off-mode energy consumption. (AHRI, Public Meeting Transcript, 
No. 5 at p. 147) DOE responded that testing had not been done. AHRI 
stated DOE should take into account the fact that there had been no 
testing done on the products, and therefore DOE did not know if the 
proposed test procedure would work. (AHRI, Public Meeting Transcript, 
No. 5 at p. 162) AHRI stated that it does not support adding testing 
procedures and calculations for off-mode energy consumption since the 
algorithm proposed in the June 2010 NOPR had not been tested by DOE or 
any manufacturers. (AHRI, No. 6.1 at p. 5) \5\ NEEA stated that it 
found DOE's proposals to measure off-mode energy

[[Page 18109]]

consumption problematic because there are no data from actual testing. 
In order for these values to be most useful to consumers, NEEA asserted 
that they would have to be published for each climatic region. (NEEA, 
No. 7.1 at p. 7) NEEA requested that DOE provide actual test data from 
systems with a crankcase heater so NEEA could better understand the 
interaction between test procedure requirements and the technologies 
and control strategies used in the field. (NEEA, No. 7.1 at p. 7) 
Lennox agreed with AHRI's recommendations that DOE provide more time 
for the consideration of its proposed testing procedures and 
calculations for off-mode energy consumption. (Lennox, No. 11.1 at p. 
2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ In this discussion, comments presented in the form ``AHRI, 
No. 6.1 at p. 5'' indicate a written comment that was submitted to 
DOE and is included in docket for this rulemaking. This particular 
notation refers to a comment (1) by AHRI, (2) in document number 6.1 
in the public meeting support materials, and (3) appearing on page 
5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    After the close of the comment period following the June 2010 NOPR, 
DOE conducted laboratory testing on a complete heat pump system and a 
stand-alone compressor that were equipped with different crankcase 
heaters, regulated using different control strategies. As a result, DOE 
has revised its off-mode test methods. To provide a means for 
interested parties to consider these proposed methods, DOE has 
published this SNOPR. Interested parties are asked to consider and 
comment on these proposed off-mode test methods so that any changes 
that are warranted can be implemented prior to publication of the test 
procedure final rule.
    The primary purpose of the off-mode test method is to develop a way 
to measure energy used by the crankcase heater, which represents the 
greatest consumption of energy during the off-mode period. For units 
with a crankcase heater, DOE proposes an off-mode test method designed 
to be more systematic and cover more specific cases. The revised off-
mode test method proposed today differentiates between residential 
central air conditioners and heat pumps, between fixed-output and self-
regulating crankcase heaters, and between thermostatically controlled 
and continuously on designs. Designs that regulate the ON/OFF status of 
the heater based on an outdoor ambient thermostat (global control) 
would be covered, as well as designs that regulate the heater based on 
measuring or inferring the temperature of the compressor's sump (local 
control). The proposed test methods are applicable to belly-band and 
insertion type heaters and to designs that use an insulating cover for 
the compressor and crankcase heater.
    Today's proposed off-mode test method would cover coil-only units, 
blower coil units, and coil-only units tested and rated with a furnace 
fan or modular blower. The off-mode ratings for coil-only units would 
include the power consumption of the low-voltage components other than 
the lab-added, low-voltage transformer. Similarly, the off-mode ratings 
for coil-only units tested and rated with a particular furnace or 
modular blower would exclude the power consumption of any components 
housed within the furnace or modular blower. The power consumption of 
the lab-added transformer and the power consumption of the idle furnace 
or modular blower would be measured separately and then subtracted from 
the total off-mode power measured for the tested system. In these 
cases, the power consumption of the transformer and off-mode power used 
by a particular furnace or modular blower would be reflected in the 
electrical off-mode rating of the furnace or modular blower. The off-
mode rating for conventional blower coil units would reflect all 
sources of off-mode power consumption.
    In the vast majority of cases, the time required to complete the 
revised off-mode tests varies from less than 1 hour to up to 12 hours. 
Two of the more time-intensive off-mode tests proposed in this SNOPR 
pertain to approximating the ``power consumption versus outdoor 
temperature'' relationship of a self-regulating crankcase heater, and 
to measuring the average power consumption of crankcase heaters that 
use local thermostatic control. The electrical resistance of self-
regulating heaters varies with temperature, with the resistance 
decreasing as temperature increases. Because of the relatively large 
thermal mass of the compressor, several hours are required to approach 
a power level that is representative of the final steady-state power 
output from a self-regulating heater when heating a compressor that is 
otherwise obtaining equilibrium with the ambient air. To balance test 
burden with reasonable repeatability, DOE proposes to require the 
regular measurement of the power over an interval during which the 
outdoor ambient temperature varies 2 [deg]F or less, and the power data 
displays a monotonic trend as it approaches its steady-state value. 
Under today's proposal, manufacturers would be required to specify 
whether the test terminates after collecting 3 hours of data, or 
whether the test continues over a longer interval. ``Power versus 
elapsed time'' data would be curve-fitted using one of two equations--
one equation if the power data decreases with elapsed time and another 
equation if the power data increases with elapsed time. Once the 
constants of the equations are determined using a curve-fitting 
program, the resulting equation would be used to estimate the power 
consumption of the heater had the asymptotic response been allowed to 
continue until it reached a steady-state. The test procedure would use 
an elapsed time of 24 hours to approximate the steady-state limit 
(rather than requiring the evaluation of the equation as time 
approaches infinity). DOE proposes limits on how much the extrapolated 
value could vary from the average power measured prior to terminating 
the test. This process would then be repeated at a second outdoor 
temperature.
    Under the proposal, crankcase heaters that use local thermostatic 
control would be monitored until successive heater ON + heater OFF 
cycles yield average power consumption values that differ by 1 watt or 
less. As an alternative, the manufacturer could choose to discontinue 
the test as soon as a minimum of three consecutive heater ON + heater 
OFF cycles are recorded, where the average power from each complete 
cycle is less than the average power from the prior cycle. For both 
test termination options, two additional requirements would need to be 
met: (1) The elapsed time between the start of the first crankcase 
heater ON cycle and the test termination must be a minimum of 3 hours 
and (2) the outdoor temperature during the two or more complete cycles 
that meet the termination criteria must vary by 2 [deg]F or less. If 
the manufacturer does not choose from the off-mode test termination 
criteria, testing requirements based on the average power differing by 
less than 1 watt for successive cycles would be used. For residential 
central air conditioners (but not heat pumps) with crankcase heaters 
that use local thermostatic control, the above off-mode test method 
would be repeated at a second outdoor temperature.

B. Selecting the Low-Voltage Transformer Used When Testing Coil-Only 
Central Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps and Required Metering of Low-
Voltage Components During Off-Mode Test(s)

    In today's SNOPR, DOE proposes that the test laboratory select a 
toroidal transformer when testing coil-only units. Toroidal 
transformers have fewer losses, less efficiency variation with loading, 
and lower power requirements at zero loading than laminated core 
transformers. DOE proposes that some of the characteristics of the 
toroidal transformer may be specified by the manufacturer (e.g., volt-
amp rating, voltage input, voltage output);

[[Page 18110]]

otherwise, a set of default criteria would be provided in the amended 
test procedure. DOE also proposes to change the load rating 
specification from an absolute volt-amp rating to a range of percent 
loading to better cover all possible units, ensure the transformer is 
adequately sized to meet the load, and provide more flexibility to the 
testing laboratory.
    In the June 2010 NOPR, DOE proposed requiring the measurement of 
the power consumption of the low-voltage components that are part of 
all tested units during every DOE-specified laboratory test. 75 FR 
31238. The June 2010 NOPR targeted coil-only residential central air 
conditioners and heat pumps tested using a low-voltage transformer 
selected by the testing laboratory. Usually, the power consumption of 
low-voltage components powered by this lab-added transformer is not 
metered. The June 2010 NOPR also listed proposed specifications for the 
lab-added transformer. Id. Under this proposal, the instrument used to 
measure the electrical power supplied to the transformer would be 
required to do so within the measurement accuracy prescribed for the 
other electrical components. Id. Because the proposal would alter the 
SEER and HSPF ratings of the products, DOE planned to require the 
measurement of low-voltage components on the compliance date for the 
amended energy conservation standards for residential central air 
conditioners and heat pumps.
    At the June 2010 NOPR public meeting, ACEEE supported DOE's premise 
while questioning whether the word ``transformer'' in the test 
procedure should be replaced with ``power supply.'' (ACEEE, Public 
Meeting Transcript, No. 5 at p. 183) Trane stated that the usage of 
``transformer'' is technically correct. (Trane, Public Meeting 
Transcript, No. 5 at p. 185). DOE concurs that the use of the word 
``transformer'' to describe the low-voltage power source is correct. In 
its written comments, NEEA supported the inclusion of transformer 
energy use in the test procedure, but noted that there may be a wide 
variety of both transformer and power supply efficiencies, and 
therefore asked DOE to provide some documentation for its assumptions. 
(NEEA, No. 13.1 at p. 8) AHRI argued against specifying requirements 
for the low-voltage transformer used when testing coil-only residential 
central air conditioners and heat pumps and requiring the metering of 
all sources of energy consumption during all tests. AHRI noted that the 
SEER and HSPF values for coil-only units would decrease, causing the 
minimum Federal standards to need to be modified for these products. 
AHRI also noted that ``accounting for the transformer power in SEER and 
HSPF [would] be double-dipping when the furnace standards are also 
revised to include the transformer power.'' (AHRI, No. 6.1 at p. 5)
    Based on this discussion, DOE proposes to exclude changes that 
would alter the SEER and HSPF ratings of currently rated residential 
central air conditioners and heat pumps because such changes would 
require adjustments to the standard levels currently being considered. 
(42 U.S.C. 6293(e)(2)) As such, the proposed test procedure does not 
require metering the power consumption of the low-voltage components of 
a coil-only system when conducting the lab tests used in calculating 
SEER and HSPF. Instead, the power consumption of these low-voltage 
components, however, would be measured during the proposed off-mode 
testing.

C. Withdrawal of the Proposal To Add the New Regional Performance 
Metric SEER Hot-Dry

    DOE has the option of implementing regional standards for 
residential central air conditioners and heat pumps, if justified. (42 
U.S.C. 6295(o)(6)(D)(i)) In the June 2010 NOPR, DOE proposed additional 
testing and calculations to evaluate a new cooling season efficiency 
rating that was specific to the proposed region of the country with a 
hot-dry climate. The proposed regional regulating metric was identified 
as SEER Hot-Dry and applied to the States of California, Nevada, New 
Mexico, and Arizona. 75 FR 31239-42.
    Comments made at the June 2010 NOPR public meeting and written 
comments that followed overwhelmingly supported the use of a steady-
state EER descriptor over the proposed SEER Hot-Dry descriptor for the 
hot-dry region. EnergySolutions withdrew its support of SEER Hot-Dry in 
favor of EER, noting that the SEER Hot-Dry metric does not adequately 
represent conditions at full load and therefore does not give the 
manufacturer the opportunity to differentiate products that perform 
very well at high temperatures. (EnergySolutions, Public Meeting 
Transcript, No. 5 at p. 170) At the public meeting, ACEEE took the same 
position. (ACEEE, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 5 at p. 175; ACEEE, 
Public Meeting Transcript, No. 5 at p. 195) Two manufacturers stated 
their opposition to a SEER Hot-Dry metric due to the increased testing 
burden that it would create. (Mitsubishi, Public Meeting Transcript, 
No. 5 at p. 176; Trane, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 5 at p. 203) 
ACEEE stated that the building loads and bin temperature distributions 
for the proposed SEER Hot-Dry metric were not representative of typical 
weather and operating conditions in a hot-dry location. (ACEEE, No. 8.1 
at p. 2) Several interested parties supported the consensus agreement 
\6\ in general and the use of EER as the basis for establishing a 
regional standard in the hot-dry region in particular, a position 
outlined in the consensus agreement. (Mitsubishi, Public Meeting 
Transcript, No. 5 at p. 176; AHRI, No. 6.1 at p. 5; Lennox, No. 11.1 at 
p. 2; NEEA, No. 7.1 at p. 7; ACEEE, No. 8.1 at p. 2; EnergySolutions, 
No 9.1 at p. 1; NRDC, No. 13.1 at pp. 1-2). In addressing a statement 
DOE included in the June 2010 NOPR, the Natural Resources Defense 
Council (NRDC) commented that ``DOE's statement on its statutory 
authority to use multiple performance metrics is incorrect. DOE should 
revise the proposed test procedures as outlined in the consensus 
agreement because DOE has authority under the EPCA to adopt the 
Southwest regional SEER and EER consensus standards agreed upon by 
manufacturers and efficiency advocates and test procedures for such 
standards.'' (NRDC, No. 13.1 at p. 2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ On January 15, 2010, several interested parties submitted a 
joint comment to DOE recommending adoption of minimum energy 
conservation standards for residential central air conditioners, 
heat pumps, and furnaces, as well as associated compliance dates for 
such standards, which represents a negotiated agreement among a 
variety of interested stakeholders including manufacturers and 
environmental and efficiency advocates. The original agreement 
(referred to as the ``consensus agreement'') was completed on 
October 13, 2009, and had 15 signatories.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The seasonal metric proposed in the June 2010 NOPR for the hot-dry 
region was not meaningful due to the inclusion of New Mexico and 
especially California (with its large coastal population). 75 FR 31240-
41. Although the region was composed of contiguous States as required 
by EISA 2007, 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(6)(C), the inclusion of these two 
States caused the population-weighted average weather conditions to be 
neither hot nor dry. DOE agrees that a seasonal performance descriptor 
such as SEER Hot-Dry does not adequately represent performance at full 
load conditions. As a result, DOE is today proposing a method to 
calculate the EER during Cooling Mode Steady State Tests. Assuming DOE 
was to adopt as final such EER test procedure; as a Final rule, DOE 
espects to withdraw its earlier proposal to include additional tests 
and

[[Page 18111]]

calculations in the test procedure to determine a SEER Hot-Dry rating.

D. Calculation of the Energy Efficiency Ratio for Cooling Mode Steady-
State Tests

    For central air conditioners, the consensus agreement recommends 
that DOE adopt dual metrics (i.e., SEER and EER) for the hot-dry 
region. Generally, DOE notes that EPCA's definition of ``efficiency 
descriptor'' at 42 U.S.C. 6291(22) specifies that the efficiency 
descriptor for both central air conditioners and heat pumps shall be 
SEER. However, DOE believes that the language at 42 U.S.C. 6295(p)(4) 
provides DOE some measure of discretion when considering recommended 
standards in a consensus agreement, if the Secretary determines that 
the recommended standards are in accordance with 42 U.S.C. 6295(o). 
Today, DOE proposes to include within the test procedure the steps 
needed to define the calculation of EER for the proposed hot-dry region 
from the results of cooling mode, steady-state testing.

E. Off-Mode Performance Ratings

    Because off-mode operation occurs during specific seasons, the most 
appropriate form of an off-mode rating is a seasonal descriptor. 
Moreover, off-mode represents times when a unit is consuming power 
while not providing space conditioning; therefore, the seasonal 
descriptor must be expressed in terms of average power or a 
representative energy consumption quantity (as efficiency is not an 
option). Given these two options, average power provides the greater 
utility because it is not as location-specific as energy consumption. 
Whereas the same off-mode average power consumption applies to any 
location within a DOE generalized climatic region, an off-mode energy 
consumption only applies to a unique location within that same climatic 
region. As such, a single average off-mode power rating can be used to 
calculate many off-mode energy values, while the opposite is not true. 
A representative off-mode energy rating would be specific to one 
particular combination of cooling season hours, heating season hours, 
and shoulder season hours. For these reasons, DOE proposes that the 
off-mode ratings be expressed as average power values.
    For residential central air conditioners, two off-mode average 
power values were proposed in the June 2010 NOPR, one for the shoulder 
season (parameter P1), and one for the heating season (parameter P2). 
75 FR 31238-39. P1 and P2 are both expressed in units of watts. Since 
heat pumps are only idle during the shoulder season, they only have a 
P1 value. For residential central air conditioners using compressor 
crankcase heaters with heating output that changes with the outdoor 
temperature, P2 will depend on the distribution of outdoor temperatures 
during the heating season. In such cases, the P2 value will be 
different for each of the six generalized climatic regions referenced 
in the current DOE test procedure. (Refer to Figures 2 and 3 in 10 CFR 
part 430, subpart B, appendix M).
    To allow straightforward comparisons among a variety of residential 
central air conditioners and heat pumps that may have different 
combinations of P1 and P2 values, these average power values can be 
weighted based on the length of the shoulder and heating seasons to 
yield an overall average power consumption value. Furthermore, in terms 
of the establishment of a minimum standard(s) for the off-mode, a 
single standard is preferable to setting separate standard levels for 
P1 and P2. The most representative weighting would be those seasonal 
hours associated with the national average cooling and heating load 
hours of 1,000 and 2,080 hours, respectively, with P2 based on 
generalized climatic Region IV. Region IV is proposed because the HSPF 
conservation standard and rating that appear on the Federal Trade 
Commission (FTC) EnergyGuide Label are based on this region. 75 FR 
31239. In sum, DOE proposes a national average off-mode power 
consumption rating, PWOFF, for residential central air conditioners and 
heat pumps. DOE proposes combining the off-mode power rating for the 
shoulder seasons, P1, with the off-mode power rating for the heating 
season, P2, by weighting these ratings with respect to the lengths of 
the national average seasons: 739 hours for the shoulder seasons and 
5,216 hours for the heating season.
    For residential central air conditioners, DOE proposes PWOFF = 
0.124 x P1 + 0.876 x P2.
    For residential heat pumps, DOE proposes PWOFF = PM 1.

IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review

A. Review Under Executive Order 12866

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has determined that test 
procedure rulemakings do not constitute ``significant regulatory 
actions'' under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory 
Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993). Accordingly, this 
proposed action was not subject to review under the Executive Order by 
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the OMB.

B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires 
preparation of an initial regulatory flexibility analysis for any rule 
proposed for public comment, unless the agency certifies that the rule, 
if promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. As required by Executive Order 
13272, ``Proper Consideration of Small Entities in Agency Rulemaking,'' 
67 FR 53461 (Aug. 16, 2002), DOE published procedures and policies on 
February 19, 2003, so that the potential impacts of its rules on small 
entities are properly considered during the rulemaking process. 68 FR 
7990. DOE has made its procedures and policies available on the Office 
of the General Counsel's website: https://www.gc.doe.gov.
    DOE reviewed today's proposed rule, which would amend the test 
procedure for residential central air conditioners and heat pumps, 
under the provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act and the 
procedures and policies published on February 19, 2003. DOE tentatively 
concludes and certifies that the proposed rule, if adopted, would not 
result in a significant impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. The factual basis for this certification is set forth below.
    For the purpose of the regulatory flexibility analysis for this 
rule, the DOE adopts the Small Business Administration (SBA) definition 
of a small entity within this industry as a manufacturing enterprise 
with 750 employees or fewer. DOE used the small business size standards 
published on January 31, 1996, as amended, by the SBA to determine 
whether any small entities would be required to comply with the rule. 
61 FR 3280, 3286, as amended at 67 FR 3041, 3045 (Jan. 23, 2002) and at 
69 FR 29192, 29203 (May 21, 2004); see also 65 FR 30836, 30850 (May 15, 
2000), as amended at 65 FR 53533, 53545 (Sept. 5, 2000). The size 
standards are codified at 13 CFR part 121. The standards are listed by 
North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code and industry 
description and are available at https://www.sba.gov/idc/groups/public/documents/sba_homepage/serv_sstd_tablepdf.pdf.
    Residential central air conditioner and heat pump equipment 
manufacturing is classified under NAICS 333415, ``Air-Conditioning and 
Warm Air Heating Equipment and Commercial and Industrial Refrigeration

[[Page 18112]]

Equipment Manufacturing.'' 70 FR 12395 (March 11, 2005). DOE reviewed 
AHRI's listing of residential central air conditioner and heat pump 
equipment manufacturer members and surveyed the industry to develop a 
list of domestic manufacturers. As a result of this review, DOE 
identified 22 manufacturers of residential central air conditioners and 
heat pumps, of which 15 would be considered small manufacturers with a 
total of approximately 3 percent of the market sales. DOE seeks comment 
on its estimate of the number of small entities that may be impacted by 
the proposed test procedure.
    Potential impacts of the proposed test procedure on all 
manufacturers, including small businesses, come from impacts associated 
with the cost of proposed additional testing. DOE estimates the 
incremental cost of the proposed additional tests described in 10 CFR 
part 430, subpart B, appendix M (proposed section 3.13) to be an 
increase of $1,000 to $1,500 per unit tested. This estimate is based on 
private testing services quoted on behalf of DOE in the last 2 years 
for residential central air conditioners and heat pumps. Typical costs 
for running the cooling tests appear to be approximately $5,000. DOE 
estimated that the additional activities required by the revised test 
procedure would introduce a 20 to 30 percent increase in testing time, 
resulting in the additional cost.
    Because the incremental cost of running the extra tests is the same 
for all manufacturers, DOE believes that all manufacturers would incur 
comparable costs for testing of individual basic models as a result of 
the proposed test procedure. DOE expects that small manufacturers will 
incur less testing expense compared with larger manufacturers as a 
result of the proposed testing requirements because they have fewer 
basic models and thus require proportionally less testing when compared 
with large manufacturers that have many basic models. DOE recognizes, 
however, that smaller manufacturers may have less capital available 
over which to spread the increased costs of testing.
    DOE compared the cost of the testing to the total value added by 
the manufacturers to determine whether the impact of the proposed test 
procedure amendments is significant. The value added represents the net 
economic value that a business creates when it takes manufacturing 
inputs (e.g., materials) and turns them into manufacturing outputs 
(e.g., manufactured goods). Specifically, as defined by the U.S. 
Census, the value added statistic is calculated as the total value of 
shipments (products manufactured plus receipts for services rendered) 
minus the cost of materials, supplies, containers, fuel, purchased 
electricity, and contract work expenses.
    DOE analyzed the impact on the smallest manufacturers of 
residential central air conditioners and heat pumps because these 
manufacturers would likely be the most vulnerable to cost increases. 
DOE calculated the additional testing expense as a percentage of the 
average value added statistic for the five individual firms in the 25 
to 49 employee size category in NAICS 333415 as reported by the U.S. 
Census (U.S. Bureau of the Census, American Factfinder, 2002 Economic 
Census, Manufacturing, Industry Series, Industry Statistics by 
Employment Size, https://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/EconSectorServlet?_lang=en&ds_name=EC0200A1&_SectorId=31&_ts=288639767147). The average annual value for manufacturers in this 
size range from the census data was $1.26 million in 2001$, per the 
2002 Economic Census, or approximately $1.52 million per year in 2009$ 
after adjusting for inflation using the implicit price deflator for 
gross domestic product (U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Economic 
Analysis, https://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/SelectTable.asp).
    DOE also examined the average value added statistic provided by 
census for all manufacturers with fewer than 500 employees in this 
NAICS classification as the most representative value from the 2002 
Economic Census data of the residential central air conditioner 
manufacturers with fewer than 750 employees that are considered small 
businesses by the SBA (15 manufacturers). The average annual value 
added statistic for all small manufacturers with fewer than 500 
employees was $7.88 million (2009$).
    Given this data, and assuming the high-end estimate of $1,500 for 
the additional testing costs, DOE concluded that the additional costs 
for testing of a single basic model product under the proposed 
requirements would be approximately 0.1 percent of annual value added 
for the 5 smallest firms, and approximately 0.02 percent of the average 
annual value added for all small residential central air conditioner 
manufacturers (15 firms). DOE estimates that testing of basic models 
may not have to be updated more than once every 5 years, and therefore 
the average incremental burden of testing one basic model may be one 
fifth of these values when the cost is spread over several years.
    DOE requires that only the highest sales volume split system 
combinations be lab tested. 10 CFR 430.24(m). The majority of air 
conditioners and heat pumps offered by a manufacturer are typically 
split systems that are not required to be lab tested but can be 
certified using an alternative rating method that does not require DOE 
testing of these units. DOE reviewed the available data for five of the 
smallest manufacturers to estimate the incremental testing cost burden 
for those small firms that might experience the greatest relative 
burden from the revised test procedure. These manufacturers had an 
average of 10 models requiring testing (AHRI Directory of Certified 
Product Performance, https://www.ahridirectory.org/ahridirectory/pages/home.aspx), while large manufacturers will have well over 100 such 
models. The additional testing cost for final certification for 10 
models was estimated at $15,000. Meanwhile, these certifications would 
be expected to last the product life, estimated to be at least 5 years 
based on the time frame established in EPCA for DOE review of 
residential central air conditioner efficiency standards. This test 
burden is therefore estimated to be approximately 0.2 percent of the 
estimated 5-year value added for the smallest five manufacturers. DOE 
believes that these costs are not significant given other, much more 
significant costs that the small manufacturers of residential central 
air conditioners and heat pumps incur in the course of doing business. 
DOE seeks comment on its estimate of the impact of the proposed test 
procedure amendments on small entities and its conclusion that this 
impact is not significant.
    Accordingly, as stated above, DOE tentatively concludes and 
certifies that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. Accordingly, DOE has 
not prepared an initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) for this 
rulemaking. DOE will provide its certification and supporting statement 
of factual basis to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the SBA for 
review under 5 U.S.C. 605(b).

C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    Manufacturers of residential central air conditioners and heat 
pumps must certify to DOE that their product complies with any 
applicable energy conservation standard. In certifying compliance, 
manufacturers must test their product according to the DOE test 
procedure for residential central air

[[Page 18113]]

conditioners and heat pumps, including any amendments adopted for that 
test procedure. DOE has proposed regulations for the certification and 
recordkeeping requirements for all covered consumer products and 
commercial equipment, including residential central air conditioners 
and heat pumps. 75 FR 56796 (Sept. 16, 2010). The collection-of-
information requirement for the certification and recordkeeping is 
subject to review and approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act 
of 1995 (PRA). This requirement has been submitted to OMB for approval. 
Public reporting burden for the certification is estimated to average 
20 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, 
searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data 
needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information.
    Public comment is sought regarding: whether this proposed 
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of 
the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall 
have practical utility; the accuracy of the burden estimate; ways to 
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be 
collected; and ways to minimize the burden of the collection of 
information, including through the use of automated collection 
techniques or other forms of information technology. Send comments on 
these or any other aspects of the collection of information to Wes 
Anderson (see ADDRESSES) and by e-mail to Christine_J._Kymn@omb.eop.gov.
    Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is 
required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty 
for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the 
requirements of the PRA, unless that collection of information displays 
a currently valid OMB Control Number.

D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969

    In this proposed rule, DOE proposes amendments to test procedures 
that may be used to implement future energy conservation standards for 
residential central air conditioners and heat pumps. DOE has determined 
that this rule falls into a class of actions that are categorically 
excluded from review under the National Environmental Policy Act of 
1969 (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). The rule is covered by Categorical 
Exclusion A5, for rulemakings that interpret or amend an existing rule 
without changing the environmental effect, as set forth in DOE's NEPA 
regulations in appendix A to subpart D, 10 CFR part 1021. This rule 
will not affect the quality or distribution of energy usage and, 
therefore, will not result in any environmental impacts. Accordingly, 
neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact 
statement is required.

E. Review Under Executive Order 13132

    Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism,'' 64 FR 43255 (Aug. 4, 1999), 
imposes certain requirements on agencies formulating and implementing 
policies or regulations that preempt State law or that have Federalism 
implications. The Executive Order requires agencies to examine the 
constitutional and statutory authority supporting any action that would 
limit the policymaking discretion of the States and to carefully assess 
the necessity for such actions. The Executive Order also requires 
agencies to have an accountable process to ensure meaningful and timely 
input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory 
policies that have Federalism im