Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Test Procedures for Residential Furnaces and Boilers, 41265-41274 [2013-16413]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 132 (Wednesday, July 10, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 41265-41274]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-16413]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

10 CFR Part 430

[Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-TP-0008]
RIN 1904-AC96


Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Test 
Procedures for Residential Furnaces and Boilers

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: On February 4, 2013, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) 
issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) to amend its test 
procedure for residential furnaces and boilers, which serves as the 
basis for today's action. This final rule amends that test procedure by 
adopting new equations to facilitate calculation of the annual fuel 
utilization efficiency (AFUE) for certain classes of products when 
omitting specified heat-up and cool-down tests, as allowed under the 
test procedure if applicable criteria are met. The relevant industry 
test procedure, which is incorporated by reference in the current DOE 
test procedure, lacks equations necessary for the calculation of the 
heating seasonal efficiency (which contributes to the ultimate 
calculation of AFUE) of two-stage and modulating condensing furnaces or 
boilers when the option to omit the heat-up and cool-down tests is 
employed. This final rule revises the DOE test procedure to rectify 
this omission by adopting additional equations for the calculation of 
the part-load efficiencies at the maximum input rate and reduced input 
rates for two-stage and modulating condensing furnaces and boilers when 
the manufacturer chooses to omit the heat-up and cool-down tests under 
the test procedure.

DATES: The effective date of this rule is August 9, 2013. The 
compliance date for use of the amended test procedure for purposes of 
compliance with energy conservation standards, as well as 
representations of energy efficiency or energy use, is January 6, 2014. 
Voluntary early compliance is permitted.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this rulemaking is available for review at 
www.regulations.gov, including Federal Register notices, public meeting 
attendee lists and transcripts, comments, and other supporting 
documents/materials. All documents in the docket are listed in the 
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://www.regulations.gov/#docketDetail;D=EERE-2013-BT-TP-0008. This Web page 
contains a link to the docket for this final rule on the 
www.regulations.gov site. The www.regulations.gov Web page contains 
simple instructions on how to access all documents, including public 
comments, in the docket.
    For further information on how to review the docket, contact Ms. 
Brenda Edwards at (202) 586-2945 or by email: 
Brenda.Edwards@ee.doe.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Ashley Armstrong, 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) 586-6590. Email: residential_furnaces_and_boilers@ee.doe.gov.
    Mr. Eric Stas, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General 
Counsel, GC-71, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC, 20585-
0121. Telephone: (202) 586-9507. Email: Eric.Stas@hq.doe.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents

I. Authority and Background
II. Summary of the Final Rule
III. Discussion
    A. Statement of the Issue and the NOPR's Proposed Corrective 
Action
    B. Discussion of Comments
    C. Final Corrective Action
    D. Effective and Compliance Dates
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 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
    M. Congressional Notification
V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

I. Authority and Background

    Title III, Part B\1\ 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) set forth a variety of provisions designed to improve 
energy efficiency and established the Energy Conservation Program for 
Consumer Products Other Than Automobiles.\2\ These include residential 
furnaces and boilers, the subject of today'srulemaking. (42 U.S.C. 
6292(a)(5))\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code, 
Part B was redesignated Part A.
    \2\ All references to EPCA in this document refer to the statute 
as amended through the American Energy Manufacturing Technical 
Corrections Act (AEMTCA), Public Law 112-210 (Dec. 18, 2012).
    \3\ Under 42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(5), the statute establishes 
``furnaces'' as covered products. Originally, boilers were 
considered a class of furnaces. However, amendments to EPCA in the 
Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007), Public Law 
110-140 (Dec. 19, 2007), distinguished between furnaces and boilers 
in 42 U.S.C. 6295(f) by adding the text ``and boilers'' to the title 
of that section and by prescribing standards for boiler products. 
Although EISA 2007 did not similarly update 42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(5), it 
is implicit that this coverage continues to include boilers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under EPCA, the energy conservation program consists essentially of 
four parts: (1) Testing; (2) labeling; (3) Federal energy conservation 
standards; and (4) certification and enforcement procedures. The 
testing requirements consist of test procedures that manufacturers of 
covered products must use as the basis for: (1) certifying to DOE that 
their products comply with the applicable energy conservation standards 
adopted pursuant to EPCA, and (2) making representations about the 
efficiency of those products. (42

[[Page 41266]]

U.S.C. 6293(c); 42 U.S.C. 6295(s)) Similarly, DOE must use these test 
procedures to determine whether the products comply with any relevant 
standards promulgated under EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6295(s))
    Under 42 U.S.C. 6293, EPCA sets forth the criteria and procedures 
DOE must follow when prescribing or amending test procedures for 
covered products. EPCA provides, in relevant part, that any test 
procedures prescribed or amended under this section must 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, and must 
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))
    DOE's current energy conservation standards for residential 
furnaces and boilers are expressed as minimum AFUE. AFUE is an 
annualized fuel efficiency metric that fully accounts for fuel 
consumption in active, standby, and off modes. The existing DOE test 
procedure for determining the AFUE of residential furnaces and boilers 
is located at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, Appendix N, Uniform Test 
Method for Measuring the Energy Consumption of Furnaces and Boilers. 
The current DOE test procedure for residential furnaces and boilers was 
originally established by a final rule published in the Federal 
Register on May 12, 1997, and it incorporates by reference the American 
National Standards Institute (ANSI)/American Society of Heating, 
Refrigerating, and Air-conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Standard 103-
1993, Method of Testing for Annual Fuel Utilization Efficiency of 
Residential Central Furnaces and Boilers (ASHRAE 103-1993). 62 FR 
26140, 26157 (incorporated by reference at 10 CFR 430.3(f)(9)). On 
October 14, 1997, DOE published an interim final rule in the Federal 
Register to revise a provision concerning the insulation of the flue 
collector box in order to ensure the updated test procedure would not 
affect the measured AFUE of existing furnaces and boilers. 62 FR 53508. 
This interim final rule was subsequently adopted without change in a 
final rule published in the Federal Register on February 24, 1998. 63 
FR 9390.
    On October 20, 2010, DOE amended its test procedure for furnaces 
and boilers to establish a method for measuring the electrical energy 
use in standby mode and off mode for gas and oil-fired furnaces and 
boilers pursuant to requirements established by EISA 2007. 75 FR 64621. 
These test procedure amendments were primarily based on and 
incorporated by reference provisions of the International 
Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) Standard 62301 (First Edition), 
Household electrical appliances--Measurement of standby power. On 
December 31, 2012, DOE published a final rule in the Federal Register 
that updated the incorporation by reference of the standby mode and off 
mode test procedure provisions to refer to the latest edition of IEC 
Standard 62301 (Second Edition). 77 FR 76831.
    On January 4, 2013, DOE published a request for information (RFI) 
in the Federal Register seeking comment and information on a variety of 
issues relating to the residential furnace and boiler AFUE test method. 
78 FR 675. Key issues discussed in the RFI include avenues for reducing 
test burden and the addition of a performance test for automatic means 
of adjusting water temperature in hot water boilers. The RFI began the 
process of fulfilling DOE's obligation to periodically review its test 
procedures under 42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(1)(A) by initiating a rulemaking to 
examine all aspects of the DOE test procedure. The RFI is broader in 
scope than today's final rule, which is limited to adding omitted 
equations to the residential furnace and boiler test procedure.
    On February 4, 2013, DOE published a NOPR in the Federal Register 
(hereinafter the ``February 2013 NOPR'') regarding the test procedure 
for residential furnaces and boilers. The February 2013 NOPR was 
focused on an issue with the test procedure where equations were 
missing that would be needed to calculate the efficiency of two-stage 
and modulating condensing furnaces and boilers tested using an option 
to omit the heat-up and cool-down portions of the test. 78 FR 7681. The 
NOPR proposed the adoption of two new test procedure equations that 
would remedy the issue and allow for the calculation of the efficiency 
of two-stage and modulating condensing furnaces and boilers that were 
tested using the option to omit the heat-up and cool-down tests. On 
March 13, 2013 DOE held a public meeting to discuss the test procedure 
proposals outlined in the February 2013 NOPR. Today's final rule is the 
culmination of the rulemaking process that began with the February 2013 
NOPR.

II. Summary of the Final Rule

    Today's final rule amends DOE's test procedure for residential 
furnaces and boilers by incorporating additional equations to account 
for the use of section 9.10 (Optional Test Procedure for Condensing 
Furnaces and Boilers That Have No Off-Period Flue Losses) of ASHRAE 
103-1993, which is incorporated by reference into the DOE test 
procedure for two-stage and modulating condensing furnaces and boilers 
at Appendix N to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430. Section 9.10 of ASHRAE 
103-1993 allows certain condensing furnaces and boilers to omit the 
heat-up and cool-down tests provided that the model: (1) has no 
measurable airflow through the combustion chamber and heat exchanger 
during the burner off-period; and (2) has post-purge periods of less 
than 5 seconds.
    Prior to issuance of this final rule, DOE's test procedure for 
residential furnaces and boilers lacked the equations necessary to 
calculate the heating seasonal efficiency (which contributes to the 
ultimate calculation of AFUE) if the option in section 9.10 is selected 
and the heat-up and cool-down tests are omitted when testing two-stage 
and modulating condensing furnaces and boilers. Omission of these 
equations causes erroneous results for AFUE when calculated using the 
DOE test method. (This situation is in contrast to that of single-stage 
condensing furnaces and boilers, where the requisite equations were 
already present in the DOE test procedure.)
    To correct this issue, DOE proposed to adopt two new equations in 
the February 2013 NOPR. These new equations would allow for the 
calculation of the part-load efficiencies at the maximum input rate and 
reduced input rates (and ultimately AFUE) of two-stage and modulating 
condensing furnaces and boilers when omitting the heat-up and cool-down 
tests, as provided under section 9.10 of ASHRAE 103-1993. Today's final 
rule adopts the equations proposed in the February 2013 NOPR, as 
described in more detail in section III.
    DOE has concluded that any test procedure changes resulting from 
this rulemaking should not impact the existing energy conservation 
standards for residential furnaces and boilers, because such changes 
simply allow for the generation of accurate information reflecting the 
efficiency of affected basic models, which typically test above the 
existing minimum standard level. The current minimum energy 
conservation standards are based on AFUE ratings

[[Page 41267]]

that correspond to non-condensing furnaces and boilers, and those 
values will not change as a result of today's final rule to remedy the 
omission of necessary equations pertaining to condensing models. DOE 
does not foresee that a model that would need to be re-rated using the 
equations adopted in today's final rule would have a resulting AFUE 
below the minimum required efficiency.

III. Discussion

A. Statement of the Issue and the NOPR's Proposed Corrective Action

    As discussed briefly above, this final rule addresses an omission 
in the current DOE test procedure by adopting a new set of equations to 
accurately calculate the AFUE for two-stage and modulating condensing 
furnaces and boilers when tested pursuant to the optional procedure to 
skip the heat-up and cool-down tests, as described in section 9.10 of 
ASHRAE 103-1993. Section 9.10 of ASHRAE 103-1993, which is incorporated 
by reference into the DOE test procedure for use at Appendix N to 
subpart B of 10 CFR part 430 allows omission of the heat-up and cool-
down tests for certain condensing furnaces and boilers provided the 
model (1) has no measurable airflow through the heat exchanger during 
the burner off period; and (2) has post purge period(s) of less than 5 
seconds.
    For single-stage condensing furnaces and boilers, section 11.3.11.3 
of ASHRAE 103-1993 provides equations necessary to accurately calculate 
the heating seasonal efficiency (which contributes to the ultimate 
calculation of AFUE). One equation is based on the results of the heat-
up and cool-down tests described in sections 9.5 and 9.6 of ASHRAE 103-
1993 and is to be used if these tests were conducted, and the other 
equation is based on the results of the steady-state test described in 
section 9.1 of ASHRAE 103-1993 and is to be used if heat-up and cool-
down tests were not conducted and the option in section 9.10 was 
employed instead.
    For two-stage and modulating condensing furnaces and boilers there 
are no equations provided in ASHRAE 103-1993 to calculate the heating 
seasonal efficiency if the option in section 9.10 is selected. The only 
equation provided in the test procedure to calculate the heating 
seasonal efficiency for two-stage and modulating condensing furnaces 
and boilers requires values for the part-load efficiencies, which are 
based on the results of the heat-up and cool-down tests. If two-stage 
and modulating condensing furnaces or boilers were tested and the heat-
up and cool-down tests were omitted in accordance with section 9.10, 
the part-load efficiencies, heating seasonal efficiency, and resulting 
AFUE would not be able to be calculated using the equations provided in 
the DOE test method.
    DOE is aware that many boiler manufacturers have utilized the 
optional section 9.10 provisions for two-stage and modulating 
condensing boilers, regardless of the fact that no equations exist in 
section 11.5.11 that would provide for the calculation of the part-load 
efficiencies for such equipment. In calculating the AFUE, DOE believes 
manufacturers that opted to omit the heat-up and cool-down portions of 
the test have erroneously used ``0'' for the temperatures that would be 
taken during the heat-up and cool-down tests. Research into this issue 
conducted by the furnace and boiler industry trade association (i.e., 
the Air-conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI)) 
revealed that AFUE values calculated for boilers using this approach 
could be inflated from one to four percent above their true values. 
(AHRI, No. 1 at p. 6)
    In the February 2013 NOPR, DOE proposed to amend the test procedure 
to include equations for calculating part-load efficiencies at the 
maximum input rate and at reduced input rates and, ultimately, the AFUE 
of two-stage and modulating condensing furnaces and boilers when 
utilizing the option to omit the heat-up and cool-down tests, as 
provided under section 9.10 of ASHRAE 103-1993. DOE developed these 
equations in the February 2013 NOPR by following the concept of 
replacing cyclic infiltration and sensible heat losses with steady-
state infiltration and sensible heat losses. This concept is already 
used in ASHRAE 103-1993 for single-stage units and can be applied to 
two-stage and modulating units as well. DOE proposed to add the 
following equations to Appendix N in the February 2013 NOPR for 
calculating the part-load efficiency at reduced and maximum fuel input 
rates for two-stage and modulating units that are tested according to 
section 9.10 of ASHRAE 103-1993:
Part-Load Efficiency at Reduced Fuel Input Rate
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10JY13.000

Where:

LS,SS = value as defined in section 11.5.6 at reduced input rate
CS = value as defined in section 11.5.10.1 at reduced input rate
Part-Load Efficiency at Maximum Fuel Input Rate
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10JY13.001

Where:

L S,SS = value as defined in section 11.5.6 at maximum input rate
C S = value as defined in section 11.5.10.1 at maximum input rate

78 FR 7681, 7694-95 (Feb. 4, 2013).

    DOE conducted testing on two modulating condensing residential 
boilers to validate the equations shown above. The test results 
verified that AFUE values determined by omitting the heat-up and cool-
down tests and using the new equations were consistent with the AFUE 
values determined using the heat-up and cool-down tests. As the results 
presented in the February 2013 NOPR demonstrate, there was no more than 
a 0.04 percent variance in AFUE determined under the new equations, as 
compared to the AFUE determined using the results of the heat-up and 
cool-down tests. 78 FR 7681, 7686-89 (Feb. 4, 2013). In DOE's view, the 
difference between the two calculation

[[Page 41268]]

methods is small enough that the AFUE values using the new equations 
are representative of the actual performance of the models. Thus, the 
resulting values are an accurate representation of the product's energy 
efficiency for consumer information purposes. Further, the adoption of 
the new equations would result in minimal additional test burden for 
manufacturers that need to recalculate efficiency ratings, or would 
reduce test burden for manufacturers in comparison to performing heat-
up and cool-down tests.

B. Discussion of Comments

    In addition to input at the March 2013 public meeting, DOE received 
five written comment submissions in response to the February 2013 NOPR, 
including comments from Lochinvar, AHRI, Heat Transfer Products (HTP), 
the American Public Gas Association (APGA), and the National Propane 
Gas Association (NPGA). These comments, along with DOE's response, are 
summarized immediately below.
    In general, Lochinvar, AHRI, and HTP were supportive of the 
proposed amendments to the residential furnace and boiler test 
procedure as outlined in the February 2013 NOPR. (Lochinvar, No. 6 at 
p. 1; AHRI, No. 9 at p. 1; HTP, No. 10 at p. 1) However, AHRI 
recommended that DOE further simplify the equations by setting the 
input rate of the pilot light to zero, noting that continuous pilot 
lights are no longer allowed on gas boilers, and, therefore, there is 
no reason to account for them in the new equation. (AHRI, Public 
Meeting Trascript, p. 21) In addition, Lochinvar stated that 10 CFR 
part 430, subpart B, Appendix N contains internal references in need of 
appropriate renumbering. (Lochinvar, No. 8 at p. 2)
    DOE agrees that Appendix N contains internal references in need of 
renumbering--a matter which DOE has addressed in today's final rule.
    DOE considered AHRI's point regarding further simplification of the 
equations, but declines to set the input rate of the pilot light to 
zero. DOE notes that the equations proposed for addition to the test 
procedure would be utilized not just for boilers, but also potentially 
for furnaces, if furnace manufacturers wish to avail themselves of the 
option provided in section 9.10 of ASHRAE 103-1993. Although a standing 
pilot is uncommon on furnaces on the market today, this feature is not 
specifically prohibited for furnaces, leaving open the possibility that 
a furnace may have a standing pilot light. Additionally, DOE believes 
that the burden of setting the pilot energy to zero in the equation is 
insignificant and does not warrant the removal of this term altogether, 
and that doing so could cause confusion and render the equations 
useless for a product equipped with a standing pilot.
    HTP stated that the tracer gas test in Appendix D of ASHRAE 103-
1993 used to determine the off-cycle airflow is cumbersome and 
difficult to understand. HTP recommended that the Department consider 
the presence of any type of damper mechanism in the combustion product 
path (upstream or downstream) to serve as proof that there is no off-
cycle losses associated with the flow rates of gases. (HTP, No. 10 at 
p.2)
    DOE believes HTP's comment regarding the tracer gas test may have 
merit, but notes that this comment is outside the scope of this 
particular rulemaking, which is meant to remedy an omission in the 
residential furnace and boiler test procedure impacting manufacturers' 
ability to calculate AFUE of certain models. Instead, DOE will consider 
the issue of the tracer gas test in its proceedings for its broader 
test procedure rulemaking initiated by the January 2013 RFI.
    Two manufacturers requested clarification as to how the changes 
proposed in the NOPR would affect the certification of residential 
furnaces and boilers. (Lochinvar, No. 6 at p. 1; HTP, No. 10 at p. 1) 
Lochinvar requested clarification as to whether the new calculations 
were meant to be an additional option or a replacement to conducting 
the heat-up and cool down-tests. (Lochinvar, Public Meeting Transcript, 
No. 5 at p. 17) HTP asked if manufacturers would be expected to use the 
same method of calculation for all models in a product line. (HTP, 
Public Meeting Transcript, No. 5 at pp. 18-19)
    Today's final rule modifies the residential furnace and boiler test 
procedure to provide a means to accurately calculate AFUE for two-stage 
and modulating condensing furnace and boiler models meeting the 
criteria outlined in section 9.10, which permit omission of the 
otherwise-required heat-up and cool-down tests. As amended, the DOE 
test procedure provides two methods of calculation for models complying 
with the criteria outlined in section 9.10. Manufacturers have 
discretion to choose to rate such models either by using the procedures 
under section 9.10, or by using the data obtained in the cool-down and 
heat-up tests under sections 9.5 and 9.6, respectively. Manufacturers 
may choose either or both options for models within a single product 
line.
    If manufacturers have previously utilized the option provided in 
section 9.10 for testing and rating the efficiency of two-stage and 
modulating condensing furnaces or boilers, manufacturers must either 
retest for efficiency without using section 9.10, or recalculate the 
efficiency using the new equations being adopted in today's final rule. 
If retesting a given basic model using the methodology being adopted in 
this final rule results in a certified rating that is more consumptive 
or less efficient than its currently certified value, then the 
manufacturer must also recertify the basic model with the revised 
rating to the Department by the compliance date of the test procedure 
amendments being adopted in this final rule.
    The APGA and the NPGA encouraged DOE to include a metric that 
accounts for the full-fuel cycle as part of the residential furnace and 
boiler test procedure. (APGA, No. 7 at p. 1; NPGA, No. 8 at p.1) Once 
again, DOE notes that today's final rule is limited in scope to 
remedying the above-discussed error in the DOE test procedure. However, 
DOE will consider this issue in the context of the broader test 
procedure rulemaking initiated by the January 2013 RFI.

C. Final Corrective Action

    After considering comments presented at the March 13, 2013 public 
meeting, and additional written comments submitted following the public 
hearing, the Department is adopting the amendments proposed in the 
February 2013 NOPR (discussed in section III.A) with minor 
clarifications to the section numbering, as suggested by interested 
parties in comments on the NOPR. The amendments in today's final rule 
include a revised method for calculating the AFUE for two-stage and 
modulating condensing furnaces and boilers. While this change may lead 
to a revised AFUE rating for certain residential furnaces or boilers, 
as discussed above, DOE does not believe that the resulting changes in 
AFUE would require amending the applicable energy conservation standard 
or affect compliance with the standard by the models at issue here. As 
noted, the previously omitted equations apply only to two-stage and 
modulating condensing models, which are highly efficient and, even 
using the amended equations, are expected to achieve ratings well above 
the minimum standards. The current minimum energy conservation 
standards are based on AFUE ratings that correspond to non-condensing 
furnaces and boilers, and those values would not change as a result of 
today's amendments to remedy the omission of necessary equations 
pertaining to condensing models. DOE does not foresee that a model that 
would need to be re-rated using the equation adopted in today's notice 
would have a resulting

[[Page 41269]]

AFUE below the minimum required efficiency.

D. Effective and Compliance Dates

    The final rule amendments discussed in this rulemaking are 
effective on August 9, 2013.
    Consistent with 42 U.S.C. 6293(c), commencing on January 6, 2014, 
manufacturers must make representations of energy efficiency and energy 
consumption of residential furnaces and boilers using this amended test 
procedure. Until that time, manufacturers may make such representations 
based either on the final amended test procedure or on the previous 
test procedure, set forth at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix N as 
contained in the 10 CFR parts 200 to 499 edition revised as of January 
1, 2013. Consistent with 42 U.S.C. 6291(8), representation of energy 
consumption means measures of energy use (including for this product, 
active more, standby mode, and off mode energy use), annual operating 
cost, energy efficiency (including for this product, AFUE), or other 
measure of energy consumption. Given that the amended test procedure 
provides necessary equations which permit the omission of otherwise 
applicable heat-up and cool-down tests, manufacturers may wish to avail 
themselves of the opportunity for early compliance.
    Manufacturers must make any certifications of compliance with the 
existing AFUE-based energy conservation standards using this amended 
test procedure on January 6, 2014. Until that time, manufacturers may 
make certifications of compliance based either on the final amended 
test procedure or on the previous test procedure, set forth at 10 CFR 
part 430, subpart B, appendix N as contained in the 10 CFR parts 200 to 
499 edition revised as of January 1, 2013. Again, given that the 
amended test procedure provides necessary equations which permit the 
omission of otherwise applicable heat-up and cool-down tests, 
manufacturers may wish to avail themselves of the opportunity for early 
compliance.

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 
regulatory action was not subject to review under the Executive Order 
by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in OMB.

B. Review under the Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as amended) 
requires preparation of an initial regulatory flexibility analysis 
(IRFA) for any rule that by law must be proposed for public comment and 
a final regulatory flexibility analysis (FRFA) for any such rule that 
an agency adopts as a final rule, unless the agency certifies that the 
rule, if promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. A regulatory flexibility analysis 
examines the impact of the rule on small entities and considers 
alternative ways of reducing negative effects. Also, as required by 
Executive Order 13272, ``Proper Consideration of Small Entities in 
Agency Rulemaking,'' 67 FR 53461 (August 16, 2002), DOE published 
procedures and policies on February 19, 2003, to ensure that the 
potential impacts of its rules on small entities are properly 
considered during the DOE rulemaking process. 68 FR 7990. DOE has made 
its procedures and policies available on the Office of the General 
Counsel's Web site: https://energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel.
    DOE reviewed today's final rule under the provisions of the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act and the procedures and policies published on 
February 19, 2003. DOE has concluded that the rule would not have a 
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. The 
factual basis for this certification is as follows:
    For manufacturers of residential furnaces and boilers, the Small 
Business Administration (SBA) has set a size threshold, which defines 
those entities classified as ``small businesses'' for the purposes of 
the Act. DOE used the SBA's small business size standards to determine 
whether any small entities would be subject to the requirements of the 
rule. 13 CFR part 121. These size standards and codes are established 
by the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) and are 
available at https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/files/Size_Standards_Table.pdf. Residential boiler manufacturing is classified 
under NAICS 333414, ``Heating equipment (except warm air furnaces) 
manufacturing,'' for which the size threshold is 500 employees. 
Residential furnace manufacturing is classified under NAICS 333415, 
``Air-conditioning and warm air heating equipment and commercial and 
industrial refrigeration equipment manufacturing'' for which the size 
threshold is 750 employees. DOE surveyed the AHRI certification 
directories for furnaces and boilers, as well as the SBA database and 
market research tools (e.g., Hoovers \4\), to identify manufacturers of 
residential furnaces and boilers. DOE then consulted publically 
available data or contacted companies, as necessary, to determine if 
they meet the SBA's definition of a ``small business'' manufacturer, 
and have their manufacturing facilities located within the United 
States. Based on this analysis, DOE identified 11 small businesses that 
manufacture residential furnaces, and 14 small businesses that 
manufacture residential boilers (two of which also manufacture 
residential furnaces), for a total of 23 small businesses potentially 
impacted by this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ For more information see: https://www.hoovers.com/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE believes the equations being adopted today would lessen 
manufacturer burden in comparison to application of the current test 
procedure. Today's final rule amends DOE's test procedure by 
incorporating additional equations to account for the use of section 
9.10 of ASHRAE 103-1993 (the relevant industry standard incorporated by 
reference) for two-stage and modulating condensing furnaces and 
boilers. Section 9.10 permits a manufacturer of condensing furnaces and 
boilers the option to omit the specified heat-up and cool-down tests if 
the model has no measurable airflow through the combustion chamber and 
heat exchanger during the burner off period and has post-purge 
period(s) of less than 5 seconds. However, under the DOE test 
procedure, the equations needed to use section 9.10 did not exist for 
two-stage and modulating condensing models. As a result, the only 
available method to properly rate the performance of two-stage and 
modulating condensing furnaces and boilers has been conducting the 
heat-up and cool-down tests. Because section 9.10 previously lacked the 
requisite equations, manufacturers who used that option to rate the 
AFUE of their two-stage and modulating condensing furnace and boiler 
models will need to re-rate their models using either today's new 
equations or the results of heat-up and cool-down tests.
    The estimated costs of re-rating using the new equations (for 
manufacturers who had incorrectly applied the test procedure) is 
discussed below, along with the estimated costs of conducting the heat-
up and cool-down tests.

[[Page 41270]]

    In the February 2013 NOPR, DOE stated that manufacturers are likely 
to choose one of two approaches to use the new equations to recalculate 
the efficiency of two-stage and modulating condensing models for which 
section 9.10 has been employed: (1) Manufacturers might recalculate the 
efficiency for each model individually by doing the calculations 
manually; or (2) manufacturers might update the AFUE calculation 
computer program to account for the new equations. 78 FR 7681, 7690 
(Feb. 4, 2013).
    In the NOPR, DOE estimated that recalculating the AFUE manually 
using the new equation would take between 30 minutes and 1 hour per 
basic model. At an hourly rate of $60 for a test lab technician, DOE 
estimated that each model that is re-rated in this manner would cost 
approximately $30 to $60. Id.
    Alternatively, an individual manufacturer may decide to reprogram 
its software for calculating AFUE to account for the new equation. In 
the NOPR, DOE estimated that a programmer would need between 16 and 40 
hours to rewrite the program code to account for this new equation. At 
an hourly rate of $80 for a programmer, the resulting cost would be a 
one-time expenditure of $1280 to $3200 to update the automatic AFUE 
calculation program. Id. HTP stated a concern that if each manufacturer 
is required to modify the AFUE calculation software to account for 
these corrections, unintended variation may be introduced to the market 
place. HTP commented that they expect the modification of the software 
to cost approximately $5,000 for each manufacturer. (HTP, No. 10 at p. 
2)
    DOE believes that the equations being adopted in today's NOPR are 
clear and unambiguous enough that they could be implemented in the 
program in a consistent manner and does not agree that unintended 
variation from manufacturer to manufacturer would be a major concern. 
Further, in the NOPR, DOE noted that given the role AHRI has 
traditionally played and the potential for cost savings for AHRI 
members, AHRI may decide to reprogram its software. In this case, the 
software would be uniform for AHRI members, and the effort required to 
recalculate AFUE for individual manufacturers, would be much less than 
the cost AHRI would incur to modify the program. 78 FR 7681, 7690 (Feb. 
4, 2013). Regarding HTP's assessment of the cost to reprogram the 
relevant software, DOE believes that $5,000 is not unreasonable as a 
rough estimate. However, DOE's estimate in the NOPR was more refined, 
being based on actual quotes obtained from computer programmers 
familiar with the AFUE calculation program that is currently used by 
industry. DOE's estimates of the programming time needed to add the two 
equations were conservatively based on actual information received from 
programmers. HTP did not provide any data in the form of the hourly 
cost of a programmer or the time required that would lead DOE to change 
its estimates. Thus, DOE believes that the total cost to reprogram the 
current industry software would fall in the range of $1280 to $3200, 
which is based on a cost of $80 per hour for a programmer and 16 to 40 
hours of programming time. Further, DOE notes that even at $5,000, the 
cost would be small compared to the overall cost of manufacturing, 
testing, and certifying residential furnace and boiler products, making 
the impact of this option minimal for manufacturers. As noted in the 
February 2013 NOPR, if these costs were spread over the cost of each 
model re-certified, the cost on a per-model basis would be much lower.
    At the time of this publication, the AHRI certification directories 
for residential furnaces and boilers contain a combined total of 
approximately 2000 active condensing models for which recalculation 
could potentially be required, although only a fraction of the total 
condensing models would be two-stage and modulating products which 
might need to be re-rated using the new equations. Further, AHRI 
required member manufacturers of condensing two-stage or condensing 
modulating boilers to either: (1) Re-rate their products at 90 percent 
AFUE; (2) discontinue the model; or (3) substantiate the model's 
efficiency rating by providing data from the heat-up and cool-down 
tests. (AHRI, No. 1 at p. 2) DOE examined the number of models in the 
AHRI certified directory for boilers that are rated at 90-percent AFUE 
(the majority of which are likely to be re-rated models that used 
option 9.10) and found that there are 210 models rated at 90-percent 
AFUE. If all of these models were to be re-rated through the use of the 
updated computer program, the per-model cost would be $6 to $15.
    In the February 2013 NOPR, DOE estimated that conducting the heat-
up and cool-down tests would require 2 hours combined for two-stage and 
modulating condensing products. 78 FR 7681, 7690 (Feb. 4, 2013). DOE 
estimated that at $60 per hour for a lab technician, the cost to 
perform the heat-up and cool-down tests is approximately $120 per 
model.
    During the public meeting, Lochinvar commented that the February 
2013 NOPR only accounted for the cost to perform the heat-up and cool-
down tests. However, according to Lochinvar, manufacturers do not have 
the option of conducting the heat-up and cool-down test on one unit of 
a particular model and incorporating that data along with the steady-
state test data from another unit of the same model to obtain an AFUE 
rating. As a result, Lochinvar contended that if a manufacturer had 
incorrectly rated their equipment under the existing test procedure and 
wished to re-rate the equipment using the heat-up and cool-down tests 
rather than using the section 9.10 method, the entire test would need 
to be performed again on that product or that family of products. 
Lochinvar stated that this would mean that the test burden would be at 
least 10 times the cost DOE listed in the February 2013 NOPR. 
(Lochinvar, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 5 at p. 24) HTP stated that 
impact for small businesses would be a significantly higher 
proportional cost relative to their revenue than it would be for large 
manufacturers. HTP estimated that the cost of addressing this issue, 
including re-rating and expenditure of company time, has cost HTP 
between $250,000 and $300,000. (HTP, No. 10 at p. 2)
    DOE agrees that manufacturers seeking to re-rate their units by 
conducting the heat-up and cool-down tests may also need to conduct the 
steady-state portion of the test to obtain an accurate efficiency 
rating. DOE estimates that the cost of conducting the entire test 
method at a test lab would cost manufacturers approximately $1600 per 
unit.
    The costs to manufacturers of utilizing the equations being adopted 
in today's final rule is significantly lower than the cost of re-rating 
the models by performing the heat-up and cool-down tests, regardless of 
whether manufacturers choose to recalculate the efficiencies by hand or 
to update the automatic AFUE calculation program. Thus, the adoption of 
these equations would be likely to significantly reduce test burden in 
comparison to the current version of the test procedure that does not 
include these equations and requires the heat-up and cool-down test 
data in order to accurately calculate AFUE. Further, DOE believes the 
costs discussed above to recalculate efficiency using the new equations 
are small relative to the overall cost of manufacturing, testing, and 
certifying residential furnace and boiler products. For the reasons 
stated above, DOE certifies that this rule will not have a significant 
economic impact on a

[[Page 41271]]

substantial number of small entities. Therefore, DOE did not prepare a 
final regulatory flexibility analysis for the final rule. DOE has 
transmitted its certification and a supporting statement of factual 
basis to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the SBA for review pursuant 
to 5 U.S.C. 605(b). Thus, DOE reaffirms and certifies that this rule 
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of 
small entities.

C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    Manufacturers of residential furnaces and boilers must certify to 
DOE that their products comply with any applicable energy conservation 
standards. In certifying compliance, manufacturers must test their 
products according to the DOE test procedures for residential furnaces 
and boilers, including any amendments adopted for those test procedures 
on the date that compliance is required. DOE has established 
regulations for the certification and recordkeeping requirements for 
all covered consumer products and commercial equipment, including 
residential furnaces and boilers. (76 FR 12422 (March 7, 2011). The 
collection-of-information requirement for the certification and 
recordkeeping is subject to review and approval by OMB under the 
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). This requirement has been approved by 
OMB under OMB control number 1910-1400. 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.
    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 final rule, DOE amends its test procedure for residential 
furnaces and boilers. 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 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and 
DOE's implementing regulations at 10 CFR part 1021. Specifically, this 
rule amends an existing rule without affecting the amount, quality, or 
distribution of energy usage, and, therefore, will not result in any 
environmental impacts. Thus, this rulemaking is covered by Categorical 
Exclusion A5 under 10 CFR part 1021, subpart D, which applies to any 
rulemaking that interprets or amends an existing rule without changing 
the environmental effect of that rule. 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 (August 10, 
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 implications. 
On March 14, 2000, DOE published a statement of policy describing the 
intergovernmental consultation process it will follow in the 
development of such regulations. 65 FR 13735. DOE examined this final 
rule and has determined that it will not have a substantial direct 
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national 
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government. EPCA governs 
and prescribes Federal preemption of State regulations as to energy 
conservation for the products that are the subject of today's final 
rule. States can petition DOE for exemption from such preemption to the 
extent, and based on criteria, set forth in EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6297(d)) 
No further action is required by Executive Order 13132.

F. Review Under Executive Order 12988

    Regarding the review of existing regulations and the promulgation 
of new regulations, section 3(a) of Executive Order 12988, ``Civil 
Justice Reform,'' 61 FR 4729 (Feb. 7, 1996), imposes on Federal 
agencies the general duty to adhere to the following requirements: (1) 
Eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity; (2) write regulations to 
minimize litigation; (3) provide a clear legal standard for affected 
conduct rather than a general standard; and (4) promote simplification 
and burden reduction. Regarding the review required by section 3(a), 
section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988 specifically requires that 
Executive agencies make every reasonable effort to ensure that the 
regulation: (1) Clearly specifies the preemptive effect, if any; (2) 
clearly specifies any effect on existing Federal law or regulation; (3) 
provides a clear legal standard for affected conduct while promoting 
simplification and burden reduction; (4) specifies the retroactive 
effect, if any; (5) adequately defines key terms; and (6) addresses 
other important issues affecting clarity and general draftsmanship 
under any guidelines issued by the Attorney General. Section 3(c) of 
Executive Order 12988 requires Executive agencies to review regulations 
in light of applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b) to determine 
whether they are met or it is unreasonable to meet one or more of them. 
DOE has completed the required review and determined that, to the 
extent permitted by law, this final rule meets the relevant standards 
of Executive Order 12988.

G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) 
requires each Federal agency to assess the effects of Federal 
regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal governments and the 
private sector. Public Law 104-4, sec. 201 (codified at 2 U.S.C. 1531). 
For a regulatory action resulting in a rule that may cause the 
expenditure by State, local, and Tribal governments, in the aggregate, 
or by the private sector of $100 million or more in any one year 
(adjusted annually for inflation), section 202 of UMRA requires a 
Federal agency to publish a written statement that estimates the 
resulting costs, benefits, and other effects on the national economy. 
(2 U.S.C. 1532(a), (b)) The UMRA also requires a Federal agency to 
develop an effective process to permit timely input by elected officers 
of State, local, and Tribal governments on a ``significant 
intergovernmental mandate,'' and requires an agency plan for giving 
notice and opportunity for timely input to potentially affected small 
governments before establishing any requirements that might 
significantly or uniquely affect them. On March 18, 1997, DOE published 
a statement of policy on its process for intergovernmental consultation 
under UMRA. 62 FR 12820. (This policy is also available at https://energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel.) DOE examined today's final rule 
according to UMRA

[[Page 41272]]

and its statement of policy and determined that the rule contains 
neither an intergovernmental mandate, nor a mandate that may result in 
the expenditure of $100 million or more in any year. Accordingly, no 
further assessment or analysis is required under UMRA.

H. Review under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 
1999

    Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations 
Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105-277) requires Federal agencies to issue a Family 
Policymaking Assessment for any rule that may affect family well-being. 
Today's final rule will not have any impact on the autonomy or 
integrity of the family as an institution. Accordingly, DOE has 
concluded that it is not necessary to prepare a Family Policymaking 
Assessment.

I. Review Under Executive Order 12630

    Pursuant to Executive Order 12630, ``Governmental Actions and 
Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights,'' 53 FR 
8859 (March 18, 1988), DOE has determined that this regulation will not 
result in any takings that might require compensation under the Fifth 
Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

J. Review Under Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 
2001

    Section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations 
Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C. 3516 note) provides for agencies to review most 
disseminations of information to the public under information quality 
guidelines established by each agency pursuant to general guidelines 
issued by OMB. OMB's guidelines were published at 67 FR 8452 (Feb. 22, 
2002), and DOE's guidelines were published at 67 FR 62446 (Oct. 7, 
2002). DOE has reviewed today's final rule under the OMB and DOE 
guidelines and has concluded that it is consistent with applicable 
policies in those guidelines.

K. Review Under Executive Order 13211

    Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,'' 66 FR 28355 
(May 22, 2001), requires Federal agencies to prepare and submit to OMB, 
a Statement of Energy Effects for any significant energy action. A 
``significant energy action'' is defined as any action by an agency 
that promulgates or is expected to lead to promulgation of a final 
rule, and that: (1) Is a significant regulatory action under Executive 
Order 12866, or any successor order; and (2) is likely to have a 
significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of 
energy; or (3) is designated by the Administrator of OIRA as a 
significant energy action. For any significant energy action, the 
agency must give a detailed statement of any adverse effects on energy 
supply, distribution, or use if the regulation is implemented, and of 
reasonable alternatives to the action and their expected benefits on 
energy supply, distribution, and use.
    Today's regulatory action to amend the test procedure for measuring 
the energy efficiency of residential furnaces and boilers is not a 
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866 or any 
successor order. Moreover, it would not have a significant adverse 
effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy, nor has it been 
designated as a significant energy action by the Administrator of OIRA. 
Therefore, it is not a significant energy action, and, accordingly, DOE 
has not prepared a Statement of Energy Effects for this rulemaking.

L. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration Act of 
1974

    Under section 301 of the Department of Energy Organization Act 
(Pub. L. 95-91; 42 U.S.C. 7101 et seq.), DOE must comply with all laws 
applicable to the former Federal Energy Administration, including 
section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974 (Pub. L. 
93-275), as amended by the Federal Energy Administration Authorization 
Act of 1977 (Pub. L. 95-70). (15 U.S.C. 788; FEAA) Section 32 
essentially provides in relevant part that, where a proposed rule 
authorizes or requires use of commercial standards, the notice of 
proposed rulemaking must inform the public of the use and background of 
such standards. In addition, section 32(c) requires DOE to consult with 
the Attorney General and the Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission 
(FTC) concerning the impact of the commercial or industry standards on 
competition.
    The modifications to the test procedures addressed by this action 
do not incorporate by reference any testing methods that are not 
currently incorporated in the DOE test procedure for residential 
furnaces and boilers. DOE's final rule continues to use ASHRAE 103-1993 
(Method of Testing for Annual Fuel Utilization Efficiency of 
Residential Central Furnaces and Boilers) as the basis for the DOE test 
procedure, while adding two necessary equations.

M. Congressional Notification

    As required by 5 U.S.C. 801, DOE will report to Congress on the 
promulgation of today's rule before its effective date. The report will 
state that it has been determined that the rule is not a ``major rule'' 
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

    The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of this final 
rule.

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 430

    Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business 
information, Energy conservation, Household appliances, Imports, 
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Small 
businesses.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on June 26, 2013.
Kathleen B. Hogan,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and 
Renewable Energy.
    For the reasons stated in the preamble, DOE amends part 430 of 
Chapter II, subchapter D of title 10, Code of Federal Regulations as 
set forth below:

PART 430--ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAM FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 430 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291-6309; 28 U.S.C. 2461 note.


0
2. Appendix N to subpart B of part 430 is amended by:
0
a. Revising sections 10.0 and 10.1;
0
b. Redesignating sections 10.2, 10.2.1, 10.2.1.1, 10.2.1.2, 10.2.1.3, 
10.2.1.4, 10.2.2, 10.2.3, 10.3, 10.5.1, 10.5.3, 10.6.1, 10.6.2, 10.6.3, 
10.7.1, and 10.9 as sections 10.4, 10.4.1, 10.4.1.1, 10.4.1.2, 
10.4.1.3, 10.4.1.4, 10.4.2, 10.4.3, 10.5, 10.7.1, 10.7.3, 10.8.1, 
10.8.2, 10.8.3, 10.9.1, and 10.11; and
0
d. Adding sections 10.2 and 10.3.
    The revisions and additions read as follows:

Appendix N to Subpart B of Part 430--Uniform Test Method for Measuring 
the Energy Consumption of Furnaces and Boilers

* * * * *
    10.0 Calculation of derived results from test measurements. 
Calculations shall be as specified in section 11 of ANSI/ASHRAE 103-
1993(incorporated by reference, see Sec.  430.3) and the October 24, 
1996, Errata Sheet for ASHRAE 103-1993, except for sections 
11.5.11.1, 11.5.11.2, and appendices B and C; and as specified in 
sections 10.1 through 10.10 and Figure 1 of this appendix.

[[Page 41273]]

    10.1 Annual fuel utilization efficiency. The annual fuel 
utilization efficiency (AFUE) is as defined in sections 11.2.12 
(non-condensing systems), 11.3.12 (condensing systems), 11.4.12 
(non-condensing modulating systems), and 11.5.12 (condensing 
modulating systems) of ANSI/ASHRAE 103-1993 (incorporated by 
reference, see Sec.  430.3), except for the definition for the term 
EffyHS in the defining equation for AFUE. 
EffyHS is defined as:

EffyHS = heating seasonal efficiency as defined in 
sections 11.2.11 (non-condensing systems), 11.3.11 (condensing 
systems), 11.4.11 (non-condensing modulating systems), and 11.5.11 
(condensing modulating systems) of ANSI/ASHRAE 103-1993, except that 
for condensing modulating systems sections 11.5.11.1 and 11.5.11.2 
are replaced by sections 10.2 and 10.3 of this appendix. 
EffyHS is based on the assumptions that all weatherized 
warm air furnaces or boilers are located outdoors, that warm air 
furnaces that are not weatherized are installed as isolated 
combustion systems, and that boilers that are not weatherized are 
installed indoors.

    10.2 Part-Load Efficiency at Reduced Fuel Input Rate. Calculate 
the part-load efficiency at the reduced fuel input rate, 
EffyU,R, for condensing furnaces and boilers equipped 
with either step modulating or two-stage controls, expressed as a 
percent and defined as:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10JY13.002

    If the option in section 9.10 of ASHRAE 103-1993 (incorporated 
by reference, see Sec.  430.3) is employed:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10JY13.003

Where:
LL,A = value as defined in section 11.2.7 of ASHRAE 103-
1993
LG = value as defined in section 11.3.11.1 of ASHRAE 103-
1993 at reduced input rate,
LC = value as defined in section 11.3.11.2 of ASHRAE 103-
1993 at reduced input rate,
LJ = value as defined in section 11.4.8.1.1 of ASHRAE 
103-1993 at maximum input rate,
tON = value as defined in section 11.4.9.11 of ASHRAE 
103-1993,
QP = pilot flame fuel input rate determined in accordance 
with section 9.2 of ASHRAE 103-1993 in Btu/h
QIN = value as defined in section 11.4.8.1.1 of ASHRAE 
103-1993,
tOFF = value as defined in section 11.4.9.12 of ASHRAE 
103-1993 at reduced input rate,
LS,ON = value as defined in section 11.4.10.5 of ASHRAE 
103-1993 at reduced input rate,
LS,OFF = value as defined in section 11.4.10.6 of ASHRAE 
103-1993 at reduced input rate,
LI,ON = value as defined in section 11.4.10.7 of ASHRAE 
103-1993 at reduced input rate,
LI,OFF = value as defined in section 11.4.10.8 of ASHRAE 
103-1993 at reduced input rate,
CJ = jacket loss factor and equal to:
    = 0.0 for furnaces or boilers intended to be installed indoors
    = 1.7 for furnaces intended to be installed as isolated 
combustion systems
    = 2.4 for boilers (other than finned-tube boilers) intended to 
be installed as isolated combustion systems
    = 3.3 for furnaces intended to be installed outdoors
    = 4.7 for boilers (other than finned-tube boilers) intended to 
be installed outdoors
    = 1.0 for finned-tube boilers intended to be installed outdoors
    = 0.5 for finned-tube boilers intended to be installed as 
isolated combustion systems
LS,SS = value as defined in section 11.5.6 of ASHRAE 103-
1993 at reduced input rate,
CS = value as defined in section 11.5.10.1 of ASHRAE 103-
1993 at reduced input rate.

    10.3 Part-Load Efficiency at Maximum Fuel Input Rate. Calculate 
the part-load efficiency at maximum fuel input rate, 
EffyU,H, for condensing furnaces and boilers equipped 
with two-stage controls, expressed as a percent and defined as:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10JY13.004

    If the option in section 9.10 of ASHRAE 103-1993 (incorporated 
by reference, see Sec.  430.3) is employed:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10JY13.005


[[Page 41274]]


Where:
LL,A = value as defined in section 11.2.7 of ASHRAE 103-
1993,
LG = value as defined in section 11.3.11.1 of ASHRAE 103-
1993 at maximum input rate,
LC = value as defined in section 11.3.11.2 of ASHRAE 103-
1993 at maximum input rate,
LJ = value as defined in section 11.4.8.1.1 of ASHRAE 
103-1993 at maximum input rate,
tON = value as defined in section 11.4.9.11 of ASHRAE 
103-1993,
QP = pilot flame fuel input rate determined in accordance 
with section 9.2 of ASHRAE 103-1993 in Btu/h,
QIN = value as defined in section 11.4.8.1.1 of ASHRAE 
103-1993,
tOFF = value as defined in section 11.4.9.12 of ASHRAE 
103-1993 at maximum input rate,
LS,ON = value as defined in section 11.4.10.5 of ASHRAE 
103-1993 at maximum input rate,
LS,OFF = value as defined in section 11.4.10.6 of ASHRAE 
103-1993 at maximum input rate,
LI,ON = value as defined in section 11.4.10.7 of ASHRAE 
103-1993 at maximum input rate,
LI,OFF = value as defined in section 11.4.10.8 of ASHRAE 
103-1993 at maximum input rate,
CJ = value as defined in section 10.2 of this appendix,
LS,SS = value as defined in section 11.5.6 of ASHRAE 103-
1993 at maximum input rate,
CS = value as defined in section 11.5.10.1 of ASHRAE 103-
1993 at maximum input rate.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2013-16413 Filed 7-9-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P