Energy Conservation Program for Certain Industrial Equipment: Energy Conservation Standards for Commercial Heating, Air-Conditioning, and Water-Heating Equipment, 20114-20138 [2014-08214]
Download as PDF
20114
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 70 / Friday, April 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules
(c) Marketable production that grades
less than U.S. No. 1 due to uninsurable
causes not covered by this endorsement
will not be reduced.
(d) Any adjustments that reduce your
production to count under this option
will not be applicable when
determining production to count for
Actual Production History purposes.
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
No. 1 or better, your indemnity would be
calculated as follows:
(A) 20 acres × 15 tons per acre = 300 tons
production guarantee;
(B) 300 tons production guarantee × $500/
ton = $150,000 value of production
guarantee;
(C) The value of fresh pear production to
count is determined as follows:
(i) 200 tons harvested production minus
150 tons that graded U.S. No. 1 or better =
50 tons failing to make grade;
(ii) 50 tons failing grade/200 tons of
production = 25 percent of production failing
to grade U.S. No. 1 or better;
(iii) In accordance with section 13(b)(1): 25
percent minus 10 percent = 15 percent in
excess of 10 percent allowance failing to
make grade;
(iv) 15 percent × 2 = 30 percent total
quality adjustment for pears failing to grade
U.S. No. 1;
(v) 200 tons production × 30 percent
quality adjustment = 60 tons of pears failing
to make grade;
(vi) 200 tons production minus 60 tons
failing to make grade = 140 tons of quality
adjusted fresh pear production to count;
(vii) 140 tons of quality adjusted fresh pear
production to count × $500/ton price election
= $70,000 value of fresh pear production to
count;
(D) $150,000 value of production guarantee
minus $70,000 value of fresh pear production
to count = $80,000 value of loss;
(E) $80,000 value of loss × 100 percent
share = $80,000 indemnity payment.
SUMMARY:
10 CFR Part 431
[Docket No. EERE–2014–BT–STD–0015]
RIN 1904–AB23
Energy Conservation Program for
Certain Industrial Equipment: Energy
Conservation Standards for
Optional Coverage for Pear Quality
Adjustment Example: You have a 100 percent Commercial Heating, Air-Conditioning,
and Water-Heating Equipment
share of a 20-acre pear orchard. You have a
production guarantee of 15 tons/acre. You
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and
elect 100 percent of the $500/ton price
Renewable Energy, Department of
election. You are only able to produce 10
Energy.
tons/acre and only 7.5 tons/acre grade a U.
ACTION: Notice of data availability and
S. No. 1 or better. Assuming you do not sell
request for public comment.
any of your fresh pear production as U. S.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
[End of Example]
Signed in Washington, DC, on March 25,
2014.
Brandon C. Willis,
Manager, Federal Crop Insurance
Corporation.
[FR Doc. 2014–07155 Filed 4–10–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–08–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:33 Apr 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
The Energy Policy and
Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA), as
amended, directs the U.S. Department of
Energy (DOE) to establish energy
conservation standards for certain
commercial and industrial equipment,
including commercial heating, airconditioning, and water-heating
equipment. Of particular relevance here,
the statute also requires that each time
the corresponding consensus standard—
the American Society of Heating,
Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning
Engineers, Inc. (ASHRAE)/Illuminating
Engineering Society (IES) Standard
90.1—is amended by the industry, DOE
must assess whether there is a need to
update the uniform national energy
conservation standards for the same
equipment covered under EPCA.
ASHRAE officially released an amended
version of this industry standard
(ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013), on
October 9, 2013, thereby triggering
DOE’s related obligations under EPCA.
As a first step in meeting this statutory
requirement, today’s notice of data
availability (NODA) discusses the
results of DOE’s analysis of the energy
savings potential of amended energy
conservation standards for certain types
of commercial equipment covered by
ASHRAE Standard 90.1. The energy
savings potentials are based upon either
the efficiency levels specified in the
amended industry standard (i.e.,
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013) or morestringent levels that would result in
significant additional conservation of
energy and are technologically feasible
and economically justified. DOE is
publishing this NODA to: announce the
results and preliminary conclusions of
DOE’s analysis of potential energy
savings associated with amended
standards for this equipment, and
request public comment on this
analysis, as well as the submission of
data and other relevant information.
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
DOE will accept written
comments, data, and information
regarding this NODA no later than May
12, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Any comments submitted
must identify the NODA for ASHRAE
Equipment and provide the docket
number EERE–2014–BT–STD–0015
and/or Regulatory Information Number
(RIN) 1904–AB23. Interested parties are
encouraged to submit comments
electronically. However, comments may
be submitted by any of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal:
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Email: ComHeatingACWHEquip
2014STD0015@ee.doe.gov. Include
docket number EERE–2014–BT–STD–
0015 and/or RIN number 1904–AB23 in
the subject line of the message. All
comments should clearly identify the
name, address, and, if appropriate,
organization of the commenter. Submit
electronic comments in WordPerfect,
Microsoft Word, PDF, or ASCII file
format, and avoid the use of special
characters or any form of encryption.
• Postal Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards,
U.S. Department of Energy, Building
Technologies Office, Mailstop EE–5B,
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.
(Please note that comments sent by mail
are often delayed and may be damaged
by mail screening processes.)
• Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda
Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy,
Building Technologies Office, Sixth
Floor, 950 L’Enfant Plaza SW.,
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.
No telefacsimilies (faxes) will be
accepted. For detailed instructions on
submitting comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process,
see section IV of this document (Public
Participation).
Docket: The docket is available for
review at https://www.regulations.gov,
including Federal Register notices,
comments, and other supporting
documents/materials throughout the
rulemaking process. 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/
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\11APP1.SGM
11APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 70 / Friday, April 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules
# !docketDetail;D=EERE-2014-BT-STD0015. This Web page contains a link to
the docket for this notice 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. See section IV, ‘‘Public
Participation,’’ for information on how
to submit comments through
www.regulations.gov.
For information on how to submit a
comment or review other public
comments and 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 Office, EE–5B, 1000
Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20585–0121.
Telephone: (202) 586–6590. Email:
Ashley.Armstrong@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:
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
A. Authority
B. Purpose of the Notice of Data
Availability
C. Background
1. ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013
D. Summary of DOE’s Preliminary
Assessment of Equipment for Energy
Savings Analysis
II. Discussion of Changes in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2013
A. Commercial Package Air-Conditioning
and Heating Equipment
1. Air-Cooled Equipment
2. Water-Source Equipment
3. Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners
4. Small-Duct, High-Velocity, and
Through-The-Wall Equipment
5. Single-Package Vertical Air Conditioners
and Single-Package Vertical Heat Pumps
6. Consideration of a Space-Constrained
Single-Package Vertical Unit Equipment
Class
B. Commercial Water Heaters
C. Test Procedures
1. Updates to the AHRI 210/240 Test
Method
2. Updates to the AHRI 340/360 Test
Method
3. Updates to the AHRI 1230 Test Method
4. Updates to the ANSI Z21.47 Test
Method
5. Updates to the ANSI Z21.10.3 Test
Method
III. Analysis of Potential Energy Savings
A. Annual Energy Use
1. Small Commercial Packaged Air
Conditioners and Heat Pumps
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:33 Apr 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
2. Water-Source Heat Pumps
3. Package Terminal Air Conditioners
4. Single-Package Vertical Air Conditioners
and Heat Pumps
5. Commercial Water Heaters
B. Shipments
1. Small Commercial Air Conditioners and
Heat Pumps
2. Water-Source Heat Pumps
3. Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners
4. Single-Package Vertical Air Conditioners
and Heat Pumps
5. Commercial Water Heaters
C. Base-Case Efficiency Distribution
D. Other Analytical Inputs
1. Conversion of Site Energy Savings
2. Equipment Lifetime
3. Compliance Date and Analysis Period
E. Estimates of Potential Energy Savings
IV. Public Participation
A. Submission of Comments
B. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment
V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
I. Introduction
A. Authority
Title III, Part C 1 of the Energy Policy
and Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA or
the Act), Public Law 94–163 (42 U.S.C.
6311–6317, as codified), added by
Public Law 95–619, Title IV, § 441(a),
established the Energy Conservation
Program for Certain Industrial
Equipment, which includes the
commercial heating, air-conditioning,
and water-heating equipment that is the
subject of this rulemaking.2 In general,
this program addresses the energy
efficiency of certain types of commercial
and industrial equipment. Relevant
provisions of the Act specifically
include definitions (42 U.S.C. 6311), test
procedures (42 U.S.C. 6314), labelling
provisions (42 U.S.C. 6315), energy
conservation standards (42 U.S.C. 6313),
and the authority to require information
and reports from manufacturers (42
U.S.C. 6316).
In relevant part here, EPCA contains
mandatory energy conservation
standards for commercial heating, airconditioning, and water-heating
equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a))
Specifically, the statute sets standards
for small, large, and very large
commercial package air-conditioning
and heating equipment, packaged
terminal air conditioners (PTACs) and
packaged terminal heat pumps (PTHPs),
warm-air furnaces, packaged boilers,
storage water heaters, instantaneous
water heaters, and unfired hot water
storage tanks. Id. In doing so, EPCA
established Federal energy conservation
standards that generally correspond to
1 For editorial reasons, upon codification in the
U.S. Code, Part C was redesignated Part A–1.
2 All references to EPCA in this document refer
to the statute as amended through the American
Energy Manufacturing Technical Corrections Act
(AEMTCA), Pub. L. 112–210 (Dec. 18, 2012).
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
20115
the levels in the American Society of
Heating, Refrigerating and AirConditioning Engineers (ASHRAE)
Standard 90.1, Energy Standard for
Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential
Buildings, as in effect on October 24,
1992 (i.e., ASHRAE Standard 90.1–
1989), for each type of covered
equipment listed in 42 U.S.C. 6313(a).
The Energy Independence and Security
Act of 2007 (EISA 2007) further
amended EPCA by adding definitions
and setting minimum standards for
single-package vertical air conditioners
(SPVACs) and single-package vertical
heat pumps (SPVHPs), which are
collectively referred to as single-package
vertical units (SPVUs). (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(10)(A)) The standards for
SPVACs and SPVHPs established by
EISA 2007 corresponded to the levels
contained in ASHRAE Standard 90.1–
2004, which originated as addendum
‘‘d’’ to Standard 90.1–2001.
In acknowledgement of technological
changes that yield energy efficiency
benefits, Congress directed DOE through
EPCA to consider amending the existing
Federal energy efficiency standard for
each type of equipment listed, each time
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 is amended
with respect to such equipment. (42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)) For each type of
equipment, EPCA directs that, if
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 is amended,3
3 Although EPCA does not explicitly define the
term ‘‘amended’’ in the context of ASHRAE
Standard 90.1, DOE provided its interpretation of
what would constitute an ‘‘amended standard’’ in
a final rule published in the Federal Register on
March 7, 2007 (hereafter referred to as the ‘‘March
2007 final rule’’). 72 FR 10038. In that rule, DOE
stated that the statutory trigger requiring DOE to
adopt uniform national standards based on
ASHRAE action is for ASHRAE to change a
standard for any of the equipment listed in EPCA
section 342(a)(6)(A)(i) (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(i)) by
increasing the energy efficiency level for that
equipment type. Id. at 10042. In other words, if the
revised ASHRAE Standard 90.1 leaves the standard
level unchanged or lowers the standard, as
compared to the level specified by the national
standard adopted pursuant to EPCA, DOE does not
have the authority to conduct a rulemaking to
consider a higher standard for that equipment
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A). DOE
subsequently reiterated this position in a final rule
published in the Federal Register on July 22, 2009.
74 FR 36312, 36313.
However, in the AEMTCA amendments to EPCA
in 2012, Congress modified several provisions
related to ASHRAE Standard 90.1 equipment. In
relevant part, DOE is now triggered to act whenever
ASHRAE Standard 90.1’s ‘‘standard levels or design
requirements under that standard’’ are amended.
(42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(i)) Furthermore, DOE is
now required to conduct an evaluation of each class
of covered equipment in ASHRAE Standard 90.1
‘‘every 6 years.’’ (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C)(i)) For any
covered equipment for which more than 6 years has
elapsed since issuance of the most recent final rule
establishing or amending a standard for such
equipment, DOE must publish either the required
notice of determination that standards do not need
E:\FR\FM\11APP1.SGM
Continued
11APP1
20116
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 70 / Friday, April 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules
DOE must adopt amended standards at
the new efficiency level in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1, unless clear and
convincing evidence supports a
determination that adoption of a morestringent level as a national standard
would produce significant additional
energy savings and be technologically
feasible and economically justified. (42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)) If DOE decides
to adopt as a national standard the
minimum efficiency levels specified in
the amended ASHRAE Standard 90.1,
DOE must establish such standard not
later than 18 months after publication of
the amended industry standard. (42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(I)) However, if
DOE determines that a more-stringent
standard is justified under 42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(II), then DOE must
establish such more-stringent standard
not later than 30 months after
publication of the amended ASHRAE
Standard 90.1. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B))
As a preliminary step in the process
of reviewing the changes to ASHRAE
Standard 90.1, EPCA directs DOE to
publish in the Federal Register for
public comment an analysis of the
energy savings potential of amended
energy efficiency standards within 180
days after ASHRAE Standard 90.1 is
amended with respect to any of the
covered products specified under 42
U.S.C. 6313(a). (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A))
On October 9, 2013, ASHRAE
officially released for distribution and
made public ASHRAE Standard 90.1–
2013.4 This action by ASHRAE triggered
DOE’s obligations under 42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6), as outlined previously. This
notice of data availability (NODA)
presents the analysis of the energy
savings potential of amended energy
efficiency standards, as required under
42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(i).
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
B. Purpose of the Notice of Data
Availability
As explained previously, DOE is
publishing today’s NODA as a
preliminary step pursuant to EPCA’s
requirements for DOE to consider
amended energy conservation standards
for certain types of commercial
equipment covered by ASHRAE
Standard 90.1, whenever ASHRAE
amends its standard to increase the
to be amended or a NOPR with proposed standards
by December 31, 2013. DOE has incorporated these
new statutory mandates into its rulemaking process
for covered ASHRAE 90.1 equipment.
4 This industry standard is developed with input
from a number of organizations—most prominently
ASHRAE, the American National Standards
Institute (ANSI), and the Illuminating Engineering
Society (IES). Therefore, this document may
sometimes be referred to more formally as ANSI/
ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1–2013. See
www.ashrae.org for more information.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:33 Apr 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
energy efficiency level for that
equipment type. Specifically, this
NODA presents for public comment
DOE’s analysis of the potential energy
savings for amended national energy
conservation standards for these types
of commercial equipment based on: (1)
The amended efficiency levels
contained within ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2013, and (2) more-stringent
efficiency levels. DOE describes these
analyses and preliminary conclusions
and seeks input from interested parties,
including the submission of data and
other relevant information.
DOE is not required by EPCA to
review additional changes in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2013 for those equipment
types where ASHRAE did not increase
the efficiency level or change the design
requirements compared to the existing
Federal energy conservation standards.
For those types of equipment for which
efficiency levels or design requirements
clearly did not change, DOE has
conducted no further analysis.
Therefore, DOE carefully examined the
changes for such equipment in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1 in order to thoroughly
evaluate the amendments in ASHRAE
90.1–2013, thereby permitting DOE to
determine what action, if any, is
required under its statutory mandate.
Section II of this notice contains a
discussion of DOE’s evaluation of each
ASHRAE equipment type for which
energy conservation standards have
been set pursuant to EPCA (‘‘covered
equipment’’), in order for DOE to
determine whether the amendments in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 have
resulted in increased efficiency levels or
changes in design requirements. For
covered equipment types determined to
have increased efficiency levels or
changes in design requirements in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013, DOE
subjected that equipment to further
analysis as discussed in section III of
this NODA.
In summary, the energy savings
analysis presented in this NODA is a
preliminary step required under 42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(i). After review of
the public comments on this NODA, if
DOE determines that the amended
efficiency levels in ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2013 have the potential for
additional energy savings for types of
equipment currently covered by
uniform national standards, DOE will
commence a rulemaking to consider
amended standards, based upon either
the efficiency levels in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2013 or more-stringent
efficiency levels that would be expected
to result in significant additional
conservation of energy and are
technologically feasible and
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
economically justified. In conducting
such rulemaking, DOE will address the
general rulemaking requirements for all
energy conservation standards, such as
the anti-backsliding provision 5 (42
U.S.C. 6316(a); 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(1); 42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(iii)(I)), the criteria
for making a determination that a
standard is economically justified 6 (42
U.S.C. 6316(a); 42 U.S.C.
6295(o)(2)(B)(i)–(ii); 42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(B)(ii)), and the prohibition on
making unavailable existing products
with performance characteristics
generally available in the United
States.7 (42 U.S.C. 6316(a); 42 U.S.C.
6295(o)(4); 42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(B)(iii)(II)).
C. Background
1. ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013
As noted previously, ASHRAE
released a new version of ASHRAE
Standard 90.1 on October 9, 2013. The
ASHRAE standard addresses efficiency
levels for many types of commercial
heating, ventilating, air-conditioning
(HVAC), and water-heating equipment
5 EPCA contains what is commonly known as an
‘‘anti-backsliding’’ provision. (42 U.S.C. 6316(a); 42
U.S.C. 6295(o)(1)) This provision mandates that the
Secretary not prescribe any amended standard that
either increases the maximum allowable energy use
or decreases the minimum required energy
efficiency of covered equipment. The AEMTCA
amendments to EPCA added this requirement to
Part A–1 directly at 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(iii)(I).
6 In deciding whether a more stringent standard
is economically justified, DOE must review
comments on the proposed standard, and then
determine whether the benefits of the standard
exceed its burdens by considering the following
seven factors to the greatest extent practicable:
(1) The economic impact on manufacturers and
consumers subject to the standard;
(2) The savings in operating costs throughout the
estimated average life of the product in the type (or
class), compared to any increase in the price, initial
charges, or maintenance expenses of the products
likely to result from the standard;
(3) The total projected amount of energy savings
likely to result directly from the standard;
(4) Any lessening of product utility or
performance likely to result from the standard;
(5) The impact of any lessening of competition,
as determined in writing by the Attorney General,
likely to result from the standard;
(6) The need for national energy conservation;
and
(7) Other factors the Secretary considers relevant.
(42 U.S.C. 6316(a); 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)–(ii))
The AEMTCA amendments to EPCA added this
requirement to Part A–1 directly at 42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(B)(ii).
7 The Secretary may not prescribe an amended
standard if interested persons have established by
a preponderance of evidence that the amended
standard would likely result in unavailability in the
U.S. of any covered product type or class of
performance characteristics, such as reliability,
features, capacities, sizes, and volumes that are
substantially similar to those generally available in
the U.S. at the time of the Secretary’s finding. (42
U.S.C. 6316(a); 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(4)) The AEMTCA
amendments to EPCA added this requirement to
Part A–1 directly at 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(iii)(II).
E:\FR\FM\11APP1.SGM
11APP1
20117
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 70 / Friday, April 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules
covered by EPCA. ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2013 revised the efficiency levels
for certain commercial equipment, but
for the remaining equipment, ASHRAE
left in place the preexisting levels (i.e.
the efficiency levels specified in EPCA
or the efficiency levels in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2010). ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2013 did not change any
of the design requirements for the
commercial (HVAC) and water-heating
equipment covered by EPCA.
Table I.1 shows the equipment classes
(and corresponding efficiency levels) for
which efficiency levels in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2013 (for metrics
included in Federal energy conservation
standards) differed from the previous
version of ASHRAE Standard 90.1 (i.e.,
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2010). Table I.1
also displays the existing Federal energy
conservation standards for those
equipment classes. Section II of this
document assesses each of these
equipment types to determine whether
the amendments in ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2013 constitute increased energy
efficiency levels, which would
necessitate further analysis of the
potential energy savings from amended
Federal energy conservation standards;
the conclusions of this assessment are
presented in the final column of Table
I.1.
TABLE I.1—FEDERAL ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY LEVELS IN ASHRAE STANDARD
90.1–2013 FOR SPECIFIC TYPES OF COMMERCIAL EQUIPMENT *
Energy
efficiency
levels in
ASHRAE
standard 90.1–2010
ASHRAE equipment class **
Energy
efficiency
levels in
ASHRAE
standard 90.1–2013
Federal
energy
conservation
standards
Energy-Savings
potential analysis
required?
Commercial Package Air-Conditioning and Heating Equipment—Air-Cooled
Air-Cooled Air Conditioner, 3-Phase, SinglePackage, <65,000 Btu/h.
Air-Cooled Heat Pump, 3-Phase, SinglePackage, <65,000 Btu/h.
13.0 SEER ..........................
Air-Cooled Heat Pump, 3-Phase, Split System, <65,000 Btu/h.
13.0 SEER ..........................
7.7 HSPF
13.0 SEER ..........................
7.7 HSPF
14.0 SEER ..........................
(as of 1/1/2015)
14.0 SEER ..........................
8.0 HSPF
(as of 1/1/2015)
14.0 SEER ..........................
8.2 HSPF
(as of 1/1/2015)
13.0 SEER ..........................
13.0 SEER ..........................
7.7 HSPF
Yes.
See section II.A.1.
Yes.
See section II.A.1.
13.0 SEER ..........................
7.7 HSPF
Yes.
See section II.A.1.
Commercial Package Air-Conditioning and Heating Equipment—Water Source
Water-Source Heat Pump, <17,000 Btu/h ......
Water-Source Heat
<65,000 Btu/h.
Water-Source Heat
<135,000 Btu/h.
Pump,
≥17,000
and
Pump,
≥65,000
and
11.2 EER .............................
4.2 COP
12.0 EER .............................
4.2 COP
12.0 EER .............................
4.2 COP
12.2 EER .............................
4.3 COPH ***
13.0 EER .............................
4.3 COPH ***
13.0 EER .............................
4.3 COPH ***
11.2 EER .............................
4.2 COP
12.0 EER .............................
4.2 COP
12.0 EER .............................
4.2 COP
Yes.
See section II.A.2.
Yes.
See section II.A.2.
Yes.
See section II.A.2.
Commercial Package Air-Conditioning and Heating Equipment—PTACs ‡‡
Package Terminal Air Conditioner, <7,000
Btu/h, Standard Size (New Construction) †.
Package Terminal Air Conditioner, ≥7,000
and ≤15,000 Btu/h, Standard Size (New
Construction) †.
Package Terminal Air Conditioner, >15,000
Btu/h, Standard Size (New Construction) †.
EER = 11.7 .........................
(as of 10/8/12)
EER = 13.8 ¥ (0.300 ×
Cap ††).
(as of 10/8/12)
EER = 9.3 ...........................
(as of 10/8/12)
EER = 11.9 .........................
(as of 1/1/2015)
EER = 14.0 ¥ (0.300 ×
Cap ††).
(as of 1/1/2015)
EER = 9.5 ...........................
(as of 1/1/2015)
EER = 11.7 .........................
EER = 13.8 ¥ (0.300 ×
Cap ††).
EER = 9.3 ...........................
Yes.
See section II.A.3.
Yes.
See section II.A.3.
Yes.
.See section II.A.3.
Commercial Package Air-Conditioning and Heating Equipment—SDHV and TTW
Through-the-Wall (TTW), Air-Cooled Heat
Pumps, ≤30,000 Btu/h.
Small-Duct, High-Velocity, Air-Cooled (SDHV)
Air Conditioners, <65,000 Btu/h.
Small-Duct, High-Velocity, Air-Cooled Heat
Pumps, <65,000 Btu/h.
13.0 SEER ..........................
7.4 HSPF
10.0 SEER ..........................
12.0 SEER ..........................
7.4 HSPF
11.0 SEER ..........................
13.0 SEER ..........................
7.7 HSPF
13.0 SEER ..........................
10.0 SEER ..........................
HSPF not listed †††
11.0 SEER ..........................
6.8 HSPF
13.0 SEER ..........................
7.7 HSPF
No.
See section II.A.4.
No.
See section II.A.4.
No.
See section II.A.4.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Commercial Package Air-Conditioning and Heating Equipment—SPVACs and SPVHPs
Single Package Vertical Air Conditioners,
<65,000 Btu/h.
Single Package Vertical Air Conditioners,
≥65,000 and <135,000 Btu/h.
Single Package Vertical Air Conditioners,
≥135,000 and <240,000 Btu/h.
Single Package Vertical Heat Pumps,
<65,000 Btu/h.
Single Package Vertical Heat Pumps,
≥65,000 and <135,000 Btu/h.
Single Package Vertical Heat Pumps,
≥135,000 and <240,000 Btu/h.
Single Package Vertical Air Conditioners
Nonweatherized
Space
Constrained,
≤30,000 Btu/h.
Single Package Vertical Air Conditioners
Nonweatherized
Space
Constrained,
>30,000 and ≤36,000 Btu/h.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:32 Apr 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
9.0 EER ...............................
10.0 EER .............................
9.0 EER ...............................
8.9 EER ...............................
10.0 EER .............................
8.9 EER ...............................
8.6 EER ...............................
10.0 EER .............................
8.6 EER ...............................
9.0 EER ...............................
3.0 COP
8.9 EER ...............................
3.0 COP
8.6 EER ...............................
2.9 COP
N/A ......................................
10.0 EER .............................
3.0 COPH ***
10.0 EER .............................
3.0 COPH ***
10.0 EER .............................
3.0 COPH ***
9.2 EER ...............................
9.0 EER ...............................
3.0 COP
8.9 EER ...............................
3.0 COP
8.6 EER ...............................
2.9 COP
N/A ‡ ....................................
9.0 EER ...............................
N/A ‡
N/A ......................................
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
....................................
E:\FR\FM\11APP1.SGM
11APP1
Yes.
See section
Yes.
See section
Yes.
See section
Yes.
See section
Yes.
See section
Yes.
See section
No.
See section
II.A.5.
II.A.5.
II.A.5.
II.A.5.
II.A.5.
II.A.5.
II.A.5.
No.
See section II.A.5.
20118
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 70 / Friday, April 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules
TABLE I.1—FEDERAL ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY LEVELS IN ASHRAE STANDARD
90.1–2013 FOR SPECIFIC TYPES OF COMMERCIAL EQUIPMENT *—Continued
Energy
efficiency
levels in
ASHRAE
standard 90.1–2010
ASHRAE equipment class **
Single Package Vertical Heat Pumps Nonweatherized Space Constrained, ≤30,000
Btu/h.
Single Package Vertical Heat Pumps Nonweatherized Space Constrained, >30,000
and ≤36,000 Btu/h.
Energy
efficiency
levels in
ASHRAE
standard 90.1–2013
Federal
energy
conservation
standards
N/A ......................................
9.2 EER ...............................
3.0 COPH
N/A ‡ ....................................
No.
See section II.A.5.
N/A ......................................
9.0 EER ...............................
3.0 COPH
N/A ‡ ....................................
No.
See section II.A.5.
0.3 + 27/Vm ‡‡‡ %/h .............
No.
See Section II.B.
No.
See section II.A.5.
Yes.
See section II.A.5.
No.
See section II.A.5.
No.
See section II.A.5.
Energy-Savings
potential analysis
required?
Commercial Water Heaters
Electric Storage Water Heaters, >12 kW, ≥20
gal.
Gas Storage Water Heaters, >75,000 Btu/h,
<4,000 Btu/h/gal.
Oil Storage Water Heaters, >105,000 Btu/h,
<4,000 Btu/h/gal.
Gas Instantaneous Water Heaters, ≥200,000
Btu/h, ≥4,000 Btu/h/gal, ≥10 gal.
Oil Instantaneous Water Heaters, >210,000
Btu/h, ≥4,000 Btu/h/gal, ≥10 gal.
20 + 35 V 1/2 SL ‡‡, Btu/h ....
80% Et; Q/800
SL ◊, Btu/h.
78% Et; Q/800
SL ◊, Btu/h.
80% Et, Q/800
SL ◊, Btu/h.
78% Et, Q/800
SL ◊, Btu/h.
+ 110 V 1/2
+ 110 V 1/2
+ 110 V 1/2
+ 110 V 1/2
0.3 + 27/Vm ‡‡‡ %/h .............
80% Et; Q/799 +
SL◊, Btu/h ◊◊.
80% Et; Q/799 +
SL ◊, Btu/h ◊◊.
80% Et, Q/799 +
SL ◊, Btu/h ◊◊.
78% Et, Q/799 +
SL ◊, Btu/h ◊◊.
16.6 V 1/2
16.6 V 1/2
16.6 V 1/2
16.6 V 1/2
80% Et; Q/800
Btu/hr.
78% Et; Q/800
Btu/hr.
80% Et, Q/800
Btu/hr.
78% Et, Q/800
Btu/hr.
+ 110 Vr 1/2
+ 110 Vr 1/2
+ 110 Vr 1/2
+ 110 Vr 1/2
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
* ‘‘Et’’ means thermal efficiency; ‘‘EER’’ means energy efficiency ratio; ‘‘SEER’’ means seasonal energy efficiency ratio; ‘‘HSPF’’ means heating seasonal performance factor; ‘‘COP’’ and ‘‘COPH’’ mean coefficient of performance; and ‘‘Btu/h’’ or ‘‘Btu/hr’’ means British thermal units per hour.
** ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 equipment classes may differ from the equipment classes defined in DOE’s regulations, but no loss of coverage will occur (i.e., all
previously covered DOE equipment classes remained covered equipment).
*** While ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 added a subscript H to COP for all heat pumps, its definition for ‘‘coefficient of performance (COP), heat pump—heating’’
has not changed. As a result, DOE believes the subscript to be a clarifying change of nomenclature (to differentiate from the COP metric used for refrigeration) only,
rather than a change to the metric itself.
† ‘‘Standard size’’ refers to PTAC equipment with wall sleeve dimensions ≥16 inches high or ≥42 inches wide. For DOE’s purposes, this equipment class applies to
standard-size equipment regardless of application (e.g., new construction or replacement).
†† ‘‘Cap’’ means cooling capacity in kBtu/h at 95°F outdoor dry-bulb temperature.
††† This may have been an editorial error in ASHRAE 90.1–2010.
‡ While ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 added this equipment class, DOE believes that equipment falling into these classes is already covered by Federal standards,
most commonly in the residential space-constrained central air conditioning equipment class with minimum standards of 12.0 SEER for air conditioners and heat
pumps and 7.4 HSPF for heat pumps. See section II.A.5.1 of this NODA.
‡‡ ‘‘V’’ means rated volume in gallons; ‘‘SL’’ means standby loss.
‡‡‡ ‘‘V ’’ means measured volume in tank.
m
◊ ‘‘Q’’ means the nameplate input rate in Btu/hr; ‘‘V’’ means rated volume in gallons; ‘‘SL’’ means standby loss. DOE’s descriptor, ‘‘Vr,’’ also means rated volume in
gallons and differs only in nomenclature.
◊◊ As explained in section II.A of this NODA, DOE believes this level was a mistake; the formula for SI units was included instead of that for IP units.
DOE notes that ASHRAE 90.1–2013
also increased integrated energy
efficiency ratio (IEER) levels for
additional equipment not listed in Table
I.1, including small, large, and very
large air-cooled and water-cooled air
conditioners and heat pumps.8
However, because Federal energy
conservation standards for this
equipment do not use IEER as a rating
metric, DOE is not triggered to review
this equipment. In February 2013, DOE
published a request for information
(RFI) and notice of document
availability for commercial air-cooled
equipment. 78 FR 7296 (Feb. 1, 2013).
In the RFI, DOE sought information on
the merits of adopting IEER as the
energy efficiency descriptor for small,
large, and very large air-cooled
commercial air conditioners and heat
pumps. Should DOE adopt new
8 ASHRAE 90.1–2013 also decreased the IEER
levels for small, large, and very large air-cooled
variable refrigerant flow equipment; however, on
December 9, 2013, ASHRAE issued errata indicating
that this was an error for air conditioners. See:
https://www.ashrae.org/File%20Library/docLib/
StdsErrata/90-1-2013-IP_ErrataSheet_12-92013.pdf. DOE believes this was also an editorial
error for heat pumps.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:32 Apr 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
standards using IEER as the metric,
future increases in IEER levels in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 as
compared to the Federal energy
conservation standards would trigger
DOE to review its efficiency levels for
that equipment?
D. Summary of DOE’s Preliminary
Assessment of Equipment for Energy
Savings Analysis
DOE has reached a preliminary
conclusion for each of the classes of
commercial equipment in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2013 addressed in
today’s NODA. For each class of
commercial equipment addressed in
this NODA, section II presents DOE’s
initial determination as to whether
ASHRAE increased the efficiency level
for a given type of equipment (based on
a rating metric used in the relevant
Federal energy conservation standards),
a change that would require an energysavings potential analysis. As DOE is
not required by EPCA to review
additional changes in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2013 for those equipment
types where ASHRAE did not increase
the efficiency level or change the design
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
requirements, DOE has conducted no
further analysis for those types of
equipment where efficiency levels
clearly did not change. Additionally, for
equipment where ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2013 has increased the level in
comparison to the previous version of
ASHRAE Standard 90.1, but the level
does not exceed the current Federal
standard level, DOE does not have the
authority to conduct a rulemaking to
consider a higher standard for that
equipment pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(A) and did not perform a
potential energy-savings analysis. For
those equipment classes where
ASHRAE increased the efficiency level
(in comparison to the Federal standard),
DOE performed an analysis of the
energy-savings potential, unless DOE
found no equipment in the market in
that equipment class (in which case
there is no potential for energy
savings).9
9 In the case where there is no equipment on the
market or insufficient data for analysis, DOE would
adopt the ASHRAE level, as required by the statute,
without further analysis.
E:\FR\FM\11APP1.SGM
11APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 70 / Friday, April 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules
Based upon DOE’s analysis, as
discussed in section II, DOE has
determined that ASHRAE increased the
efficiency level for the following
equipment categories:
• Small Three-Phase Commercial AirCooled Air Conditioners (Single Package
Only) and Heat Pumps (Single Package
and Split System) <65,000 Btu/h;
• Water Source Heat Pumps;
• Packaged Terminal Air
Conditioners (Standard Size);
• Single Package Vertical Air
Conditioners and Heat Pumps; and
• Oil-Fired Storage Water Heaters.
For most of those equipment classes,
DOE found that equipment is available
on the market and adequate information
exists to reasonably estimate potential
energy savings, and DOE performed an
analysis of the energy-savings potential,
which is described in section III.
However, when DOE did not find
equipment available on the market
(such as for SPVACs and SPVHPs with
capacities above 135,000 Btu/h), DOE
did not perform a potential energy
savings analysis.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
II. Discussion of Changes in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2013
Before beginning an analysis of the
potential energy savings that would
result from adopting the efficiency
levels specified by ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2013 or more-stringent efficiency
levels, DOE first determined whether or
not the ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013
efficiency levels actually represented an
increase in efficiency above the current
Federal standard levels or whether
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 adopted
new design requirements, thereby
triggering DOE action. This section
contains a discussion of each equipment
class where the ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2013 efficiency level differs from
the ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2010 level
(based on a rating metric used in the
relevant Federal energy conservation
standards),10 along with DOE’s
preliminary conclusion regarding the
appropriate action to take with respect
to that equipment. In addition, this
section contains a discussion of DOE’s
determination with regard to newly
created equipment classes in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2013 (i.e.,
nonweatherized, space-constrained
SPVAC and SPVHP). Finally, this
section provides a brief discussion of
the test procedure updates contained in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013.
10 ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 did not change
any of the design requirements for the commercial
(HVAC) and water-heating equipment covered by
EPCA, so this potential category of change is not
discussed in this section.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:32 Apr 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
A. Commercial Package AirConditioning and Heating Equipment
EPCA, as amended, defines
‘‘commercial package air conditioning
and heating equipment’’ as air-cooled,
evaporatively-cooled, water-cooled, or
water source (not including ground
water source) electrically operated,
unitary central air conditioners and
central air conditioning heat pumps for
commercial use. (42 U.S.C. 6311(8)(A);
10 CFR 431.92) EPCA also defines
‘‘small,’’ ‘‘large,’’ and ‘‘very large’’
commercial package air conditioning
and heating equipment based on the
equipment’s rated cooling capacity. (42
U.S.C. 6311(8)(B)-(D); 10 CFR 431.92)
‘‘Small commercial package air
conditioning and heating equipment’’
means equipment rated below 135,000
Btu per hour (cooling capacity). (42
U.S.C. 6311(8)(B); 10 CFR 431.92)
‘‘Large commercial package air
conditioning and heating equipment’’
means equipment rated (i) at or above
135,000 Btu per hour; and (ii) below
240,000 Btu per hour (cooling capacity).
(42 U.S.C. 6311(8)(C); 10 CFR 431.92)
‘‘Very large commercial package air
conditioning and heating equipment’’
means equipment rated (i) at or above
240,000 Btu per hour; and (ii) below
760,000 Btu per hour (cooling capacity).
(42 U.S.C. 6311(8)(D); 10 CFR 431.92)
1. Air-Cooled Equipment
The current Federal energy
conservation standards for the three
classes of air-cooled commercial
package air conditioners and heat
pumps for which ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2013 amended efficiency levels are
shown in Table I.1 and can be found in
DOE’s regulations at 10 CFR 431.97. The
Federal energy conservation standards
for air-cooled air conditioners and heat
pumps are differentiated based on the
cooling capacity (i.e., small, large, or
very large). For small equipment, there
is an additional disaggregation into: (1)
Equipment less than 65,000 Btu/h and
(2) equipment greater than or equal to
65,000 Btu/h and less than 135,000 Btu/
h. Three-phase equipment less than
65,000 Btu/h, although commercial
equipment, is rated with the same
metric as residential single-phase
equipment (i.e., SEER). Unlike the
current Federal energy conservation
standards, ASHRAE Standard 90.1 also
differentiates the equipment that is less
than 65,000 Btu/h into split system and
single package subcategories.
Historically, ASHRAE has set equivalent
efficiency levels for this equipment;
however, effective January 1, 2015,
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 increases
the efficiency level for single package
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
20119
air conditioners but not split system air
conditioners. The increased efficiency
level for single package air conditioners
surpasses the current Federal energy
conservation standard level for the
overall equipment class, while the
efficiency level for split system air
conditioners meets and does not exceed
the Federal energy conservation
standard for the overall equipment
class. ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 also
increases the efficiency levels, effective
January 1, 2015, for both single package
and split system air-cooled heat pumps,
for SEER and HSPF, to efficiency levels
that surpass the current Federal energy
conservation standard levels. ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2013 increases the HSPF
level for split systems above that for
single package heat pumps.
In the past, DOE has separated the
equipment classes for three-phase air
conditioners and heat pumps less than
65,000 Btu/h into single package and
split system classes, for a total of four
classes. However, when EISA 2007
increased the efficiency levels to
identical levels across single package
and split system equipment, effective in
2008, DOE combined the equipment
classes in the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR), resulting in only two
equipment classes, one for air
conditioners and one for heat pumps.
Because ASHRAE has increased the
standard for only single package air
conditioners, and has increased the
HSPF level to a more-stringent level for
split system heat pumps than for single
package heat pumps, and DOE is
obligated to adopt, at a minimum, the
increased level in ASHRAE 90.1–2013
for that equipment class, DOE proposes
to re-create separate equipment classes
for single package and split system
equipment in the overall equipment
classes of small commercial package air
conditioners and heat pumps (aircooled, three-phase) less than 65,000
Btu/h. DOE requests comment on
whether it should re-create these
separate equipment classes, which is
identified as Issue 1 in section IV.B,
‘‘Issues on Which DOE Seeks
Comment.’’
DOE conducted an analysis of the
potential energy savings due to
amended standards for single package
air conditioners and single package and
split system heat pumps (air-cooled,
three-phase, less than 65,000 Btu/h),
which is described in section III of this
NODA. DOE did not conduct an
analysis of the potential energy savings
for split system air conditioners.
E:\FR\FM\11APP1.SGM
11APP1
20120
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 70 / Friday, April 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules
2. Water-Source Equipment
The current Federal energy
conservation standards for the three
classes of commercial water source heat
pumps for which ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2013 amended efficiency levels are
shown in Table I.1 and can be found in
DOE’s regulations at 10 CFR 431.97. The
Federal energy conservation standards
for water source equipment are
differentiated based on the cooling
capacity. ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013
increased the energy efficiency levels
for all three equipment classes to
efficiency levels that surpass the current
Federal energy conservation standard
levels. Therefore, DOE conducted an
analysis of the potential energy savings
due to amended standards for this
equipment, which is described in
section III of this NODA.
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 also
changed the name of this equipment
class from ‘‘water source’’ to ‘‘water to
air, water loop.’’ DOE believes this to be
an editorial change only and that this
new nomenclature refers to the same
water source heat pump equipment
covered by Federal energy conservation
standards. ASHRAE also changed the
descriptor for this equipment from COP
to COPH. DOE believes this is also an
editorial change to clarify the difference
between COP for refrigeration and COP
for heat pumps. DOE requests comment
on whether these changes are other than
editorial, which is identified as Issue 2
in section IV.B, ‘‘Issues on Which DOE
Seeks Comment.’’
EPCA does not define ‘‘water source
heat pump’’ other than to exclude
ground-water-source units from the
definition of ‘‘commercial package air
conditioning and heating equipment.’’
(42 U.S.C. 6311(8)(A)) However, DOE
notes that there are several related types
of water-source and ground-watersource heat pumps, as shown in Table
II.1. ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013
included new nomenclature for all such
types of heat pumps. DOE further notes
that the vast majority of water-source
(water-to-air, water-loop) heat pump
models are also rated for performance in
ground-loop or ground-water heat pump
applications. It is DOE’s understanding
that design differences of the models
used in the different applications are
minimal, including potentially more
corrosion-resistant metal in the water
coil (for open-loop systems only) and/or
added insulation for ground-water or
ground-loop systems. Efficiency ratings
are different across these three
application types primarily because of
the different test conditions (ground and
ground-water-source are tested with
cooler entering water). Because of the
similarity in models across application,
DOE believes that increased efficiency
standards for water-loop applications
may affect heat pumps for groundsource and ground-water applications,
although they are excluded from
coverage. DOE is not aware of any
differences between water-source heat
pumps for residential and commercial
applications.
TABLE II.1—NOMENCLATURE FOR TYPES OF WATER-LOOP, GROUND-LOOP, AND GROUND-WATER-SOURCE HEAT PUMPS
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013
Water-source (86° entering water) ......................................................
Ground-water-source 59° entering water ............................................
Ground-water source 77° entering water ............................................
Water-source water-to-water 86° entering water ................................
Water-source water-to-water 59° entering water ................................
Ground-water-source brine-to-water 77° entering water ....................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2010
Water-to-air, water-loop ................................
Water-to-air, ground-water.
Brine-to-air, ground-loop.
Water-to-water, water-loop ...........................
Water-to-water, ground-water.
Brine-to-water, ground-loop.
As noted above, DOE views these
changes in nomenclature as
nonsubstantive in terms of the
associated standard levels.
Consequently, DOE is maintaining its
current requirements for these
equipment classes.
However, DOE is considering adding
a definition for ‘‘water-source heat
pump’’ to the CFR that would include
both single-phase and three-phase units
of all capacities (up to 760,000 Btu/h)
and would be applicable to water-to-air
heat pumps. DOE is considering
adapting the definition from that in the
ASHRAE handbook: 11 ‘‘A water-source
heat pump is a [single-phase or threephase] reverse-cycle heat pump that
uses [a circulating water loop] as the
heat source for heating and as the heat
sink for cooling. The main components
are a compressor, refrigerant-to-water
heat exchanger, refrigerant-to-air heat
exchanger, refrigerant expansion
11 2012 ASHRAE Handbook, Heating, Ventilating,
and Air-Conditioning Systems and Equipment.
ASHRAE, Atlanta, GA. Chapter 9 (Available at:
https://www.ashrae.org/resources-publications/
description-of-the-2012-ashrae-handbook-hvacsystems-and-equipment).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:33 Apr 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
devices, and refrigerant reversing
valve.’’ DOE requests comment on this
definition, which is identified as Issue
3 in section IV.B, ‘‘Issues on Which DOE
Seeks Comment.’’
3. Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners
EPCA defines a ‘‘packaged terminal
air conditioner’’ as ‘‘a wall sleeve and a
separate unencased combination of
heating and cooling assemblies
specified by the builder and intended
for mounting through the wall. It
includes a prime source of refrigeration,
separable outdoor louvers, forced
ventilation, and heating availability by
builder’s choice of hot water, steam, or
electricity.’’ (42 U.S.C. 6311(10)(A); 10
CFR 431.92)
In February 2013, DOE published a
notice of public meeting and availability
of the Framework Document regarding
energy conservation standards for
packaged terminal air conditioners and
heat pumps standards. 78 FR 12252
(Feb. 22, 2013). This framework was
published as a first step toward meeting
the six-year look back requirement
specified in EISA 2007. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(C)(i)) As part of the six-year
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Test procedure
ISO Standard 13256–1.
ISO Standard 13256–2.
look back, DOE expects to issue a notice
of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) for
PTAC and PTHP equipment that will
include equipment classes for which
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 increased
efficiency levels (i.e., standard-size
PTACs), as well as those for which it
did not. The PTACs/PTHPs NOPR will
be issued along a timeline that meets the
six-year look back requirements (for
those equipment classes where DOE was
not triggered), as well as either the 18
or 30 month timeline noted previously
(for those equipment classes where DOE
was triggered).
The current Federal energy
conservation standards for the three
classes of PTACs for which ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2013 amended efficiency
levels are shown in Table I.1 and are
found in DOE’s regulations at 10 CFR
431.97. The Federal energy conservation
standards for PTACs are differentiated
based on the cooling capacity and
physical dimensions (standard versus
nonstandard size). ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2013 increased the energy
efficiency levels for all three standardsize PTAC equipment classes to
efficiency levels that meet those for
E:\FR\FM\11APP1.SGM
11APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 70 / Friday, April 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
PTHPs and surpass the current Federal
energy conservation standard levels for
PTACs. Therefore, DOE conducted an
analysis of the potential energy savings
due to amended standards for standardsize PTACs, which is described in
section III of this NODA.
4. Small-Duct, High-Velocity, and
Through-The-Wall Equipment
EPCA does not separate small-duct
high-velocity (SDHV) or through-thewall (TTW) heat pumps from other
types of small commercial package airconditioning and heating equipment in
its definitions. (42 U.S.C. 6311(8))
Therefore, EPCA’s definition of ‘‘small
commercial package air conditioning
and heating equipment’’ would include
SDHV and TTW heat pumps.
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013
appeared to change some of the
efficiency levels for these classes of
equipment. Specifically, ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2010 had increased the
cooling efficiency requirements for TTW
heat pumps to 13.0 SEER in comparison
to the efficiency levels of 12.0 SEER in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2007. However,
in March 2011, ASHRAE issued
Proposed Addendum h for public
review that would correct the minimum
SEER for this equipment to 12.0 SEER,
and this addendum was approved and
incorporated into ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2013. Therefore, this change in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 was
correcting an editorial error in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2010.
For SDHV air conditioners and heat
pumps, ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013
increases the cooling efficiency
requirement from 10.0 SEER to 11.0
SEER. It also includes a heating
efficiency requirement for SDHV heat
pumps of 6.8 HSPF, which was present
in ASHRAE 90.1–2007 but not ASHRAE
90.1–2010 (which DOE also thought to
be an editorial error). These changes
were made through Addendum bj to
ASHRAE 90.1–2010, which noted that
the previously adopted Addendum j to
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2010 had
deleted the SDHV equipment class
entirely because all SDHV models sold
were single-phase residential products,
but that Addendum bj was reestablishing the equipment class
because manufacturers had expressed
an intention to introduce three-phase
equipment to the market. In addition,
Addendum bj noted that it contained
minimum efficiency levels identical to
those established by DOE for singlephase residential SDHV products.
The DOE standards for both
commercial TTW and SDHV air
conditioners, which are 13.0 SEER, and
for heat pumps, which are 13.0 SEER
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:33 Apr 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
and 7.7 HSPF, were established for the
overall equipment category of small
commercial package air-conditioning
and heating equipment by EISA 2007,
which amended EPCA. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(7)(D)) Because the ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2013 efficiency levels for
TTW and SDHV equipment are less than
those in the DOE standards, DOE has
tentatively concluded that it is not
required to take action on this
equipment at this time.
5. Single-Package Vertical Air
Conditioners and Single-Package
Vertical Heat Pumps
EPCA, as amended, defines ‘‘single
package vertical air conditioner’’ as aircooled commercial package air
conditioning and heating equipment
that:
(1) is factory-assembled as a single
package that:
(i) has major components that are
arranged vertically;
(ii) is an encased combination of
cooling and optional heating
components; and
(iii) is intended for exterior mounting
on, adjacent interior to, or through an
outside wall;
(2) is powered by a single- or 3-phase
current;
(3) may contain one or more separate
indoor grilles, outdoor louvers, various
ventilation options, indoor free air
discharges, ductwork, wall plenum, or
sleeves; and
(4) has heating components that may
include electrical resistance, steam, hot
water, or gas, but may not include
reverse cycle refrigeration as a heating
means. (42 U.S.C. 6311(22);12 10 CFR
431.92)
EPCA, as amended, defines ‘‘single
package vertical heat pump’’ as a singlepackage vertical air conditioner that
(1) uses reverse cycle refrigeration as
its primary heat source; and
(2) may include secondary
supplemental heating by means of
electrical resistance, steam, hot water, or
gas. (42 U.S.C. 6311(23); 10 CFR 431.92)
The current Federal energy
conservation standards for the six
classes of SPVUs for which ASHRAE
12 In the EISA 2007 amendments to EPCA,
Congress renumbered several statutory definitions
to accommodate new definitions. Consequently, the
definition for ‘‘harvest rate’’ was moved from 42
U.S.C. 6311(21) to 42 U.S.C. 6311(22). However, in
a separate provision, EISA 2007 provided for a
definition of ‘‘single package vertical air
conditioner’’ at 42 U.S.C. 6311(22). Similarly, EISA
2007 added a definition for ‘‘single package vertical
heat pump’’ at 42 U.S.C. 6311(23), which given the
other definitions present, probably should have
been codified at 42 U.S.C. 6311(24). DOE has
implemented these statutory provisions as if the
drafting error had not occurred.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
20121
Standard 90.1–2013 amended efficiency
levels are shown in Table I.1 and can be
found in DOE’s regulations at 10 CFR
431.97. The product classes for SPVACs
and SPVHPs, as well as their attendant
Federal energy conservation standards,
are differentiated based on cooling
capacity. ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013
increased the energy efficiency levels
for all six equipment classes to
efficiency levels that surpass the current
Federal energy conservation standard
levels. Therefore, DOE conducted an
analysis of the potential energy savings
due to amended standards for this
equipment, which is described in
section III of this NODA.
DOE reviewed the SPVU market and
identified several models of SPVUs in
the 65,000 Btu/h or less equipment
class. However, DOE did not identify
any models of SPVUs in the large
category ≥135,000 Btu/h and <240,000
Btu/h or any models of SPVHPs in the
category ≥65,000 Btu/h and <135,000
Btu/h. As a result of the apparent lack
of a market for large SPVUs and for
SPVHPs ≥65,000 Btu/h and <135,000
Btu/h, DOE conducted complete
preliminary energy saving estimates
only for the equipment classes SPVAC
and SPVHP <65,000 Btu/h and SPVACs
≥65,000 Btu/h and <135,000 Btu/h. For
the equipment classes with no market,
DOE would adopt the ASHRAE levels as
the Federal standard, as required by the
statute, without further analysis.
6. Consideration of a Space-Constrained
Single-Package Vertical Unit Equipment
Class
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 created
a new equipment class for SPVACs and
SPVHPs used in space-constrained
applications. Specifically, ASHRAE
defined ‘‘nonweatherized space
constrained single-package vertical
unit’’ as a SPVAC or SPVHP that meets
all of the following requirements:
(1) is for indoor use only;
(2) has rated cooling capacities no
greater than 36,000 Btu/h;
(3) is a single-package unit requiring
opening in an exterior wall with overall
exterior dimensions that require or use
an existing sleeve that meets one of the
following criteria:
1. width of less than 32 inches and a
height of less than 45 inches
2. fits inside an existing 1,310 in2
opening;
(4) is commonly installed in site-built
commercial buildings;
(5) is of a similar cooling capacity
and, if a heat pump, similar heating
capacity;
(6) draws outdoor air for heat
exchange directly through an existing
E:\FR\FM\11APP1.SGM
11APP1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
20122
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 70 / Friday, April 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules
opening, used for both inlet and outlet,
in the exterior wall;
(7) is restricted to applications where
an existing air conditioner, heat pump,
or gas/electric unit, installed in an
existing exterior wall opening, is to be
replaced; and
(8) bears a permanent ‘‘Replacement’’
marking, conspicuously placed and
clearly indicating that its application is
limited to installations where an
existing air conditioner or heat pump is
to be replaced.
DOE has carefully considered the
possibility of establishing an equipment
class for space-constrained SPVUs. After
reviewing the SPVU market, DOE
identified two distinct market segments:
(1) Traditional SPVUs, which are
typically wall hung or installed indoors
and intended for use in schools,
telecommunications shelters, office
buildings, and similar applications; and
(2) through-the-wall units that are being
classified as SPVUs and are designed to
be installed through-the-wall in hotels,
apartments, dormitories, assisted living
facilities, and other similar applications
(i.e., ‘‘lodging’’ applications). Many of
the units that are intended primarily for
use in lodging applications would meet
the definition of a space-constrained
SPVU in ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013,
while conversely, none of the models
that were intended primarily to serve
traditional SPVU applications meet the
criteria.
In examining the models that would
meet the definition of a ‘‘space
constrained SPVU’’ under ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2013, DOE discovered
that certain models that are currently
classified by manufacturers and in the
Air-Conditioning, Heating, and
Refrigeration Institute (AHRI)
Directory 13 as being an SPVU do not
have major components arranged
vertically, which is a key provision in
the SPVAC and SPVHP definitions
provided by EPCA (and discussed
earlier in this section). For the purposes
of determining the applicability of DOE
energy conservation standards, the
product classification is based on the
applicable product and equipment
definitions in EPCA and DOE’s
regulations. DOE does not consider
models without the major components
arranged vertically to be SPVUs.
Depending on the product
characteristics (e.g., electrical power
phase, capacity), these models should
be classified, tested, and certified to
DOE as compliant with the applicable
13 AHRI Directory of Certified Product
Performance can be accessed at: https://
www.ahridirectory.org/ahridirectory/pages/
home.aspx.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:33 Apr 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
standards for either central air
conditioners or one of the other
equipment types provided by DOE
regulations. Accordingly, DOE did not
consider these models in its analyses of
SPVUs and did not evaluate them when
making a determination regarding
whether to establish a space-constrained
equipment class within the SPVU
equipment type.
Furthermore, while reviewing the
market to consider a potential spaceconstrained SPVU equipment class,
DOE also discovered that many models
characterized by industry as SPVUs,
particularly those that are primarily
used for lodging applications (which
were also the models that met the
ASHRAE definition for ‘‘spaceconstrained’’), are advertised for use in
multiple applications including both
commercial and residential
applications. Many of the models
characterized as SPVUs on the market
are advertised to a significant extent for
use in residential, multi-family
applications; however, DOE notes that
these products are currently classified
and certified in the AHRI Directory as
single-package vertical units, a type of
commercial equipment. Further, DOE
found that certain models of SPVUs in
the AHRI Directory that would be
categorized as ‘‘space-constrained’’ were
previously classified as through-thewall central air conditioners.14
Upon discovering the dual-market
applications of these units, DOE
considered whether the classification of
these products as SPVUs—a type of
commercial equipment—is appropriate.
14 DOE defined a product class for spaceconstrained central air conditioners, a consumer
product type, in a January 22, 2001 final rule,
which DOE stated would include through-the-wall
products among several other types of spaceconstrained products. However, DOE did not set
minimum standards for the space-constrained
product class. 66 FR 7170, 7197. In a May 23, 2002
final rule, DOE established a separate product class
with minimum standards for through-the-wall
products. 67 FR 36368, 36406. Upon establishing
that product class, DOE also provided in its
definition of ‘‘through-the-wall air conditioner’’ that
the class would cease to exist on January 23, 2010.
Id. In a June 27, 2011 direct final rule, DOE stated
that products in the through-the-wall product class
of central air conditioners would meet the
definition of a ‘‘space constrained central air
conditioner.’’ 76 FR 37408, 37446. The American
Energy Manufacturing Technical Corrections Act
(AEMTCA), Pub. L. 112–210 (enacted Dec. 18,
2012), prescribed definitions for ‘‘through-the-wall
central air conditioner’’ and ‘‘through-the-wall
central air conditioning heat pump.’’ 42 U.S.C.
6295(d)(4)(A)(ii). In a proposed rule published on
December 20, 2013 78FR77019, DOE proposed to
eliminate the previous definition for through-thewall products and adopted these statutory
definitions. DOE noted that such products must be
assigned to a product class based on the product’s
characteristics and suggested that most would be
assigned to one of the space-constrained product
classes.
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
SPVUs are classified as a type of
commercial air conditioner under 42
U.S.C. chapter 77, subchapter III, Part
A–1, ‘‘Certain Industrial Equipment.’’
EPCA defines industrial equipment as
any article of equipment of certain
specified types that consumes, or is
designed to consume, energy, which is
distributed to any significant extent for
industrial and commercial use, and
which is not a covered product as
defined in 42 U.S.C. 6291(2), without
regard to whether such article is in fact
distributed in commerce for industrial
or commercial use. (42 U.S.C.
6311(2)(A))
EPCA defines ‘‘consumer product’’ as
any article of a type that consumes or
is designed to consume energy, and, to
any significant extent, is distributed in
commerce for personal use or
consumption by individuals without
regard to whether such article of such
type is in fact distributed in commerce
for personal use or consumption by an
individual. (42 U.S.C. 6291(1))
Thus, consumer products and
industrial equipment are mutually
exclusive categories. An appliance
model can only be considered
commercial/industrial equipment under
EPCA if it does not fit the definition of
‘‘consumer product.’’ Further, DOE
must make a determination as to
whether a model is a consumer product
or commercial equipment, ‘‘without
regard’’ to how the model is ‘‘in fact’’
distributed. DOE notes that many of the
products that are currently classified by
industry as a commercial SPVU and
advertised for multi-family residential
applications would meet EPCA’s
definitions for ‘‘SPVUs’’ from a
technical standpoint. (42 U.S.C.
6311(22) and (23)) However, DOE
reviewed the characteristics of these
products and concluded that they
would also meet the definition of a
‘‘central air conditioner.’’ (42 U.S.C.
6291(21)) EPCA defines ‘‘central air
conditioner’’ as a product, other than a
packaged terminal air conditioner,
which: (1) Is powered by single phase
electric current; (2) is air-cooled; (3) is
rated below 65,000 Btu per hour; (4) is
not contained within the same cabinet
as a furnace with a rated capacity above
225,000 Btu per hour; and (5) is a heat
pump or a cooling only unit. (42 U.S.C.
6291(21); 10 CFR 430.2) DOE has
concluded that, because these products
meet the definition of a ‘‘central air
conditioner,’’ are similar to products
used in residential applications, and are
seemingly (based on product literature
and advertising of known products and
manufacturers) distributed for personal
use or consumption by individuals, they
are appropriately categorized as
E:\FR\FM\11APP1.SGM
11APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 70 / Friday, April 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
consumer products under the statute.15
Because such units meet the definition
for a ‘‘consumer product’’ under 42
U.S.C. 6291(1), they cannot meet the
definition of commercial ‘‘industrial
equipment’’ under 42 U.S.C. 6311(2). In
fact, as noted above, certain products
that are currently categorized by
manufacturers as commercial SPVUs
were at one time categorized as throughthe-wall central air conditioners by their
manufacturers but have since been
reclassified as commercial equipment.
Through-the-wall models for
commercial lodging applications that
are not specifically advertised for the
residential multi-family market (and
that were not previously categorized as
through-the-wall residential units) are
appropriately classified as consumer
products because they are for personal
use or consumption by individuals.
DOE examined the types of models that
are currently characterized as SPVUs
and are intended to serve the lodging
market but have not been reclassified
from the through-the-wall central air
conditioner product class. It noted
similarities in the design, construction,
and applications for these products as
compared to the products that were
classified previously as through-thewall central air conditioners. Given the
similarities between through-the-wall
units intended for installation in multifamily residential applications and
those intended primarily for installation
in commercial lodging applications,
DOE has tentatively concluded that
these products should be treated the
same under its regulatory scheme.
In examining the through-the-wall
models on the market that are not
advertised for residential applications or
were not reclassified, DOE has
determined that the available models
would all meet the definition of a
‘‘central air conditioner’’ and, more
specifically, a ‘‘space constrained
product.’’ 10 CFR 430.2. In the
proceedings that led to the development
of the space-constrained central air
conditioner product class, DOE
recognized that through-the-wall
products have severe space constraints
and, accordingly, established a product
class with less-stringent energy
conservation standards for such units.16
15 An air conditioner that cools a single apartment
and is controlled by the residents of that apartment
is for personal use, just like an air conditioner
found in a single-family home, duplex, condo, or
townhouse.
16 Through-the-wall air conditioners are typically
not as wide or deep as standard air conditioning
units and, in the case of units intended for
replacement, must fit into a pre-existing hole in the
wall. This size limitation affects the size of both the
evaporator and condensing heat exchangers.
Additionally, the airflow through the unit is
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:33 Apr 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
67 FR 36368, 36406 (May 23, 2002).
Because the space-constrained central
air conditioner product class has
already been established to account for
products whose outer dimensions are
severely limited by their application
and, given the similarities and overlap
between models used in commercial
lodging applications and models used in
residential multi-family applications,
DOE believes that any single-package
vertical units that are ‘‘spaceconstrained’’ are appropriately
categorized and regulated as central air
conditioners.
As a result, DOE has determined that,
based on the available product
literature, as well as the governing
definitions in EPCA, certain units
currently listed by manufacturers as
SPVUs are being misclassified and are
appropriately classified as central air
conditioners (and in most cases as
space-constrained central air
conditioners). The majority of these
products are models that would meet
the ‘‘space constrained’’ definition in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013. Because
DOE has established a spaceconstrained product class to account for
space-constrained through-the-wall
units and because these units meet the
existing definitions, DOE has tentatively
concluded that there is no need to
establish a separate space-constrained
class for SPVUs. Therefore, DOE has not
analyzed separate standards for spaceconstrained SPVU equipment in this
NODA. DOE requests comment on this
conclusion, which is identified as Issue
4 in section IV.B, ‘‘Issues on Which DOE
Seeks Comment.’’ In making this
determination, DOE was also mindful of
the purposes underlying EPCA and the
Department’s energy and water
conservation standards regulations: To
conserve energy and water supplies and
to increase energy and cost savings for
American businesses and consumers.
Allowing a model of a product type that
is sold for personal use to evade DOE’s
energy conservation standards for
consumer products, simply because it is
sold in some instances to commercial or
industrial users, would undermine this
purpose.
B. Commercial Water Heaters
EPCA defines ‘‘storage water heater’’
as a water heater that heats and stores
water within the appliance at a
thermostatically controlled temperature
for delivery on demand and that is
industrial equipment. This term does
not include units with an input rating
of 4,000 Btu/h or more per gallon of
restricted by this size limitation, which reduces the
heat exchanger’s effectiveness.
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
20123
stored water. (42 U.S.C. 6311(12)(A); 10
CFR 431.102) EPCA defines
‘‘instantaneous water heater’’ as a water
heater that has an input rating of at least
4,000 Btu/h per gallon of stored water
and that is industrial equipment,
including products meeting this
description that are designed to heat
water to temperatures of 180°F or
higher. (42 U.S.C. 6311(12)(B); 10 CFR
431.102)
The current Federal energy
conservation standards for the five
classes of storage and instantaneous
water heaters for which ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2013 amended efficiency
levels are shown in Table I.1 and set
forth in DOE’s regulations at 10 CFR
431.110. The product classes for
commercial storage and instantaneous
water heaters, and attendant Federal
energy conservation standards, are
differentiated based on fuel type.
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 appeared
to change the standby loss levels for
four equipment classes (gas-fired storage
water heaters, oil-fired storage water
heaters, gas-fired instantaneous water
heaters, and oil-fired instantaneous
water heaters) to efficiency levels that
surpass the current Federal energy
conservation standard levels. However,
upon review of the changes, DOE
believes that all changes to standby loss
levels for these equipment classes were
editorial errors because they are
identical to SI (International System of
Units; metric system) formulas rather
than I–P (Inch-Pound; English system)
formulas. Therefore, DOE did not
conduct an analysis of the potential
energy savings for this equipment.
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 also
changed the standby loss level for
electric storage water heaters, in this
case in a purposeful manner to align
with the current Federal energy
conservation standard level. Because
these levels meet and do not exceed the
current Federal standards, DOE did not
conduct an analysis of the potential
energy savings for this equipment class.
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 also
increased the thermal efficiency levels
for oil-fired storage water heaters to
efficiency levels that surpass the current
Federal energy conservation standards.
Therefore, DOE conducted an analysis
of the potential energy savings due to
amended thermal efficiency standards
for oil-fired storage water heaters, which
is described in section III of this NODA.
C. Test Procedures
EPCA requires the Secretary to amend
the test procedures for ASHRAE
equipment to the latest version
generally accepted by industry or the
rating procedures developed or
E:\FR\FM\11APP1.SGM
11APP1
20124
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 70 / Friday, April 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
recognized by AHRI or by ASHRAE, as
referenced by ASHRAE/IES Standard
90.1, unless the Secretary determines by
clear and convincing evidence that the
latest version of the industry test
procedure does not meet the
requirements for test procedures
described in paragraphs (2) and (3) of 42
U.S.C. 6314(a).17 (42 U.S.C.
6314(a)(4)(B)) ASHRAE Standard 90.1–
2013 updated several of its test
procedures for ASHRAE equipment.
Specifically, ASHRAE Standard 90.1–
2013 updated to the most recent
editions of test procedures for small
commercial package air conditioners
and heating equipment (AHRI 210/240–
2008 18 with Addendum 1 and 2,
Performance Rating of Unitary AirConditioning & Air-Source Heat Pump
Equipment), large and very large
commercial package air conditioners
and heating equipment (AHRI 340/360–
2007 with Addenda 1 and 2,
Performance Rating of Commercial and
Industrial Unitary Air-Conditioning and
Heat Pump Equipment), variable
refrigerant flow equipment (AHRI 1230–
2010 with Addendum 1, Performance
Rating of Variable Refrigerant Flow
(VRF) Multi-Split Air-Conditioning and
Heat Pump Equipment), commercial
warm-air furnaces (ANSI (American
National Standards Institute) Z21.47–
2012, Standard for Gas-Fired Central
Furnaces), and commercial water
heaters (ANSI Z21.10.3–2011, Gas
Water Heaters, Volume III, Storage
Water Heaters with Input Ratings Above
75,000 Btu Per Hour, Circulating and
Instantaneous).
DOE has preliminarily reviewed each
of the test procedures that were updated
in ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 and
discusses the changes to the test
procedures below.
17 Specifically, the relevant provisions (42 U.S.C.
6314(a)(2)–(3)) provide that test procedures must be
reasonably designed to produce test results that
reflect energy efficiency, energy use, and estimated
operating costs of a type (or class) of industrial
equipment during a representative average use
cycle and must not be unduly burdensome to
conduct. Moreover, if the test procedure is for
determining estimated annual operating costs, it
must provide that such costs will be calculated
from measurements of energy use in a
representative average-use cycle, and from
representative average unit costs of the energy
needed to operate the equipment during such cycle.
The Secretary must provide information to
manufacturers of covered equipment regarding
representative average unit costs of energy.
18 ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 technically cites
‘‘AHRI 210/240–200 with Addendum 1 and 2.’’
However, DOE believes that this is an editorial error
and that ASHRAE meant to cite AHRI 210/240–
2008, which is the most recent published year of
that test procedure.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:33 Apr 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
1. Updates to the AHRI 210/240 Test
Method
In 2011 and 2012, AHRI published
Addendum 1 and Addendum 2,
updating AHRI Standard 210/240–2008.
AHRI Standard 210/240, Performance
Rating of Unitary Air-Conditioning &
Air-Source Heat Pump Equipment, is
incorporated by reference as the DOE
test procedure for small commercial air
conditioners and air-source heat pumps
with a cooling capacity below 65,000
Btu/h at 10 CFR 431.95. Although
ASHRAE 90.1–2013 referenced the
addenda to the 2008 version for the first
time, the changes contained in the
addenda 19 were previously evaluated
by DOE and adopted as part of a seven
year test procedure review (conducted
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(1)(A)) in
a final rule for commercial heating, airconditioning, and water heating
equipment, published in the Federal
Register on May 16, 2012. 77 FR 28928.
In that test procedure amendment, DOE
concluded that the addenda would not
impact the Federal energy efficiency
ratings for small commercial air
conditioners and heat pumps, and it
proceeded to incorporate AHRI
Standard 210/240–2008 with
Addendum 1 and Addendum 2. 77 FR
28928, 28943, 28989 (May 16, 2012).
Because DOE has already incorporated
by reference the most recent AHRI 210/
240 addenda referenced by ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2013, DOE does not need
to take action at this time.
2. Updates to the AHRI 340/360 Test
Method
In 2010 and 2011, AHRI published
Addendum 1 and Addendum 2,
respectively, updating AHRI 340/360–
2007. AHRI Standard 340/360,
Performance Rating of Commercial and
Industrial Unitary Air-Conditioning and
Heat Pump Equipment, is incorporated
by reference as the DOE test procedure
for small, large, and very large
commercial air conditioners and airsource heat pumps with a cooling
capacity greater than or equal to 65,000
Btu/h at 10 CFR 431.95. Although
ASHRAE 90.1–2013 referenced the
addenda to the 2007 version for the first
time, the changes contained in the
addenda 20 were previously evaluated
19 The addenda to AHRI 210/240–2008 generally
replace any references to the part-load metric (i.e.,
integrated part load value (IPLV)) with references to
the new part load metric (i.e., IEER). 77 FR 28928,
28943.
20 The addenda to AHRI 340/360–2007 expand
the scope of the standard to include air-cooled
package unitary air conditioners with cooling
capacities from 250,000 Btu/h to less than 760,000
Btu/h, add a ¥0.00 inch H2O to a 0.05 inch H2O
tolerance to the external static pressure test
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
by DOE and adopted as part of a sevenyear test procedure look back in a final
rule for commercial heating, airconditioning, and water heating
equipment, published in the Federal
Register on May 16, 2012, 77 FR 28928.
In that test procedure amendment, DOE
concluded that the addenda would not
impact the Federal energy efficiency
ratings for small, large, and very large
commercial air conditioners and heat
pumps, and it proceeded to incorporate
AHRI 340/360 with Addendum 1 and
Addendum 2. 77 FR 28928, 28943,
28989 (May 16, 2012). Because DOE has
already incorporated by reference the
most recent AHRI 340/360 addenda
referenced by ASHRAE Standard 90.1–
2013, DOE does not need to take action
at this time.
3. Updates to the AHRI 1230 Test
Method
In 2011, AHRI published Addendum
1, updating AHRI Standard 1230–2010.
AHRI Standard 1230, Performance
Rating of Variable Refrigerant Flow
(VRF) Multi-Split Air-Conditioning and
Heat Pump Equipment, is incorporated
by reference into the DOE test procedure
for variable refrigerant flow multi-split
systems at 10 CFR 431.95. Although
ASHRAE 90.1–2013 referenced the
addenda to the 2010 version for the first
time, DOE incorporated by reference
AHRI 1230–2010 with Addendum 1 in
a final rule for commercial heating, airconditioning, and water heating
equipment, published in the Federal
Register on May 16, 2012, 77 FR 28928,
28989. Because DOE has already
incorporated by reference the most
recent AHRI 1230 edition and
addendum referenced by ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2013, DOE does not need
to take action at this time.
4. Updates to the ANSI Z21.47 Test
Method
In 2012, ANSI updated ANSI Z21.47,
Standard for Gas-Fired Central
Furnaces. DOE’s test procedure for
measuring the energy efficiency of gasfired warm air furnaces incorporates by
reference ANSI Z21.47–2006 at 10 CFR
431.75, but the uniform test method set
out at 10 CFR 431.76 only directs one
to use those procedures contained in
ANSI Z21.47–2006 that are relevant to
the steady-state efficiency measurement
(i.e., sections 1.1, 2.1 through 2.6, 2.39,
and 4.2.1 of ANSI Z21.47). As a result,
DOE focused its test procedure review
on the relevant sections of ANSI Z21.47
condition, and add an external static pressure
equation and a tolerance to the leaving dry-bulb
temperature to the IEER part-load test. 77 FR 28928,
28943.
E:\FR\FM\11APP1.SGM
11APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 70 / Friday, April 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules
that DOE’s test procedure references. In
those sections referenced by DOE’s test
procedures, ANSI did not make any
updates. Therefore, DOE has
preliminarily determined that the
changes to ANSI Z21.47–2012 are not
relevant to the DOE test procedure for
gas-fired warm air furnaces and,
therefore, do not impact the energy
efficiency ratings for gas-fired furnaces.
Consequently, no further action is
required at this time. DOE seeks
comments regarding this tentative
conclusion. This is identified as Issue 5
in section IV.B, ‘‘Issues on Which DOE
Seeks Comment.’’
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
5. Updates to the ANSI Z21.10.3 Test
Method
In 2011, ANSI updated ANSI
Z21.10.3, Gas Water Heaters, Volume
III, Storage Water Heaters with Input
Ratings Above 75,000 Btu Per Hour,
Circulating and Instantaneous. DOE’s
test procedure for gas-fired water
heaters incorporates by reference ANSI
Z21.10.3–2011 at 10 CFR 431.105, but
the uniform test method set out at 10
CFR 431.106 only directs one to use
sections G1 (Method of Test for
Measuring Thermal Efficiency) and G2
(Method of Test for Measuring Standby
Loss) of the ANSI Z21.10.3 test
procedure. Although ASHRAE 90.1–
2013 referenced the 2011 version for the
first time, the version was previously
evaluated by DOE and adopted 21 as part
of a 7-year test procedure review
(conducted pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
6314(a)(1)(A)) in a final rule for
commercial heating, air-conditioning,
and water heating equipment, published
in the Federal Register on May 16,
2012. 77 FR 28928. In that test
procedure amendment, DOE concluded
that the new version would not alter the
DOE test method or the energy
efficiency ratings for commercial water
heaters as compared to adopting ANSI
Z21.10.3–2004, and it proceeded to
incorporate ANSI Z21.10.3–2011 by
reference. 77 FR 28928, 28944, 28996
(May 16, 2012). Because DOE has
already incorporated by reference ANSI
Z21.10.3–2011, the test procedure
referenced by ASHRAE Standard 90.1–
2013, DOE does not need to take action
at this time.
III. Analysis of Potential Energy
Savings
As required under 42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(A), DOE performed an
analysis to determine the energy-savings
potential of amending Federal energy
21 DOE
also adopted a correction regarding
Figures 2 and 3 in Exhibit G of ANSI Z21.10.3–
2011.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:32 Apr 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
conservation standard levels to the
efficiency levels specified in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2013, as well as to morestringent efficiency levels than those
specified in ASHRAE Standard 90.1–
2013. As explained previously, DOE’s
energy-savings analysis is limited to
types of equipment covered by Federal
energy conservation standards for which
the amended ASHRAE Standard 90.1–
2013 increase the efficiency levels and
for which a market exists and sufficient
data are available.22 Based upon the
conclusions reached in section II, DOE
is conducting the energy-savings
analysis for:
• Three equipment classes of small
air-cooled, three-phase commercial
packaged air-conditioning and heating
equipment: (1) Single-package air
conditioners less than 65,000 Btu/h, (2)
single-package heat pumps less than
65,000 Btu/h, and (3) split system heat
pumps less than 65,000 Btu/h;
• Three equipment classes of small
commercial water-source heat pumps:
(1) Less than 17,000 Btu/h, (2) 17,000 to
less than 65,000 Btu/h, and (3) 65,000
to less than 135,000 Btu/h;
• Three equipment classes of
standard size PTACs: (1) Less than 7,000
Btu/h, (2) 7,000 to 15,000 Btu/h, and (3)
greater than 15,000 Btu/h;
• Three equipment classes of SPVUs:
(1) SPVACs less than 65,000 Btu/h, (2)
SPVHPs less than 65,000 Btu/h, and (3)
SPVACs 65,000 to less than 135,000
Btu/h; and
• One equipment class of commercial
water-heating equipment: (1) Oil-fired
storage water heaters greater than
105,000 Btu/h and less than 4,000 Btu/
h/gal.
The following discussion provides an
overview of the energy-savings analysis
conducted for these 13 classes of
equipment, followed by summary
results of that analysis. For each
efficiency level analyzed, DOE
calculated the potential energy savings
to the Nation as the difference between
a base-case projection (without
amended standards) and the standardscase projection (with amended
standards). The national energy savings
(NES) refers to cumulative lifetime
energy savings for equipment purchased
in a 30-year period that differs by
equipment (i.e., the compliance date
22 As discussed in section II, when no products
are available on the market or no reliable data exist
for calculating potential energy savings, DOE did
not perform an analysis. The products for which
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 increase the
efficiency level, but for which DOE did not perform
an analysis due to lack of a market or lack of data
include: (1) SPVHP 65,000 to less than 135,000
Btu/h; (2) SPVAC 135,000 to less than 240,000
Btu/h; and (3) SPVHP 135,000 to less than 240,000
Btu/h. (See section II.A.5.)
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
20125
differs by equipment class because of
the ASHRAE trigger legal requirements).
The analysis is based on a stock
accounting method. In the standards
case, equipment that is more efficient
gradually replaces less-efficient
equipment over time. This affects the
calculation of the potential energy
savings, which are a function of the total
number of units in use and their
efficiencies. Savings depend on annual
shipments and equipment lifetime.
Inputs to the energy-savings analysis are
presented below, and details are
available in the ASHRAE NODA
technical support document (TSD) on
DOE’s Web site.23
A. Annual Energy Use
This section describes the energy use
analysis performed for each type of
equipment. The Federal standard and
higher efficiency levels are expressed in
terms of an efficiency metric or metrics.
For each equipment class, this section
describes how DOE developed estimates
of annual energy consumption at the
baseline efficiency level and at higher
levels for each equipment type. These
annual unit energy consumption (UEC)
estimates form the basis of the national
energy savings estimates discussed in
section III.E. More detailed discussion is
found in the ASHRAE NODA TSD.
1. Small Commercial Packaged Air
Conditioners and Heat Pumps
To estimate the UEC for each class of
small commercial packaged air
conditioning and heating equipment
less than 65,000 Btu/h (air-cooled,
three-phase), DOE began with the
cooling UECs for single-phase
equipment installed in commercial
buildings as presented in the national
impact analysis associated with the
2010 notice of public meeting and
availability of preliminary technical
support document for residential central
air conditioners and heat pumps.
(EERE–2008–BT–STD–0006–0003). DOE
believes that three-phase commercial
equipment would have similar energy
usage to single-phase equipment, as it
would tend to be used in similar
locations and in a similar manner. DOE
seeks comment on this assumption,
which is identified as Issue 6 in section
IV.B, ‘‘Issues on Which DOE Seeks
Comment.’’
In the 2010 analysis, the UECs for
split and single-package systems were
very similar (and therefore comparable),
but UECs were available for higher
efficiency levels for split systems than
23 The ASHRAE NODA TSD is available on the
Web page for ASHRAE Products at: https://
www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_
standards/rulemaking.aspx?ruleid=90
E:\FR\FM\11APP1.SGM
11APP1
20126
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 70 / Friday, April 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules
for single-package equipment. As a
result, DOE used the 2010 UECs for split
systems for all equipment classes
analyzed for today’s NODA, including
both split and single-package systems.
Although ASHRAE 90.1–2013
increased the HSPF levels for this
equipment, DOE did not include heating
UECs in this analysis. For commercial
installations in the 2010 analysis, DOE
determined that the heating UECs did
not scale proportionally with HSPF.
Based on these data, DOE has
preliminarily determined that using
available data to quantify energy savings
related to increasing HSPF for small
commercial heat pumps is not possible.
DOE seeks data and information related
to the heating energy use of commercial
heat pumps, as related to HSPF, which
is identified as Issue 7 in section IV.B,
‘‘Issues on Which DOE Seeks
Comment.’’
Table III.1 shows the UEC estimates
for the current Federal standards levels
(baseline), the ASHRAE 90.1–2013
levels, and the higher efficiency levels
for the three small air-cooled
commercial packaged air-conditioning
and heating equipment classes
analyzed. DOE derived the ‘‘max-tech’’
level from the market maximum in the
AHRI Certified Directory 24 as of
November 2013. However, the highest
available efficiency level for split
system heat pumps was only 16.2,
whereas for single-package units it was
18.05. DOE believes that split system
heat pumps are capable of reaching the
same efficiency level as single-package
units because the same technologies to
increase efficiency can be employed for
each type of equipment and, therefore,
analyzed a ‘‘max-tech’’ level of 18.05 for
both single package and split system
heat pumps.
TABLE III.1—NATIONAL UEC ESTIMATES FOR AIR-COOLED AIR CONDITIONERS AND HEAT PUMPS
Small threephase air-cooled
single-package
air conditioners
<65,000 Btu/h
Small threephase air-cooled
single-package
heat pumps
<65,000 Btu/h
Small threephase air-cooled
split system heat
pumps
<65,000 Btu/h
13.0
14.0
15.0
16.0
17.5
19.15
13.0
14.0
15.0
16.0
—
18.05
13.0
14.0
15.0
16.0
—
18.05
Efficiency Level (SEER)
Baseline—Federal Standard ............................................................................................
ASHRAE Level (1) ...........................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 2 .............................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 3 .............................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 4 .............................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 5—‘‘Max-Tech’’— ..................................................................................
UEC (kwh/year)
Baseline—Federal Standard ............................................................................................
ASHRAE Level (1) ...........................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 2 .............................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 3 .............................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 4 .............................................................................................................
2,408
2,349
2,237
2,125
2,086
2,418
2,387
2,282
2,177
—
2,418
2,387
2,282
2,177
—
Efficiency Level 5—‘‘Max-Tech’’— ..................................................................................
2,047
2,123
2,123
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
2. Water-Source Heat Pumps
To estimate the UEC for each class of
water-source heat pump, DOE began
with the cooling UECs for water-source
heat pumps published in Appendix D of
the 2000 Screening Analysis for EPACTCovered Commercial HVAC and WaterHeating Equipment. (EERE–2006–STD–
0098–0015) Where identical efficiency
levels were available, DOE used the
UEC directly from the screening
analysis. For additional efficiency
levels, DOE scaled the UECs based on
the ratio of EER, as was done in the
original analysis. DOE seeks comment
on the appropriateness of the cooling
UECs derived from the 2000 screening
analysis, adjusted based on equipment
EER to be inversely proportional to EER,
including whether energy use for this
equipment would have changed
significantly since the last analysis. This
is identified as Issue 8 in section IV.B,
‘‘Issues on Which DOE Seeks
Comment.’’
Although ASHRAE 90.1–2013
increased the COP levels for this
equipment, DOE did not include heating
UEC in this analysis as a result of lack
of information regarding the heating-
24 Available at: https://www.ahridirectory.org/
ahridirectory/pages/home.aspx.
mode energy use of this equipment.
DOE seeks data and information related
to water-source heat pump heating
energy use. This is identified as Issue 9
in section IV.B, ‘‘Issues on Which DOE
Seeks Comment.’’
Table III.2 shows the UEC estimates
for the current Federal standard levels,
the ASHRAE 90.1–2013 levels, and the
higher efficiency levels for the three
water-source heat pump classes
analyzed. The ‘‘max-tech’’ levels
represent the market maximum
identified in the AHRI Certified
Directory as of November 2013.25
25 For variable-capacity models listed at both
minimum and maximum capacity, DOE analyzed
the efficiency of the maximum capacity only.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:33 Apr 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\11APP1.SGM
11APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 70 / Friday, April 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules
20127
TABLE III.2—NATIONAL UEC ESTIMATES FOR WATER-SOURCE HEAT PUMPS
Water-source
heat pumps
≥17,000 and
<65,000 Btu/h
Water-source
heat pumps
<17,000 Btu/h
Water-source
heat pumps
≥65,000 and
<135,000 Btu/h
Efficiency Level (EER)
Baseline—Federal Standard ............................................................................................
ASHRAE Level (1) ...........................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 2 .............................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 3 .............................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 4 .............................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 5 .............................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 6—‘‘Max-Tech’’— ..................................................................................
11.2
12.2
13.0
14.0
15.7
16.5
18.1
12.0
13.0
14.6
16.6
18.0
19.2
21.6
12.0
13.0
14.0
15.0
16.0
—
17.2
1,738
1,595
1,497
1,390
1,240
1,180
1,075
4,868
4,493
4,001
3,519
3,245
3,042
2,704
11,528
10,641
9,881
9,223
8,646
—
8,043
UEC (kwh/year)
Baseline—Federal Standard ............................................................................................
ASHRAE Level (1) ...........................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 2 .............................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 3 .............................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 4 .............................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 5 .............................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 6—‘‘Max-Tech’’— ..................................................................................
3. Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners
To estimate the UEC for each class of
PTACs, DOE began with the cooling
UECs for PTACs used in the 2008
energy conservation standards final
rule. 73 FR 58772 (Oct. 7, 2008). With
the UECs given for each State, the
population of each State was used to
weight the UECs to obtain a nationally
representative UEC. Where identical
efficiency levels and cooling capacities
were available, DOE used the UEC
directly from the rulemaking. For
additional efficiency levels, DOE scaled
the UECs based on interpolations
between EERs at a constant cooling
capacity. Likewise, for additional
cooling capacities, DOE scaled the UECs
based on interpolations between cooling
capacities at constant EER.
Table III.3 shows the UEC estimates
for the current Federal standard levels,
the ASHRAE 90.1–2013 levels, and the
higher efficiency levels for the three
PTAC classes analyzed. The ‘‘max-tech’’
levels correspond to those in the PTAC
Framework Document published in
2013. 78 FR 12252 (Feb. 22, 2013)
(EERE–2012–BT–STD–0029–0002).
TABLE III.3—NATIONAL UEC ESTIMATES FOR PTACS
PTAC
≥7,000 and
≤15,000 Btu/h
PTAC
<7,000 Btu/h
PTAC
>15,000 Btu/h
Efficiency Level (EER)
Baseline—Federal Standard ............................................................................................
ASHRAE Level (1) ...........................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 2 .............................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 3 .............................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 4 .............................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 5 .............................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 6—‘‘Max-Tech’’ – ...................................................................................
11.7
11.9
12.2
12.6
13.1
13.6
14.0
11.1
11.3
11.5
12.0
12.4
12.9
13.3
9.3
9.5
9.7
10.0
10.4
10.8
11.2
849
838
824
799
773
748
723
1,026
1,014
1,000
973
946
919
892
1,607
1,591
1,577
1,547
1,517
1,487
1,458
UEC (kwh/year)
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Baseline—Federal Standard ............................................................................................
ASHRAE Level (1) ...........................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 2 .............................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 3 .............................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 4 .............................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 5 .............................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 6—‘‘Max-Tech’’— ..................................................................................
4. Single-Package Vertical Air
Conditioners and Heat Pumps
Based on information received from
manufacturer interviews conducted in
preparation for the forthcoming SPVU
NOPR, DOE has determined that
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:33 Apr 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
approximately 35 percent of SPVAC
shipments go to educational facilities,
and the majority of those installations
are for space conditioning of modular
classroom buildings. Another
approximately 35 percent of the
shipments go to providing cooling for
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
telecommunications and electronics
enclosures. The remainder of the
shipments (30 percent) is used in a wide
variety of commercial buildings,
including offices, temporary buildings,
and some miscellaneous facilities. In
almost all of these commercial building
E:\FR\FM\11APP1.SGM
11APP1
20128
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 70 / Friday, April 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
applications, the buildings served are
expected to be of modular construction,
because SPVUs, as packaged air
conditioners installed on external
building walls, do not impact site
preparation costs for modular buildings,
which may be relocated multiple times
over the building’s life. The verticallyoriented configuration of SPVUs allows
the building mounting to be unobtrusive
and minimizes impacts on modular
building transportation requirements.
These advantages do not apply to a
significant extent to site-constructed
buildings. DOE further understands that
shipments of SPVHP equipment would
primarily be to educational facilities or
office-type end uses but would be
infrequently used for
telecommunication or electronic
enclosures for which the heating
requirements are often minimal.
DOE analyzed energy use in three
different classes of commercial
buildings that utilize SPVU equipment:
(1) modular classrooms; (2) modular
offices; and (3) telecommunication
shelters. To estimate the energy use of
SPVU equipment in these building
types, DOE developed building
simulation models for use with DOE’s
EnergyPlus software.26 A prototypical
building model was developed for each
building type, described by the building
footprint, general building size, and
design. The building types were
represented by a 1,568 ft2 wood-frame
modular classroom, a 1,568 ft2 woodframe modular office, and a 240 ft2
concrete-wall telecommunications
shelter. In each case, the building
construction (footprint, window-wall
ratio, general design) was developed to
be representative of typical designs
within the general class of building.
Operating schedules, internal load
profiles, internal electric receptacle
(plug) loads, and occupancy for the
modular classroom were based upon
classroom-space-type data found in the
DOE Primary School commercial
prototype building model.27 Operating
schedules, internal load profiles,
internal plug loads, and occupancy for
modular office buildings were those
from office space in the DOE Small
Office commercial prototype building
model. Id. For the telecommunications
shelter, DOE did not identify a source
26 EnergyPlus Energy Simulation Software and
documentation are available at: https://
apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/energyplus/.
27 The commercial prototype building models are
available on DOE’s Web site as Energy Plus input
files at: https://www.energycodes.gov/development/
commercial/90.1_models. Documentation of the
initial model development is provided in: Deru, M.,
et al., U.S. Department of Energy Commercial
Reference Building Models of the National Building
Stock, NREL/TP–5500–46861 (2011).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:33 Apr 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
for typical representative internal
electronic loads as a function of
building size, nor did it find
information on representative internal
gain profiles. However, based on
feedback from shelter manufacturers,
DOE used a 36,000 Btu/h (10.55 kW)
peak internal load to reflect internal
design load in the shelter. DOE
determined that, on average over the
year, this load ran at a scheduled 65
percent of peak value, reflecting
estimates for computer server
environments.28 Each of these three
building models was used to establish
the energy usage of SPVAC and SPVHP
equipment in the same building class.
Envelope performance (e.g., wall,
window, and roof insulation, and
window performance) and lighting
power inputs were based on
requirements in ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2004.29 DOE believes that the
requirements in ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2004 are sufficiently representative
of a mixture of both older and more
recent construction and that resulting
SPVU equipment loads will be
representative of typical SPVU
equipment loads in the building stock.
Ventilation levels were based on
ASHRAE Standard 62.1–2004.30
DOE simulated each building
prototype in 237 U.S. climate locations,
taking into account variation in building
envelope performance for each climate
as required by ASHRAE 90.1–2004. For
simulations used to represent SPVU
equipment of less than 65,000 Btu/h, no
outside air economizers were assumed
for the modular office and modular
classroom buildings.31 However, for
simulations used to represent
equipment of greater than or equal to
65,000 Btu/h but less than 135,000 Btu/
h, economizer usage was presumed to
be climate-dependent in these building
types, based on ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2004 requirements for unitary
equipment in that capacity range. For
28 EnergyConsult Pty Ltd., Equipment Energy
Efficiency Committee Regulatory Impact Statement
Consultation Draft: Minimum Energy Performance
Standards and Alternative Strategies for Close
Control Air Conditioners, Report No 2008/11 (2008)
(Available at: www.energyrating.gov.au).
29 American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and
Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE), Energy
Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential
Buildings, ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1–
2004 (2005).
30 American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and
Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE), Ventilation
for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality, ANSI/ASHRAE/
IESNA Standard 62.1–2004 (2004).
31 An ‘‘outside air economizer’’ is a combination
of ventilation and exhaust air dampers and controls
that increase the amount of outside air brought in
to a building when the outside air conditions (i.e.,
temperature and humidity) are low, such that
increasing the amount of ventilation air reduces the
equipment cooling loads.
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the telecommunications shelter,
economizers were assumed for 45
percent of buildings, based on
manufacturer interviews. In addition,
for the telecommunications shelter,
redundant identical air conditioners
with alternating usage were assumed
when establishing average annual
energy consumption per unit.
Simulations were done for the
buildings using SPVAC equipment and
electric resistance heating, and then a
separate set of simulations was done for
buildings with SPVHP equipment. For
each equipment type and building type
combination, DOE simulated each
efficiency level identified in the
engineering analysis for each equipment
class. Fan power at these efficiency
levels was based on manufacturers’
literature and reported fan power
consumption data as developed in the
engineering analysis. Brushless
permanent magnet (BPM) supply air
blower motors were assumed at an EER
of 10.0 and higher for all classes of
equipment based on results from the
engineering analysis. The supply air
blower motors are assumed to run at
constant speed and constant power
while operating.
DOE used typical meteorological
weather data (TMY3) for each location
in the simulations.32 DOE sized
equipment for each building simulation
using a design-day sizing method
incorporating the design data found in
the EnergyPlus design-day weather data
files for each climate.33 DOE also
incorporated an additional cooling
sizing factor of 1.1 for the equipment
used in the modular office and modular
classroom simulations, reflective of the
typical sizing adjustment needed to
account for discrete available equipment
capacities in SPVAC and SPVHP
equipment.
EER and heating COP were converted
to corresponding simulation inputs for
each efficiency level simulated. These
inputs, along with the calculated fan
power at each efficiency level, were
used in the building simulations.
Further details of the building model
and the simulation inputs for the
SPVAC and SPVHP equipment can be
found in chapter 3 of the NODA TSD.
From the annual simulation results
for SPVAC equipment, DOE extracted
the condenser energy use for cooling,
the supply air blower energy use for
32 Wilcox S. and W. Marion, User’s Manual for
TMY3 Data Sets, National Renewable Energy
Laboratory, Report No. NREL/TP–581–43156
(2008).
33 EnergyPlus TMY3-based weather data files and
design-day data files available at: https://
apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/energyplus/
weatherdata_about.cfm.
E:\FR\FM\11APP1.SGM
11APP1
20129
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 70 / Friday, April 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules
both heating and cooling hours, the
electric resistance heating energy, and
the equipment capacity for each
building type, climate, and efficiency
level. From these, DOE developed
corresponding normalized annual
cooling energy per cooling ton and
annual blower energy per ton for the
efficiency levels simulated. DOE also
developed the electrical heating energy
per ton for the building. These per-ton
cooling and blower energy values were
added together and then multiplied by
the average cooling capacity estimated
for the equipment class simulated to
arrive at an initial energy consumption
estimate for SPVAC. In a deviation from
the 2011 NODA analysis, DOE also
noted that, where fan power was
reduced for higher efficiency levels,
there was a corresponding increase in
the amount of heating required in each
climate to make up for the loss of heat
energy imparted into the supply air
stream through the use of the moreefficient supply air blower during the
heating season. This impact was climate
dependent, with little heating impact in
warm climates, and greater heating
impact in cold climates where heating
energy requirements dominate during
the year. DOE calculated this heating
‘‘take back’’ effect for higher efficiency
levels as a deviation from the baseline
heating energy use for each equipment
capacity. The final SPVAC energy
consumption estimates were then based
on the calculated cooling and supply
blower energy uses plus this heating
take back, which allowed the resulting
energy savings estimates to correctly
account for the heating energy increase
during the year. In addition, it was
estimated that 5 percent of the market
for the class of SPVAC less than 65,000
Btu/h utilize gas furnace heating. The
heating take back for these systems was
estimated based on the heating load of
the systems with electric resistance heat
and assuming an average 81-percent
furnace annual fuel utilization
efficiency (AFUE).
The analytical method for SPVHP was
carried out in a similar fashion;
however, for heat pumps, DOE included
the heating energy (compressor heating
and electric resistance backup) directly
from the simulation results and, thus,
did not separately calculate a heating
take back effect. From these data, DOE
developed per-ton energy consumption
values for cooling, supply blower, and
heating electric loads. These per-ton
energy figures were summed and
multiplied by the nominal capacity for
the equipment class simulated to arrive
at the annual per-ton energy
consumption for SPVHP for each
combination of building type, climate,
and efficiency level.
For each combination of equipment
class, building type, climate, and
efficiency level, DOE developed UEC
values for each State using weighting
factors to establish the contribution of
each climate in each State. National
average UEC estimates for each
equipment class and efficiency level
were also established based on
population-based weighting across
States and shipment weights to the
different building types. With regard to
the latter, while DOE established
shipment weights for SPVAC equipment
related to the three building types
(educational, office, and
telecommunications), DOE determined
that SPVHP equipment was not used to
a significant extent in
telecommunications facilities and, thus,
only allocated shipments of SPVHP
equipment to two building types,
educational and office.
For details of this energy use analysis,
see chapter 3 of the NODA TSD.
Table III.4 shows the annual UEC
estimates for SPVAC and SPVHP
corresponding to the efficiency levels
analyzed. For all levels above the
baseline, SPVAC less than 65,000 Btu/
h also include a heating take-back UEC
of 53 kBtu/year.
TABLE III.4—NATIONAL UEC ESTIMATES FOR SPVUS
SPVAC <65,000
Btu/h
SPVHP <65,000
Btu/h
SPVAC ≥65,000
and <135,000
Btu/h
9.0
10.0
10.5
11.0
11.8
12.3
9.0
10.0
10.5
11.0
11.8
12.3
8.9
10.0
............................
............................
............................
............................
6,814
6,113
5,864
5,638
5,335
5,136
20,222
19,689
19,236
18,951
18,115
17,977
13,604
12,119
............................
............................
............................
............................
Efficiency Level (EER)
Baseline—Federal Standard ............................................................................................
ASHRAE Level (1) ...........................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 2 .............................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 3 .............................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 4 .............................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 5—‘‘Max-Tech’’— ..................................................................................
UEC (kwh/year)
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Baseline—Federal Standard ............................................................................................
ASHRAE Level (1) ...........................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 2 .............................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 3 .............................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 4 .............................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 5—‘‘Max-Tech’’— ..................................................................................
DOE seeks input on its analysis of
UECs for these equipment classes and
its use in establishing the energy savings
potential for higher standards. Of
particular interest to DOE is input on
shipments of SPVHP equipment to
telecommunications shelters and the
frequency of use of economizers in
equipment serving these shelters. DOE
also recognizes that there may be
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:33 Apr 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
regional differences between the
shipments of heat pumps and air
conditioners to warmer or cooler
climates and requests stakeholder input
on how, or if, such differences can be
taken into account in the energy use
characterization. DOE identified these
topics as Issues 10 and 11 under ‘‘Issues
on Which DOE Seeks Comment’’ in
section IV.B of this NODA.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
5. Commercial Water Heaters
To provide an estimate of the UEC of
commercial oil-fired storage water
heaters (greater than 105,000 Btu/h and
less than 4,000 Btu/h/gal), DOE
calculated the shipment-weighted
average UEC of gas-fired commercial
storage water heaters using data in the
2000 Screening Analysis for EPACTCovered Commercial HVAC and Water-
E:\FR\FM\11APP1.SGM
11APP1
20130
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 70 / Friday, April 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules
Heating Equipment. (EERE–2006–STD–
0098–0015) DOE then calculated the
ratio of UEC of oil-fired to gas-fired
commercial water heaters based on the
water heating information derived from
the Energy Information Administration’s
2003 Commercial Buildings Energy
Consumption Survey.34 DOE applied
this ratio to the shipment-weighted
average UEC of gas-fired commercial
storage water heaters to arrive at the
UEC of oil-fired commercial storage
water heaters. DOE assumed this UEC
corresponded to the baseline efficiency
of 78 percent. For additional efficiency
levels above 78 percent, DOE scaled the
UECs based on the ratio of thermal
efficiency at the baseline and each
specific efficiency level. DOE seeks
comment on its approach to estimating
UECs for oil-fired commercial storage
water heaters. DOE has identified this
topic as Issue 12 under ‘‘Issues on
Which DOE Seeks Comment’’ in section
IV.B of this NODA.
Table III.5 shows the UEC estimates
for the current Federal standard levels,
the ASHRAE 90.1–2013 levels, and the
higher efficiency levels for oil-fired
commercial storage water heaters.
2000 Screening Analysis for EPACTCovered Commercial HVAC and WaterHeating Equipment. (EERE–2006–STD–
0098–0015) Table III.6 shows these data.
While the U.S. Census provides
shipments data for air-cooled equipment
less than 65,000 Btu/h, it does not
disaggregate the shipments into singlephase and three-phase. Therefore, DOE
used the Census data from 1999 to
2010 35 as a trend from which to
extrapolate DOE’s 1999 estimated
shipments data (which is divided by
equipment class) for three-phase
equipment for the time period from
2000 to 2010. DOE then used the
estimated shipments from 1999 to 2010
to establish a trend from which to
project shipments beyond 2010. For
heat pumps, DOE used a linear trend,
which is slightly decreasing for singlepackage units and increasing for split
systems. However, for single-package air
conditioners, the trend was
precipitously declining. As a result, for
single-package air conditioners for the
years after 2010, DOE used the average
value from 1999 to 2010. The full time
series of shipments can be found in the
ASHRAE NODA TSD.
source heat pump shipments to
individual equipment classes. Table
III.8 exhibits the shipment data
provided for 1999. DOE assumed that
this distribution of shipments across the
various equipment classes remained
constant and has used this same
distribution in its projection of future
shipments of water-source heat pumps.
The complete historical data set and the
projected shipments for each equipment
class can be found in the ASHRAE
NODA TSD.
TABLE III.7—TOTAL SHIPMENTS OF
WATER-SOURCE HEAT PUMPS (CENSUS PRODUCT CODE: 333415E181)
Equipment
class
1989
1999
2009
Total ............
157,080
120,545
180,101
TABLE III.8—TOTAL SHIPMENTS OF
WATER-SOURCE HEAT PUMPS (AHRI)
Equipment class
WSHP <17000 Btu/h ....
WSHP 17000–65000
Btu/h ..........................
WSHP 65000–135000
Btu/h ..........................
1999
Percent
41,000
31
86,000
65
TABLE III.5—NATIONAL UEC ESTIMATES FOR COMMERCIAL WATERHEATING EQUIPMENT
TABLE III.6—DOE ESTIMATED SHIP5,000
4
MENTS OF SMALL THREE-PHASE
COMMERCIAL AIR CONDITIONERS
DOE notes that an EIA report on
AND HEAT PUMPS <65,000 Btu/h
geothermal heat pump manufacturers 37
Oil-fired storage
water-heating equipment (>105,000 Btu/h
and <4,000 Btu/h/gal)
shows shipments of water-source units
(defined by EIA as those tested to ARI–
320) as only 22,009 in 2009 and 7,808
Single-Package AC ......................
213,728
in 2000, which is significantly less than
Single-Package HP ......................
27,773
Split System HP ...........................
11,903 that reported by the Census (product
code 333415E181) and by AHRI. DOE
notes that both the Census data and the
2. Water-Source Heat Pumps
EIA report show consistent shipments of
The U.S. Census published historical
separately-reported ground-source and
(1980, 1983–1994, 1997–2006, and
ground-water-source heat pumps (listed
2008–2010) water-source heat pump
as Census product code 333415G and
shipment data.36 Table III.7 exhibits the defined by EIA as those tested to ARI–
shipment data provided for a selection
325/330) at approximately 87,000
of years. DOE analyzed data from the
shipments in 2009; DOE is not counting
years 1990–2010 to establish a trend
these shipments in its estimates as
from which to project shipments beyond reported in Table III.7. DOE believes
2010. DOE used a linear trend. Because
that water-source heat pumps operate
the Census data do not distinguish
with a water loop using a boiler or
between equipment capacities, DOE
chiller as the heat source or sink, and
used the shipments data by equipment
that, therefore, may not be considered
class provided by AHRI in 1999, and
‘‘geothermal’’; in this case, the EIA
published in the 2000 Screening
report may not include a comprehensive
Analysis for EPACT-Covered
number of water-source heat pump
Commercial HVAC and Water-Heating
shipments.
Equipment (EERE–2006–STD–0098–
DOE seeks comment on the market for
0015), to distribute the total waterwater-source heat pumps, especially
what magnitude of annual shipments is
35 U.S. Census Bureau. Current Industrial Reports
most accurate, and how shipments are
for Refrigeration, Air Conditioning, and Warm Air
Heating Equipment, MA333M. Note that the current expected to change over time. DOE also
Efficiency Level (Et)
Baseline—Federal
Standard ................
ASHRAE Level (1) ....
Efficiency Level 2 .....
Efficiency Level 3—
‘‘Max-Tech’’— .......
78%
80%
81%
82%
UEC (MMBtu/year)
Baseline—Federal
Standard ................
ASHRAE Level (1) ....
Efficiency Level 2 .....
Efficiency Level 3—
‘‘Max-Tech’’— .......
131
128
126
125
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
B. Shipments
1. Small Commercial Air Conditioners
and Heat Pumps
DOE previously estimated shipments
of air-cooled, three-phase equipment
less than 65,000 Btu/h by equipment
class for the year 1999 as part of the
34 U.S. Department of Energy: Energy Information
Administration, Commercial Buildings Energy
Consumption Survey (2003) (Last accessed Jan.
2014) (Available at: https://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/
cbecs/).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:32 Apr 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
Equipment Class
1999
industrial reports were discontinued in 2010, so
more recent data are not available. Available at:
https://www.census.gov/manufacturing/cir/
historical_data/ma333m/.
36 Id.
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
37 U.S. Energy Information Administration,
Geothermal Heat Pump Manufacturing Activities
2009 (2010) (Available at: https://www.eia.gov/
renewable/renewables/geothermalrpt09.pdf).
E:\FR\FM\11APP1.SGM
11APP1
20131
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 70 / Friday, April 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules
seeks comment on the share of the
market for ground-source and groundwater-source heat pump applications
that use models also rated for waterloop application. DOE identified these
as Issues 13 and 14 under ‘‘Issues on
Which DOE Seeks Comment’’ in section
IV.B of this NODA.
3. Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners
To estimate yearly shipments of
PTACs, DOE examined new
construction and replacement
shipments. New construction shipments
were calculated using projected new
construction floor space of healthcare,
lodging, and small office buildings from
the Annual Energy Outlook 2013 (AEO
2013) 38 and historical saturation data,
which were calculated from historical
shipments data and historical new
construction floor space as shown in
Table III.9. Replacement shipments
equaled the number of units that failed
in a given year, based on a stock model
and distribution of equipment lifetimes.
DOE determined the distribution of
shipments among the equipment classes
using shipments data by equipment
class provided by AHRI for the 2008
PTAC and PTHP rulemaking, as shown
in Table III.10.39
TABLE III.9—HISTORICAL PTAC AND PTHP SHIPMENTS WITH NEW CONSTRUCTION FLOOR SPACE VALUES USED TO
CALCULATE SATURATION
Year
Health care (million
s.f.)
Lodging (million s.f.)
Small Office (million
s.f.)
Total (million s.f.)
New Construction
Shipments
Saturation (units/
million s.f.)
2000
68
172
179
419
66,407
6,315
TABLE III.10—SHIPMENTS OF PTACS BY EQUIPMENT CLASS (AHRI)
PTAC
<7,000
Btu/h
1998–2004 Average Shipments ..............................................................
Percent .....................................................................................................
4. Single-Package Vertical Air
Conditioners and Heat Pumps
To develop the SPVU shipments
model, DOE started with 2005 shipment
estimates from the Air-Conditioning and
Refrigeration Institute (ARI, now AHRI)
for units less than 65,000 Btu/h as
published in a previous rulemaking 40
(more recent data are not available).
Table III.11 shows these data.
TABLE III.11—TOTAL SHIPMENTS OF
SINGLE PACKAGE VERTICAL UNITS
Equipment class
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SPVAC
phase
SPVAC
phase
SPVHP
phase
SPVHP
phase
2005
<65,000 Btu/h, single........................................
<65,000 Btu/h, three........................................
<65,000 Btu/h, single........................................
<65,000 Btu/h, three........................................
31,976
13,125
14,301
6,129
38 AEO 2013 can be accessed at: https://
www.eia.gov/forecasts/archive/aeo13/index.cfm.
39 U.S. Department of Energy—Office of Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Energy
Conservation Program for Commercial and
Industrial Equipment: Packaged Terminal Air
Conditioner and Packaged Terminal Heat Pump
Energy Conservation Standards (Available at: https://
www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=EERE-2007BT-STD-0012).
40 U.S. Department of Energy—Office of Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Technical
Support Document: Energy Efficiency Program for
Commercial and Industrial Equipment: Efficiency
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:33 Apr 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
12,898
3%
≥7,000—
≤15,000
Btu/h
205,355
48%
PTHP
>15,000
Btu/h
15,407
4%
<7,000
Btu/h
7,702
2%
≥7,000—
≤15,000
Btu/h
168,068
40%
>15,000
Btu/h
13,534
3%
DOE added additional shipments for
SPVACs greater than or equal to 65,000
Btu/h and less than 135,000 Btu/h,
which make up 3 percent of the market,
based on manufacturer interviews. As
there are no models on the market for
SPVHP greater than or equal to 65,000
Btu/h and less than 135,000 Btu/h, or
for any SPVUs greater than or equal to
135,000 Btu/h, DOE did not develop
shipments estimates (or generate NES)
for these equipment classes. See chapter
4 of the NODA TSD for more details on
the initial shipment estimates by
equipment class that were used as the
basis for the shipments projections
discussed subsequently.
To project shipments of SPVUs for
new construction (starting in 2006),
DOE relied primarily on sector-based
estimates of saturation and projections
of floor space. Based on manufacturer
interview information, DOE allocated 35
percent of shipments to the education
sector, 35 percent to telecom, and 30
percent to offices. DOE used the 2005
new construction shipments and 2005
new construction floor space for offices
and education (from AEO 2013) to
estimate a saturation rate for each end
use.41 DOE applied this saturation rate
to AEO 2013 projections of new
construction floor space to project
shipments to new construction through
2044. For shipments to telecom, DOE
developed an index based on County
Business Pattern data for
establishments 42 and projected this
trend forward. To allocate the total
projected shipments for office,
education, and telecom into the
equipment classes, DOE used the
fraction of shipments from 2005 for each
equipment class. This fraction remained
constant over time. The complete
discussion of shipment allocation and
projected shipments for the different
Standards for Commercial Heating, AirConditioning, and Water Heating Equipment
Including Packaged Terminal Air-Conditioners and
Packaged Terminal Heat Pumps, Small Commercial
Packaged Boiler, Three-Phase Air-Conditioners and
Heat Pumps <65,000 Btu/h, and Single-Package
Vertical Air Conditioners and Single-Package
Vertical Heat Pumps <65,000 Btu/h (March 2006)
(Available at: https://www1.eere.energy.gov/
buildings/appliance_standards/commercial/pdfs/
ashrae_products/ashrae_products_draft_tsd_
030206.pdf). This TSD was prepared for the
rulemaking that resulted in the Final Rule: Energy
Efficiency Program for Certain Commercial and
Industrial Equipment: Efficiency Standards for
Commercial Heating, Air-Conditioning, and WaterHeating Equipment. 72 FR 10038 (March 7, 2007).
41 Manufacturers reported that in 2012, 50 percent
of shipments were for new construction. DOE
allocated a larger percentage of shipments to new
construction in 2005 in order to arrive at 50 percent
in 2012.
42 U.S. Census Bureau, County Business Patterns
for NAICS 237130 Power and Communication Line
and Related Structures Construction (Available at:
https://www.census.gov/econ/cbp/) (Last
accessed May 2, 2012).
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\11APP1.SGM
11APP1
20132
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 70 / Friday, April 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules
equipment classes can be found in
chapter 4 of the NODA TSD.
In order to model shipments for
replacement SPVUs, DOE developed
historical shipments for SPVUs back to
1981 based on an index of square
footage production data from the
Modular Buildings Institute.43
Shipments prior to 1994 were
extrapolated based on a trend from 2005
to 1997. In the stock model, the lifetime
of SPVUs follows a distribution with a
minimum of 10 years and a maximum
of 25 years (and an average of 15 years).
All retired units are assumed to be
replaced with new shipments. The
complete discussion of the method for
extrapolating historical shipments can
be found in chapter 4 of the NODA TSD.
1% per year growth rate after 2000. To
derive the shipments of oil-fired storage
water heaters, DOE calculated the ratio
of oil- versus gas-fired storage water
heaters using the number of models in
the AHRI model database, which was
3.3 percent. DOE multiplied this ratio
by the shipments of gas-fired storage
water heaters to calculate the shipments
of oil-fired storage water heaters. The
complete series of shipments can be
found in chapter 4 of the NODA TSD.
DOE seeks input and data regarding
its shipments methodologies and
projections for all equipment analyzed
in today’s NODA. DOE identified this as
Issue 15 under ‘‘Issues on Which DOE
Seeks Comment’’ in section IV.B of this
NODA.
5. Commercial Water Heaters
DOE derived the shipments for
commercial oil-fired storage water
heaters (greater than 105,000 Btu/h and
less than 4,000 Btu/h/gal) from the 2000
Screening Analysis for EPACT-Covered
Commercial HVAC and Water-Heating
Equipment (EERE–2006–STD–0098–
0015) and the AHRI model database.44
The PNNL study estimated the
shipments of gas-fired storage water
heaters in 1999. DOE estimated that the
shipments in 2000 are the same as the
shipments in 1999, and then applied a
C. Base-Case Efficiency Distribution
DOE reviewed manufacturer
interview data (for SPVUs) or the AHRI
certified products directory for relevant
equipment classes (for all other
equipment) to determine the
distribution of efficiency levels for
commercially-available models within
each equipment class analyzed in
today’s NODA. DOE bundled the
efficiency levels into ‘‘efficiency ranges’’
and determined the percentage of
models within each range. The
distribution of efficiencies in the base
case for each equipment class can be
found in the ASHRAE NODA TSD.
For the standards case for all
equipment in today’s NODA, DOE
assumed shipments at lower efficiencies
were most likely to roll up into higher
efficiency levels in response to morestringent energy conservation standards.
For each efficiency level analyzed
within a given equipment class, DOE
used a ‘‘roll-up’’ scenario to establish
the market shares by efficiency level for
the year that standards would become
effective (e.g., 2015, 2017, or 2020). DOE
estimated that the efficiencies of
equipment in the base case that did not
meet the standard level under
consideration would roll up to meet the
standard level. Available information
also suggests that all equipment
efficiencies in the base case that were
above the standard level under
consideration would not be affected.
Table III.12 shows an example of the
distribution of efficiencies within the
base-case and the roll-up scenarios to
establish the distribution of efficiencies
in the standards cases for oil-fired
commercial storage water heaters. For
all the tables of the distribution of
efficiencies in the base case and
standards cases by equipment class, see
the ASHRAE NODA TSD.
TABLE III.12—DISTRIBUTION OF EFFICIENCIES IN THE BASE CASE AND STANDARDS CASES FOR OIL-FIRED COMMERCIAL
STORAGE WATER HEATERS
Thermal efficiency (%)
78
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Base Case .......................................................................................................................................................
ASHRAE 90.1–2013 Standard ........................................................................................................................
Efficiency Level 2 .............................................................................................................................................
Max-Tech .........................................................................................................................................................
80
81
82
52.6%
............
............
............
23.7%
76.3%
............
............
10.5%
10.5%
86.8%
............
13.2%
13.2%
13.2%
100.0%
DOE seeks input on its determination
of the base-case distribution of
efficiencies and its projection of how
amended energy conservation standards
would affect the distribution of
efficiencies in each standards case. DOE
identified this as Issue 16 under ‘‘Issues
on Which DOE Seeks Comment’’ in
section IV.B of this NODA.
Using the distribution of efficiencies
in the base case and in the standards
cases for each equipment class analyzed
in today’s NODA, as well as the UECs
for each specified EER, SEER, or thermal
efficiency (discussed previously), DOE
calculated market-weighted average
efficiency values. The market-weighted
average efficiency value represents the
average efficiency of the total units
shipped at a specified amended
standard level. The market-weighted
average efficiency values for the base
case and the standards cases for each
efficiency level analyzed within the
equipment classes is provided in the
ASHRAE NODA TSD.
DOE converted the annual site energy
savings into the annual amount of
energy saved at the source of electric
generation (i.e., primary energy) using
annual multiplicative factors calculated
from the AEO 2013 projections.45 For
electricity, the conversion factors vary
over time because of projected changes
in generation sources (i.e., the types of
power plants projected to provide
electricity to the country).
In response to the recommendations
of a committee on ‘‘Point-of-Use and
Full-Fuel-Cycle Measurement
Approaches to Energy Efficiency
Standards’’ appointed by the National
Academy of Sciences, DOE announced
its intention to use full-fuel-cycle (FFC)
measures of energy use and greenhouse
gas and other emissions in the national
impact analyses and emissions analyses
included in future energy conservation
standards rulemakings. 76 FR 51281
(August 18, 2011). After evaluating
43 Available at: https://www.modular.org/
HtmlPage.aspx?name=analysis (Last accessed May
18, 2012).
44 Available at: https://www.ahridirectory.org/
ahridirectory/pages/home.aspx.
45 AEO 2013 can be accessed at: https://
www.eia.gov/forecasts/archive/aeo13/index.cfm.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:33 Apr 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
D. Other Analytical Inputs
1. Conversion of Site Energy Savings
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\11APP1.SGM
11APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 70 / Friday, April 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules
analytical models and the approaches
discussed in the August 18, 2011 notice,
DOE published a statement of amended
policy in which DOE explained its
determination that the National Energy
Modeling System (NEMS) is the most
appropriate tool for its FFC analysis and
its intention to use NEMS for that
purpose. 77 FR 49701 (August 17, 2012).
The calculations in today’s notice use
FFC multipliers derived from NEMS.
2. Equipment Lifetime
DOE defines ‘‘equipment lifetime’’ as
the age when a unit is retired from
service. DOE reviewed available
literature to establish typical equipment
lifetimes. For air-cooled equipment,
water-source heat pumps, and
commercial storage water heaters, DOE
used the estimated product lifetimes
from the 2000 screening analysis for
EPACT-Covered Commercial HVAC and
Water-Heating Equipment (EERE–2006–
STD–0098–0015). The average lifetime
for air-cooled equipment is 15 years, for
water-source equipment 19 years, and
for water heaters 7 years.
For PTACs, DOE used the same
average lifetime of 10 years as used in
the 2008 final rule for PTACs. 73 FR
58772, 58789 (Oct. 7, 2008). For SPVUs,
DOE used an average of 15 years based
on a review of a range of packaged
cooling equipment lifetime estimates
found in published studies and online
documents. For further details on
equipment lifetime, see the ASHRAE
NODA TSD.
3. Compliance Date and Analysis Period
If DOE were to propose a rule
prescribing energy conservation
standards at the efficiency levels
contained in ASHRAE Standard 90.1–
2013, EPCA states that any such
standard shall become effective on or
after a date that is two or three years
(depending on equipment type or size)
after the effective date of the applicable
minimum energy efficiency requirement
in the amended ASHRAE standard (i.e.,
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013). (42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(D)) All equipment for
which analysis was performed in this
NODA falls into the two-year category.
For all PTACs and air-cooled equipment
in this rulemaking, the effective date in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 is January
1, 2015. Thus, if DOE decides to adopt
the levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1–
2013, the rule would apply to PTACs
and air-cooled equipment manufactured
on or after January 1, 2017, which is two
years from the effective date specified in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013. For all
water-source heat pumps, SPVUs, and
commercial water heaters in this
rulemaking, ASHRAE Standard 90.1–
2013 did not specify an effective date,
so the publication date of October 9,
2013 is assumed. Thus, if DOE decides
to adopt the levels in ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2013, the rule would apply to
water-source heat pumps, SPVUs, and
commercial water heaters manufactured
on or after October 9, 2015, which is
two years from the publication date of
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013.
If DOE were to propose prescribing
energy conservation standards higher
than the efficiency levels contained in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013, under
EPCA, any such standard will become
effective for equipment manufactured
four years after the date of publication
of a final rule in the Federal Register.
(42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(D)) Thus, for
20133
equipment for which DOE might adopt
a level more stringent than the ASHRAE
efficiency level, the rule would apply to
equipment manufactured on and after a
date which is four years from the date
of publication of the final rule adopting
standards higher than the ASHRAE
efficiency levels (with a requirement to
complete that final rule no later than 30
months after publication of the revised
ASHRAE Standard 90.1, which occurred
on October 9, 2013). Under this
timeline, compliance with such more
stringent standards would be required
no later than April 9, 2020.
For purposes of calculating the NES
for water-source heat pumps, SPVUs,
and commercial water heaters, DOE
used an analysis period of 2015 (the
assumed compliance date if DOE were
to adopt the ASHRAE levels as Federal
standards for this equipment) through
2044. For PTACs and air-cooled
equipment, DOE used an analysis
period of 2017 (the assumed compliance
date if DOE were to adopt the ASHRAE
levels as Federal standards for this
equipment) through 2046. This is the
standard analysis period of 30 years that
DOE typically uses in its NES analysis.
While the analysis periods remain the
same for assessing the energy savings of
Federal standard levels higher than the
ASHRAE levels, those energy savings
would not begin accumulating until
2020 (the assumed compliance date if
DOE were to determine that standard
levels more stringent than the ASHRAE
levels are justified).
For each equipment class for which
DOE developed a potential energy
savings analysis, Table III.13 exhibits
the approximate compliance dates of an
amended energy conservation standard.
TABLE III.13—APPROXIMATE COMPLIANCE DATE OF AN AMENDED ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARD FOR EACH
EQUIPMENT CLASS
Approximate compliance
date for adopting the efficiency levels in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2013
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Equipment class
Three-Phase Air-Cooled Single Package Air Conditioners <65,000 Btu/h .....................
Three-Phase Air-Cooled Single Package Heat Pumps <65,000 Btu/h ...........................
Three-Phase Air-Cooled Split System Heat Pumps <65,000 Btu/h ................................
Water Source HP <17,000 Btu/h .....................................................................................
Water Source HP ≥17,000 to <65,000 Btu/h ..................................................................
Water Source HP ≥65,000 to 135,000 Btu/h ..................................................................
PTAC <7,000 Btu/h .........................................................................................................
PTAC ≥7,000 to ≤15,000 Btu/h .......................................................................................
PTAC >15,000 Btu/h .......................................................................................................
SPVAC <65,000 Btu/h .....................................................................................................
SPVHP <65,000 Btu/h .....................................................................................................
SPVAC ≥65,000 to <135,000 Btu/h .................................................................................
Oil-Fired Storage Water Heaters >105,000 Btu/h and <4,000 Btu/h/gal ........................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:33 Apr 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\11APP1.SGM
01/2017
01/2017
01/2017
10/2015
10/2015
10/2015
01/2017
01/2017
01/2017
10/2015
10/2015
10/2015
10/2015
11APP1
Approximate compliance
date for adopting morestringent efficiency levels
than those in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2013
04/2020
04/2020
04/2020
04/2020
04/2020
04/2020
04/2020
04/2020
04/2020
04/2020
04/2020
04/2020
04/2020
20134
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 70 / Friday, April 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules
E. Estimates of Potential Energy Savings
DOE estimated the potential primary
energy savings in quads (i.e., 1015 Btu)
for each efficiency level considered
within each equipment class analyzed.
The potential energy savings for
efficiency levels more stringent than
those specified by ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2013 were calculated relative to
the efficiency levels that would result if
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 standards
were adopted. Table III.14 through
Table III.26 show the potential energy
savings resulting from the analyses
conducted as part of this NODA. The
reported energy savings are cumulative
over the period in which equipment
shipped in the 30-year analysis
continues to operate.
TABLE III.14—POTENTIAL ENERGY SAVINGS FOR SMALL THREE-PHASE AIR-COOLED SINGLE-PACKAGE AIR CONDITIONERS
<65,000 Btu/h
Primary energy savings
estimate* (quads)
Efficiency level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
1—ASHRAE—14 SEER ........................................................................................
2—15 SEER ...........................................................................................................
3—16 SEER ...........................................................................................................
4—17.5 SEER ........................................................................................................
5—‘‘Max-Tech’’—19.15 SEER ...............................................................................
FFC energy savings
estimate*
(quads)
0.02
0.04
0.10
0.12
0.14
0.02
0.04
0.10
0.12
0.15
* The potential energy savings for efficiency levels more stringent than those specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 were calculated relative to the efficiency levels that would result if ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 standards were adopted.
TABLE III.15—POTENTIAL ENERGY SAVINGS FOR SMALL THREE-PHASE AIR-COOLED SINGLE-PACKAGE HEAT PUMPS
<65,000 Btu/h
Primary energy savings
estimate*
(quads)
Efficiency level
Level
Level
Level
Level
1—ASHRAE—14 SEER ........................................................................................
2—15 SEER ...........................................................................................................
3—16 SEER ...........................................................................................................
4—‘‘Max-Tech’’—18.05 SEER ...............................................................................
FFC energy savings
estimate*
(quads)
0.001
0.007
0.014
0.018
0.001
0.007
0.014
0.019
* The potential energy savings for efficiency levels more stringent than those specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 were calculated relative to the efficiency levels that would result if ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 standards were adopted.
TABLE III.16—POTENTIAL ENERGY SAVINGS FOR SMALL THREE-PHASE AIR-COOLED SPLIT SYSTEM HEAT PUMPS <65,000
Btu/h
Primary energy savings
estimate*
(quads)
Efficiency level
Level
Level
Level
Level
1—ASHRAE—14 SEER ........................................................................................
2—15 SEER ...........................................................................................................
3—16 SEER ...........................................................................................................
4—‘‘Max-Tech’’—18.05 SEER ...............................................................................
FFC energy savings
estimate*
(quads)
0.002
0.012
0.026
0.033
0.002
0.012
0.026
0.033
* The potential energy savings for efficiency levels more stringent than those specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 were calculated relative to the efficiency levels that would result if ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 standards were adopted.
TABLE III.17—POTENTIAL ENERGY SAVINGS FOR WATER-SOURCE HEAT PUMPS <17,000 Btu/h
Primary energy savings
estimate*
(quads)
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Efficiency level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
1—ASHRAE—12.2 EER ........................................................................................
2—13 EER .............................................................................................................
3—14 EER .............................................................................................................
4—15.7 EER ..........................................................................................................
5—16.5 EER ..........................................................................................................
6—‘‘Max-Tech’’—18.1 EER ...................................................................................
0.001
0.007
0.025
0.063
0.082
0.116
FFC energy savings
estimate*
(quads)
0.001
0.007
0.026
0.064
0.083
0.118
* The potential energy savings for efficiency levels more stringent than those specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 were calculated relative to the efficiency levels that would result if ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 standards were adopted.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:33 Apr 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\11APP1.SGM
11APP1
20135
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 70 / Friday, April 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules
TABLE III.18—POTENTIAL ENERGY SAVINGS FOR WATER-SOURCE HEAT PUMPS ≥17,000 AND <65,000 Btu/h
Primary energy savings
estimate*
(quads)
Efficiency level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
1—ASHRAE—13 EER ...........................................................................................
2—14.6 EER ..........................................................................................................
3—16.6 EER ..........................................................................................................
4—18 EER .............................................................................................................
5—19.2 EER ..........................................................................................................
6—‘‘Max-Tech’’—21.6 EER ...................................................................................
FFC energy savings
estimate*
(quads)
0.001
0.064
0.280
0.451
0.591
0.831
0.001
0.065
0.284
0.459
0.601
0.844
* The potential energy savings for efficiency levels more stringent than those specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 were calculated relative to the efficiency levels that would result if ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 standards were adopted.
TABLE III.19—POTENTIAL ENERGY SAVINGS FOR WATER-SOURCE HEAT PUMPS ≥65,000 AND <135,000 Btu/h
Primary energy savings
estimate *
(quads)
Efficiency level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
1—ASHRAE—13 EER ...........................................................................................
2—14 EER .............................................................................................................
3—15 EER .............................................................................................................
4—16 EER .............................................................................................................
5—‘‘Max-Tech’’—17.2 EER ...................................................................................
FFC energy savings
estimate *
(quads)
(**)
0.004
0.013
0.032
0.057
(**)
0.004
0.014
0.033
0.058
* The potential energy savings for efficiency levels more stringent than those specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 were calculated relative to the efficiency levels that would result if ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 standards were adopted.
** There are no potential savings for this Level because all models currently on the market exceed this efficiency level, and thus would not be
affected by a standard set at this level.
TABLE III.20—POTENTIAL ENERGY SAVINGS FOR PTAC <7,000 Btu/h
Primary energy savings
estimate *
(quads)
Efficiency level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
1—ASHRAE—11.9 EER ........................................................................................
2—12.2 EER ..........................................................................................................
3—12.6 EER ..........................................................................................................
4—13.1 EER ..........................................................................................................
5—13.6 EER ..........................................................................................................
6—‘‘Max-Tech’’—14.0 EER ...................................................................................
FFC energy savings estimate *
(quads)
(**)
(**)
0.001
0.002
0.003
0.004
(**)
(**)
0.001
0.002
0.003
0.004
* The potential energy savings for efficiency levels more stringent than those specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 were calculated relative to the efficiency levels that would result if ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 standards were adopted.
** There are no potential savings for this Level because all models currently on the market exceed this efficiency level, and thus would not be
affected by a standard set at this level.
TABLE III.21—POTENTIAL ENERGY SAVINGS FOR PTAC ≥7,000 AND ≤15,000 Btu/h
Primary energy savings estimate *
(quads)
Efficiency level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
1—ASHRAE—11.3 EER ........................................................................................
2—11.5 EER ..........................................................................................................
3—12.0 EER ..........................................................................................................
4—12.4 EER ..........................................................................................................
5—12.9 EER ..........................................................................................................
6—‘‘Max-Tech’’—13.3 EER ...................................................................................
0.001
0.005
0.022
0.040
0.058
0.076
FFC energy savings estimate *
(quads)
0.001
0.005
0.023
0.040
0.058
0.077
* The potential energy savings for efficiency levels more stringent than those specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 were calculated relative to the efficiency levels that would result if ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 standards were adopted.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
TABLE III.22—POTENTIAL ENERGY SAVINGS FOR PTAC >15,000 Btu/h
Primary energy savings
estimate*
(quads)
Efficiency level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
1—ASHRAE—9.5 EER ..........................................................................................
2—9.7 EER ............................................................................................................
3—10.0 EER ..........................................................................................................
4—10.4 EER ..........................................................................................................
5—10.8 EER ..........................................................................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:57 Apr 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\11APP1.SGM
0.0009
0.0007
0.0022
0.0037
0.0053
11APP1
FFC energy savings
estimate*
(quads)
0.0009
0.0007
0.0023
0.0038
0.0053
20136
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 70 / Friday, April 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules
TABLE III.22—POTENTIAL ENERGY SAVINGS FOR PTAC >15,000 Btu/h—Continued
Primary energy savings
estimate*
(quads)
Efficiency level
Level 6—‘‘Max-Tech’’—11.2 EER ...................................................................................
FFC energy savings
estimate*
(quads)
0.0068
0.0069
* The potential energy savings for efficiency levels more stringent than those specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 were calculated relative to the efficiency levels that would result if ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 standards were adopted.
TABLE III.23—POTENTIAL ENERGY SAVINGS ESTIMATES FOR SPVAC <65,000 Btu/h
Primary energy savings
estimate*
(quads)
Efficiency level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
1—ASHRAE—10 EER ...........................................................................................
2—10.5 EER ..........................................................................................................
3—11 EER .............................................................................................................
4—11.8 EER ..........................................................................................................
4—‘‘Max-Tech’’—12.3 EER ...................................................................................
FFC energy savings
estimate*
(quads)
0.21
0.07
0.14
0.22
0.28
0.21
0.07
0.14
0.23
0.29
* The potential energy savings for efficiency levels more stringent than those specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 were calculated relative to the efficiency levels that would result if ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 standards were adopted.
TABLE III.24—POTENTIAL ENERGY SAVINGS ESTIMATES FOR SPVHP<65,000 Btu/h
Primary energy savings
estimate* **
(quads)
Efficiency level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
1—ASHRAE—10 EER ...........................................................................................
2—10.5 EER ..........................................................................................................
3—11 EER .............................................................................................................
4—11.8 EER ..........................................................................................................
4—‘‘Max-Tech’’—12.3 EER ...................................................................................
FFC energy savings
estimate* **
(quads)
0.06
0.05
0.08
0.17
0.19
0.06
0.05
0.08
0.18
0.19
* The potential energy savings for efficiency levels more stringent than those specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 were calculated relative to the efficiency levels that would result if ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 standards were adopted.
** For SPVHPs, the energy savings estimates are based on both cooling savings (EER) and heating savings (COP).
TABLE III.25—POTENTIAL ENERGY SAVINGS ESTIMATES FOR SPVAC ≥65,000 AND <135,000 Btu/h
Efficiency level
Primary energy savings estimate
(quads)
FFC energy savings estimate
(quads)
Level 1—ASHRAE—10.0 EER ........................................................................................
0.02
0.02
TABLE III.26—POTENTIAL ENERGY SAVINGS ESTIMATES FOR COMMERCIAL OIL-FIRED STORAGE WATER HEATERS
>105,000 Btu/h AND <4,000 Btu/h/GAL
Primary energy savings
estimate*
(quads)
Efficiency level
Level 1—ASHRAE—80% Et ....................................................................................................
Level 2—81% Et ......................................................................................................................
Level 3—‘‘Max-Tech’’—82% Et ...............................................................................................
0.002
0.001
0.002
FFC energy savings
estimate*
(quads)
0.002
0.001
0.002
* The potential energy savings for efficiency levels more stringent than those specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 were calculated relative to the efficiency levels that would result if ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2013 standards were adopted.
the ADDRESSES section at the beginning
of this notice.
A. Submission of Comments
Submitting comments via
DOE will accept comments, data, and www.regulations.gov. The
information regarding this NODA no
www.regulations.gov Web page will
later than the date provided in the DATES require you to provide your name and
section at the beginning of this notice.
contact information. Your contact
Interested parties may submit
information will be viewable to DOE
comments, data, and other information
Building Technologies staff only. Your
contact information will not be publicly
using any of the methods described in
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
IV. Public Participation
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:33 Apr 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
viewable except for your first and last
names, organization name (if any), and
submitter representative name (if any).
If your comment is not processed
properly because of technical
difficulties, DOE will use this
information to contact you. If DOE
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
E:\FR\FM\11APP1.SGM
11APP1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 70 / Friday, April 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules
you for clarification, DOE may not be
able to consider your comment.
However, your contact information
will be publicly viewable if you include
it in the comment itself or in any
documents attached to your comment.
Any information that you do not want
to be publicly viewable should not be
included in your comment, nor in any
document attached to your comment.
Otherwise, persons viewing comments
will see only first and last names,
organization names, correspondence
containing comments, and any
documents submitted with the
comments.
Do not submit to www.regulations.gov
information for which disclosure is
restricted by statute, such as trade
secrets and commercial or financial
information (hereinafter referred to as
Confidential Business Information
(CBI)). Comments submitted through
www.regulations.gov cannot be claimed
as CBI. Comments received through the
Web site will waive any CBI claims for
the information submitted. For
information on submitting CBI, see the
Confidential Business Information
section below.
DOE processes submissions made
through www.regulations.gov before
posting. Normally, comments will be
posted within a few days of being
submitted. However, if large volumes of
comments are being processed
simultaneously, your comment may not
be viewable for up to several weeks.
Please keep the comment tracking
number that www.regulations.gov
provides after you have successfully
uploaded your comment.
Submitting comments via email, hand
delivery/courier, or mail. Comments and
documents submitted via email, hand
delivery, or mail also will be posted to
www.regulations.gov. If you do not want
your personal contact information to be
publicly viewable, do not include it in
your comment or any accompanying
documents. Instead, provide your
contact information in a cover letter.
Include your first and last names, email
address, telephone number, and
optional mailing address. The cover
letter will not be publicly viewable as
long as it does not include any
comments.
Include contact information each time
you submit comments, data, documents,
and other information to DOE. Email
submissions are preferred. If you submit
via mail or hand delivery/courier,
please provide all items on a CD, if
feasible, in which case, it is not
necessary to submit printed copies. No
telefacsimiles (faxes) will be accepted.
Comments, data, and other
information submitted to DOE
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:33 Apr 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
electronically should be provided in
PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or
Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file
format. Provide documents that are not
secured, that are written in English, and
that are free of any defects or viruses.
Documents should not contain special
characters or any form of encryption
and, if possible, they should carry the
electronic signature of the author.
Campaign form letters. Please submit
campaign form letters by the originating
organization in batches of between 50 to
500 form letters per PDF or as one form
letter with a list of supporters’ names
compiled into one or more PDFs. This
reduces comment processing and
posting time.
Confidential business information.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 1004.11, any person
submitting information that he or she
believes to be confidential and exempt
by law from public disclosure should
submit via email, postal mail, or hand
delivery/courier two well-marked
copies: One copy of the document
marked ‘‘confidential’’ that includes all
the information believed to be
confidential, and one copy of the
document marked ‘‘non-confidential’’
with the information believed to be
confidential deleted. Submit these
documents via email or on a CD, if
feasible. DOE will make its own
determination about the confidential
status of the information and treat it
according to its determination.
Factors of interest to DOE when
evaluating requests to treat submitted
information as confidential include: (1)
A description of the items; (2) whether
and why such items are customarily
treated as confidential within the
industry; (3) whether the information is
generally known by or available from
other sources; (4) whether the
information has previously been made
available to others without obligation
concerning its confidentiality; (5) an
explanation of the competitive injury to
the submitting person which would
result from public disclosure; (6) when
such information might lose its
confidential character due to the
passage of time; and (7) why disclosure
of the information would be contrary to
the public interest.
It is DOE’s policy that all comments
may be included in the public docket,
without change and as received,
including any personal information
provided in the comments (except
information deemed to be exempt from
public disclosure).
B. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment
Although DOE welcomes comments
on any aspect of this notice, DOE is
particularly interested in receiving
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
20137
comments and views of interested
parties concerning the following issues:
(1) DOE’s proposal to re-create
separate equipment classes for singlepackage and split system equipment in
the overall equipment classes of small
commercial package air conditioning
and heating equipment (air-cooled,
three-phase) less than 65,000 Btu/h;
(2) The nomenclature changes in
ASHRAE 90.1–2013 from ‘‘water
source’’ to ‘‘water to air, water loop’’
and from ‘‘COP’’ to ‘‘COPH’’, and
whether in fact they are editorial in
nature;
(3) The proposed definition for
‘‘water-source heat pump;’’
(4) DOE’s tentative proposal to not
establish a separate space-constrained
class for SPVUs;
(5) DOE’s preliminary conclusion that
the updates to the most recent versions
of ANSI Z21.47 do not have a
substantive impact on the measurement
of energy efficiency for gas-fired
furnaces;
(6) Whether energy usage for threephase commercial air-cooled equipment
would be similar to that modeled for
single-phase equipment in commercial
buildings;
(7) Whether increasing the HSPF for
commercial air-cooled equipment less
than 65,000 Btu/h will result in
significant energy savings, and, if so,
data to support such conclusion;
(8) The appropriateness of using the
cooling UECs for water-source heat
pumps developed in the 2000 screening
analysis, or other sources of data for this
analysis;
(9) Data and information related to
water-source heat pump heating energy
use;
(10) DOE’s analysis of UEC for SPVUs
and its use in establishing the energy
savings potential for more-stringent
standards. Of particular interest to DOE
is input on shipments of SPVHP
equipment to telecommunications
shelters and the frequency of use of
economizers in equipment serving these
shelters;
(11) Input on how or if regional
differences between the shipments of
heat pumps and air conditioners to
warmer or cooler climates can be taken
into account in the SPVU energy use
characterization;
(12) DOE’s derivation of UECs for oilfired storage water heaters;
(13) Data and information related to
the current shipments of water-source
heat pumps and expected future trends;
(14) The share of the market for
ground-source and ground-water-source
heat pump applications that use models
also rated for water-loop application;
E:\FR\FM\11APP1.SGM
11APP1
20138
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 70 / Friday, April 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules
(15) DOE’s shipment methodologies
and projections for all equipment
analyzed in today’s NODA, and any
shipments data related to these
equipment; and
(16) DOE’s determination of the basecase distribution efficiencies and its
prediction on how amended energy
conservation standards would affect the
distribution of efficiencies in the
standards case for the thirteen classes of
equipment for which analysis was
performed.
V. Approval of the Office of the
Secretary
The Secretary of Energy has approved
publication of this notice of data
availability.
Issued in Washington, DC, on April 7,
2014.
Kathleen B. Hogan,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy
Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy.
[FR Doc. 2014–08214 Filed 4–10–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2013–0981; Directorate
Identifier 2013–NM–032–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing
Company Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM); reopening of comment period.
AGENCY:
This document announces the
reopening of the comment period for the
above-referenced NPRM, which
proposed the adoption of a new
airworthiness directive (AD) that
applies to all The Boeing Company
Model MD–90–30 airplanes and that
would supersede AD 97–11–07 and AD
99–18–23. The NPRM proposed to
continue to require revising the
Airworthiness Limitations Section
(ALS) of the Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness to incorporate certain
compliance times for principal
structural elements (PSE) inspections
and replacement times for safe-life
limited parts. The NPRM also proposed
to require revising the maintenance or
inspection program to incorporate a new
PSE requirement for the rear spar caps
of the horizontal stabilizer and its
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:33 Apr 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
associated inspections. This reopening
of the comment period is necessary to
ensure that all interested persons have
ample opportunity to submit any
written relevant data, views, or
arguments regarding the proposed
requirements of the NPRM.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this NPRM (78 FR 73739, December 9,
2013) by May 6, 2014.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments,
using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Fax: 202–493–2251.
• Mail: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M–
30, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.
• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail
address above between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA–2013–
0981; or in person at the Docket
Management Facility between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this AD action, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The street address for
the Docket Office (telephone 800–647–
5527) is in the ADDRESSES section.
Comments will be available in the AD
docket shortly after receipt.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Roger Durbin, Airframe Branch, ANM–
120L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), 3960
Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA
90712–4137; phone: (562) 627–5233;
fax: (562) 627–5210; email:
roger.durbin@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We
proposed to amend 14 CFR Part 39 by
adding a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) that would apply to all The
Boeing Company Model MD–90–30
airplanes. The NPRM was published in
the Federal Register on December 9,
2013 (78 FR 73739). The NPRM
proposed to supersede AD 97–11–07,
Amendment 39–10036 (62 FR 27941,
May 22, 1997); and AD 99–18–23,
Amendment 39–11289 (64 FR 48284,
September 3, 1999). The NPRM
proposed to continue to require revising
the Airworthiness Limitations Section
(ALS) of the Instructions for Continued
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Airworthiness to incorporate certain
compliance times for principal
structural elements (PSE) inspections
and replacement times for safe-life
limited parts. The NPRM also proposed
to require revising the maintenance or
inspection program to incorporate a new
PSE requirement for the rear spar caps
of the horizontal stabilizer and its
associated inspections. The NPRM also
invites comments on its overall
regulatory, economic, environmental,
and energy aspects.
Events Leading to the Reopening of the
Comment Period
Since we issued the NPRM (78 FR
73739, December 9, 2013), we have
determined that the Relevant Service
Information section in the preamble of
the NPRM did not adequately describe
the service information. We specified to
see the service information, Boeing MD–
90 Airworthiness Limitations
Instructions (ALI) Report No. MDC–
94K9000, Revision 6, dated September
2011, at https://www.regulations.gov.
However, we did not post the service
information at https://
www.regulations.gov because we do not
have clearance to post Boeing MD–90
Airworthiness Limitations Instructions
(ALI) Report No. MDC–94K9000,
Revision 6, dated September 2011, at
the NPRM stage of the AD process.
Description of Service Information
Boeing MD–90 Airworthiness
Limitations Instructions (ALI) Report
No. MDC–94K9000, Revision 6, dated
September 2011, describes PSE
inspections, compliance times, and
replacement times for safe-life limited
parts, which are required by AD 97–11–
07, Amendment 39–10036 (62 FR
27941, May 22, 1997); and AD 99–18–
23, Amendment 39–11289 (64 FR
48284, September 3, 1999). Boeing MD–
90 Airworthiness Limitations
Instructions (ALI) Report No. MDC–
94K9000, Revision 6, dated September
2011, also describes a new PSE
requirement for the rear spar of the
horizontal stabilizer and its associated
inspections.
FAA’s Determination
We considered it necessary to
adequately describe the service
information and found it appropriate to
reopen the comment period to give all
interested persons additional time to
examine the proposed requirements of
the NPRM (78 FR 73739, December 9,
2013) and submit comments. We have
determined that reopening the comment
period for 25 days will not compromise
the safety of these airplanes.
E:\FR\FM\11APP1.SGM
11APP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 70 (Friday, April 11, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 20114-20138]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-08214]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 431
[Docket No. EERE-2014-BT-STD-0015]
RIN 1904-AB23
Energy Conservation Program for Certain Industrial Equipment:
Energy Conservation Standards for Commercial Heating, Air-Conditioning,
and Water-Heating Equipment
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Notice of data availability and request for public comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA), as
amended, directs the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to establish
energy conservation standards for certain commercial and industrial
equipment, including commercial heating, air-conditioning, and water-
heating equipment. Of particular relevance here, the statute also
requires that each time the corresponding consensus standard--the
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning
Engineers, Inc. (ASHRAE)/Illuminating Engineering Society (IES)
Standard 90.1--is amended by the industry, DOE must assess whether
there is a need to update the uniform national energy conservation
standards for the same equipment covered under EPCA. ASHRAE officially
released an amended version of this industry standard (ASHRAE Standard
90.1-2013), on October 9, 2013, thereby triggering DOE's related
obligations under EPCA. As a first step in meeting this statutory
requirement, today's notice of data availability (NODA) discusses the
results of DOE's analysis of the energy savings potential of amended
energy conservation standards for certain types of commercial equipment
covered by ASHRAE Standard 90.1. The energy savings potentials are
based upon either the efficiency levels specified in the amended
industry standard (i.e., ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013) or more-stringent
levels that would result in significant additional conservation of
energy and are technologically feasible and economically justified. DOE
is publishing this NODA to: announce the results and preliminary
conclusions of DOE's analysis of potential energy savings associated
with amended standards for this equipment, and request public comment
on this analysis, as well as the submission of data and other relevant
information.
DATES: DOE will accept written comments, data, and information
regarding this NODA no later than May 12, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Any comments submitted must identify the NODA for ASHRAE
Equipment and provide the docket number EERE-2014-BT-STD-0015 and/or
Regulatory Information Number (RIN) 1904-AB23. Interested parties are
encouraged to submit comments electronically. However, comments may be
submitted by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow
the instructions for submitting comments.
Email: ComHeatingACWHEquip2014STD0015@ee.doe.gov. Include
docket number EERE-2014-BT-STD-0015 and/or RIN number 1904-AB23 in the
subject line of the message. All comments should clearly identify the
name, address, and, if appropriate, organization of the commenter.
Submit electronic comments in WordPerfect, Microsoft Word, PDF, or
ASCII file format, and avoid the use of special characters or any form
of encryption.
Postal Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of
Energy, Building Technologies Office, Mailstop EE-5B, 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. (Please note that comments sent by mail are
often delayed and may be damaged by mail screening processes.)
Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department
of Energy, Building Technologies Office, Sixth Floor, 950 L'Enfant
Plaza SW., 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.
No telefacsimilies (faxes) will be accepted. For detailed
instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the
rulemaking process, see section IV of this document (Public
Participation).
Docket: The docket is available for review at https://www.regulations.gov, including Federal Register notices, comments, and
other supporting documents/materials throughout the rulemaking process.
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/
[[Page 20115]]
!docketDetail;D=EERE-2014-BT-STD-0015. This Web page contains
a link to the docket for this notice 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. See
section IV, ``Public Participation,'' for information on how to submit
comments through www.regulations.gov.
For information on how to submit a comment or review other public
comments and 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 Office, EE-5B, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington,
DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-6590. Email:
Ashley.Armstrong@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. Introduction
A. Authority
B. Purpose of the Notice of Data Availability
C. Background
1. ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013
D. Summary of DOE's Preliminary Assessment of Equipment for
Energy Savings Analysis
II. Discussion of Changes in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013
A. Commercial Package Air-Conditioning and Heating Equipment
1. Air-Cooled Equipment
2. Water-Source Equipment
3. Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners
4. Small-Duct, High-Velocity, and Through-The-Wall Equipment
5. Single-Package Vertical Air Conditioners and Single-Package
Vertical Heat Pumps
6. Consideration of a Space-Constrained Single-Package Vertical
Unit Equipment Class
B. Commercial Water Heaters
C. Test Procedures
1. Updates to the AHRI 210/240 Test Method
2. Updates to the AHRI 340/360 Test Method
3. Updates to the AHRI 1230 Test Method
4. Updates to the ANSI Z21.47 Test Method
5. Updates to the ANSI Z21.10.3 Test Method
III. Analysis of Potential Energy Savings
A. Annual Energy Use
1. Small Commercial Packaged Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps
2. Water-Source Heat Pumps
3. Package Terminal Air Conditioners
4. Single-Package Vertical Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps
5. Commercial Water Heaters
B. Shipments
1. Small Commercial Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps
2. Water-Source Heat Pumps
3. Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners
4. Single-Package Vertical Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps
5. Commercial Water Heaters
C. Base-Case Efficiency Distribution
D. Other Analytical Inputs
1. Conversion of Site Energy Savings
2. Equipment Lifetime
3. Compliance Date and Analysis Period
E. Estimates of Potential Energy Savings
IV. Public Participation
A. Submission of Comments
B. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment
V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
I. Introduction
A. Authority
Title III, Part C \1\ of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of
1975 (EPCA or the Act), Public Law 94-163 (42 U.S.C. 6311-6317, as
codified), added by Public Law 95-619, Title IV, Sec. 441(a),
established the Energy Conservation Program for Certain Industrial
Equipment, which includes the commercial heating, air-conditioning, and
water-heating equipment that is the subject of this rulemaking.\2\ In
general, this program addresses the energy efficiency of certain types
of commercial and industrial equipment. Relevant provisions of the Act
specifically include definitions (42 U.S.C. 6311), test procedures (42
U.S.C. 6314), labelling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6315), energy
conservation standards (42 U.S.C. 6313), and the authority to require
information and reports from manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6316).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code,
Part C was redesignated Part A-1.
\2\ All references to EPCA in this document refer to the statute
as amended through the American Energy Manufacturing Technical
Corrections Act (AEMTCA), Pub. L. 112-210 (Dec. 18, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In relevant part here, EPCA contains mandatory energy conservation
standards for commercial heating, air-conditioning, and water-heating
equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)) Specifically, the statute sets standards
for small, large, and very large commercial package air-conditioning
and heating equipment, packaged terminal air conditioners (PTACs) and
packaged terminal heat pumps (PTHPs), warm-air furnaces, packaged
boilers, storage water heaters, instantaneous water heaters, and
unfired hot water storage tanks. Id. In doing so, EPCA established
Federal energy conservation standards that generally correspond to the
levels in the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-
Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Standard 90.1, Energy Standard for
Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings, as in effect on
October 24, 1992 (i.e., ASHRAE Standard 90.1-1989), for each type of
covered equipment listed in 42 U.S.C. 6313(a). The Energy Independence
and Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007) further amended EPCA by adding
definitions and setting minimum standards for single-package vertical
air conditioners (SPVACs) and single-package vertical heat pumps
(SPVHPs), which are collectively referred to as single-package vertical
units (SPVUs). (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(10)(A)) The standards for SPVACs and
SPVHPs established by EISA 2007 corresponded to the levels contained in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2004, which originated as addendum ``d'' to
Standard 90.1-2001.
In acknowledgement of technological changes that yield energy
efficiency benefits, Congress directed DOE through EPCA to consider
amending the existing Federal energy efficiency standard for each type
of equipment listed, each time ASHRAE Standard 90.1 is amended with
respect to such equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)) For each type of
equipment, EPCA directs that, if ASHRAE Standard 90.1 is amended,\3\
[[Page 20116]]
DOE must adopt amended standards at the new efficiency level in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1, unless clear and convincing evidence supports a
determination that adoption of a more-stringent level as a national
standard would produce significant additional energy savings and be
technologically feasible and economically justified. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)) If DOE decides to adopt as a national standard the
minimum efficiency levels specified in the amended ASHRAE Standard
90.1, DOE must establish such standard not later than 18 months after
publication of the amended industry standard. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(I)) However, if DOE determines that a more-stringent
standard is justified under 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(II), then DOE
must establish such more-stringent standard not later than 30 months
after publication of the amended ASHRAE Standard 90.1. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(B))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Although EPCA does not explicitly define the term
``amended'' in the context of ASHRAE Standard 90.1, DOE provided its
interpretation of what would constitute an ``amended standard'' in a
final rule published in the Federal Register on March 7, 2007
(hereafter referred to as the ``March 2007 final rule''). 72 FR
10038. In that rule, DOE stated that the statutory trigger requiring
DOE to adopt uniform national standards based on ASHRAE action is
for ASHRAE to change a standard for any of the equipment listed in
EPCA section 342(a)(6)(A)(i) (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(i)) by
increasing the energy efficiency level for that equipment type. Id.
at 10042. In other words, if the revised ASHRAE Standard 90.1 leaves
the standard level unchanged or lowers the standard, as compared to
the level specified by the national standard adopted pursuant to
EPCA, DOE does not have the authority to conduct a rulemaking to
consider a higher standard for that equipment pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(A). DOE subsequently reiterated this position in a final
rule published in the Federal Register on July 22, 2009. 74 FR
36312, 36313.
However, in the AEMTCA amendments to EPCA in 2012, Congress
modified several provisions related to ASHRAE Standard 90.1
equipment. In relevant part, DOE is now triggered to act whenever
ASHRAE Standard 90.1's ``standard levels or design requirements
under that standard'' are amended. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(i))
Furthermore, DOE is now required to conduct an evaluation of each
class of covered equipment in ASHRAE Standard 90.1 ``every 6
years.'' (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C)(i)) For any covered equipment for
which more than 6 years has elapsed since issuance of the most
recent final rule establishing or amending a standard for such
equipment, DOE must publish either the required notice of
determination that standards do not need to be amended or a NOPR
with proposed standards by December 31, 2013. DOE has incorporated
these new statutory mandates into its rulemaking process for covered
ASHRAE 90.1 equipment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As a preliminary step in the process of reviewing the changes to
ASHRAE Standard 90.1, EPCA directs DOE to publish in the Federal
Register for public comment an analysis of the energy savings potential
of amended energy efficiency standards within 180 days after ASHRAE
Standard 90.1 is amended with respect to any of the covered products
specified under 42 U.S.C. 6313(a). (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A))
On October 9, 2013, ASHRAE officially released for distribution and
made public ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013.\4\ This action by ASHRAE
triggered DOE's obligations under 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6), as outlined
previously. This notice of data availability (NODA) presents the
analysis of the energy savings potential of amended energy efficiency
standards, as required under 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ This industry standard is developed with input from a number
of organizations--most prominently ASHRAE, the American National
Standards Institute (ANSI), and the Illuminating Engineering Society
(IES). Therefore, this document may sometimes be referred to more
formally as ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2013. See www.ashrae.org
for more information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Purpose of the Notice of Data Availability
As explained previously, DOE is publishing today's NODA as a
preliminary step pursuant to EPCA's requirements for DOE to consider
amended energy conservation standards for certain types of commercial
equipment covered by ASHRAE Standard 90.1, whenever ASHRAE amends its
standard to increase the energy efficiency level for that equipment
type. Specifically, this NODA presents for public comment DOE's
analysis of the potential energy savings for amended national energy
conservation standards for these types of commercial equipment based
on: (1) The amended efficiency levels contained within ASHRAE Standard
90.1-2013, and (2) more-stringent efficiency levels. DOE describes
these analyses and preliminary conclusions and seeks input from
interested parties, including the submission of data and other relevant
information.
DOE is not required by EPCA to review additional changes in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2013 for those equipment types where ASHRAE did not
increase the efficiency level or change the design requirements
compared to the existing Federal energy conservation standards. For
those types of equipment for which efficiency levels or design
requirements clearly did not change, DOE has conducted no further
analysis. Therefore, DOE carefully examined the changes for such
equipment in ASHRAE Standard 90.1 in order to thoroughly evaluate the
amendments in ASHRAE 90.1-2013, thereby permitting DOE to determine
what action, if any, is required under its statutory mandate.
Section II of this notice contains a discussion of DOE's evaluation
of each ASHRAE equipment type for which energy conservation standards
have been set pursuant to EPCA (``covered equipment''), in order for
DOE to determine whether the amendments in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013
have resulted in increased efficiency levels or changes in design
requirements. For covered equipment types determined to have increased
efficiency levels or changes in design requirements in ASHRAE Standard
90.1-2013, DOE subjected that equipment to further analysis as
discussed in section III of this NODA.
In summary, the energy savings analysis presented in this NODA is a
preliminary step required under 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(i). After
review of the public comments on this NODA, if DOE determines that the
amended efficiency levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 have the
potential for additional energy savings for types of equipment
currently covered by uniform national standards, DOE will commence a
rulemaking to consider amended standards, based upon either the
efficiency levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 or more-stringent
efficiency levels that would be expected to result in significant
additional conservation of energy and are technologically feasible and
economically justified. In conducting such rulemaking, DOE will address
the general rulemaking requirements for all energy conservation
standards, such as the anti-backsliding provision \5\ (42 U.S.C.
6316(a); 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(1); 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(iii)(I)), the
criteria for making a determination that a standard is economically
justified \6\ (42 U.S.C. 6316(a); 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)-(ii); 42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(ii)), and the prohibition on making unavailable
existing products with performance characteristics generally available
in the United States.\7\ (42 U.S.C. 6316(a); 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(4); 42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(iii)(II)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ EPCA contains what is commonly known as an ``anti-
backsliding'' provision. (42 U.S.C. 6316(a); 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(1))
This provision mandates that the Secretary not prescribe any amended
standard that either increases the maximum allowable energy use or
decreases the minimum required energy efficiency of covered
equipment. The AEMTCA amendments to EPCA added this requirement to
Part A-1 directly at 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(iii)(I).
\6\ In deciding whether a more stringent standard is
economically justified, DOE must review comments on the proposed
standard, and then determine whether the benefits of the standard
exceed its burdens by considering the following seven factors to the
greatest extent practicable:
(1) The economic impact on manufacturers and consumers subject
to the standard;
(2) The savings in operating costs throughout the estimated
average life of the product in the type (or class), compared to any
increase in the price, initial charges, or maintenance expenses of
the products likely to result from the standard;
(3) The total projected amount of energy savings likely to
result directly from the standard;
(4) Any lessening of product utility or performance likely to
result from the standard;
(5) The impact of any lessening of competition, as determined in
writing by the Attorney General, likely to result from the standard;
(6) The need for national energy conservation; and
(7) Other factors the Secretary considers relevant.
(42 U.S.C. 6316(a); 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)-(ii)) The AEMTCA
amendments to EPCA added this requirement to Part A-1 directly at 42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(ii).
\7\ The Secretary may not prescribe an amended standard if
interested persons have established by a preponderance of evidence
that the amended standard would likely result in unavailability in
the U.S. of any covered product type or class of performance
characteristics, such as reliability, features, capacities, sizes,
and volumes that are substantially similar to those generally
available in the U.S. at the time of the Secretary's finding. (42
U.S.C. 6316(a); 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(4)) The AEMTCA amendments to EPCA
added this requirement to Part A-1 directly at 42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(B)(iii)(II).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Background
1. ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013
As noted previously, ASHRAE released a new version of ASHRAE
Standard 90.1 on October 9, 2013. The ASHRAE standard addresses
efficiency levels for many types of commercial heating, ventilating,
air-conditioning (HVAC), and water-heating equipment
[[Page 20117]]
covered by EPCA. ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 revised the efficiency
levels for certain commercial equipment, but for the remaining
equipment, ASHRAE left in place the preexisting levels (i.e. the
efficiency levels specified in EPCA or the efficiency levels in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2010). ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 did not change any of
the design requirements for the commercial (HVAC) and water-heating
equipment covered by EPCA.
Table I.1 shows the equipment classes (and corresponding efficiency
levels) for which efficiency levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 (for
metrics included in Federal energy conservation standards) differed
from the previous version of ASHRAE Standard 90.1 (i.e., ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2010). Table I.1 also displays the existing Federal
energy conservation standards for those equipment classes. Section II
of this document assesses each of these equipment types to determine
whether the amendments in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 constitute
increased energy efficiency levels, which would necessitate further
analysis of the potential energy savings from amended Federal energy
conservation standards; the conclusions of this assessment are
presented in the final column of Table I.1.
Table I.1--Federal Energy Conservation Standards and Energy Efficiency Levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 for
Specific Types of Commercial Equipment *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Energy Energy
efficiency efficiency Federal energy
ASHRAE equipment class ** levels in levels in conservation Energy-Savings potential
ASHRAE standard ASHRAE standard standards analysis required?
90.1-2010 90.1-2013
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commercial Package Air-Conditioning and Heating Equipment--Air-Cooled
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air-Cooled Air Conditioner, 3- 13.0 SEER....... 14.0 SEER....... 13.0 SEER....... Yes.
Phase, Single-Package, (as of 1/1/2015) See section II.A.1.
<65,000 Btu/h.
Air-Cooled Heat Pump, 3- 13.0 SEER....... 14.0 SEER....... 13.0 SEER....... Yes.
Phase, Single-Package, 7.7 HSPF........ 8.0 HSPF........ 7.7 HSPF........ See section II.A.1.
<65,000 Btu/h. (as of 1/1/2015)
Air-Cooled Heat Pump, 3- 13.0 SEER....... 14.0 SEER....... 13.0 SEER....... Yes.
Phase, Split System, <65,000 7.7 HSPF........ 8.2 HSPF........ 7.7 HSPF........ See section II.A.1.
Btu/h. (as of 1/1/2015)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commercial Package Air-Conditioning and Heating Equipment--Water Source
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Water-Source Heat Pump, 11.2 EER........ 12.2 EER........ 11.2 EER........ Yes.
<17,000 Btu/h. 4.2 COP......... 4.3 COPH ***.... 4.2 COP......... See section II.A.2.
Water-Source Heat Pump, 12.0 EER........ 13.0 EER........ 12.0 EER........ Yes.
>=17,000 and <65,000 Btu/h. 4.2 COP......... 4.3 COPH ***.... 4.2 COP......... See section II.A.2.
Water-Source Heat Pump, 12.0 EER........ 13.0 EER........ 12.0 EER........ Yes.
>=65,000 and <135,000 Btu/h. 4.2 COP......... 4.3 COPH ***.... 4.2 COP......... See section II.A.2.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commercial Package Air-Conditioning and Heating Equipment--PTACs [Dagger][Dagger]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Package Terminal Air EER = 11.7...... EER = 11.9...... EER = 11.7...... Yes.
Conditioner, <7,000 Btu/h, (as of 10/8/12). (as of 1/1/2015) See section II.A.3.
Standard Size (New
Construction) [dagger].
Package Terminal Air EER = 13.8 - EER = 14.0 - EER = 13.8 - Yes.
Conditioner, >=7,000 and (0.300 x Cap (0.300 x Cap (0.300 x Cap See section II.A.3.
<=15,000 Btu/h, Standard [dagger][dagger [dagger][dagger [dagger][dagger
Size (New Construction) ]). ]). ]).
[dagger]. (as of 10/8/12). (as of 1/1/2015)
Package Terminal Air EER = 9.3....... EER = 9.5....... EER = 9.3....... Yes.
Conditioner, >15,000 Btu/h, (as of 10/8/12). (as of 1/1/2015) .See section II.A.3.
Standard Size (New
Construction) [dagger].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commercial Package Air-Conditioning and Heating Equipment--SDHV and TTW
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Through-the-Wall (TTW), Air- 13.0 SEER....... 12.0 SEER....... 13.0 SEER....... No.
Cooled Heat Pumps, <=30,000 7.4 HSPF........ 7.4 HSPF........ 7.7 HSPF........ See section II.A.4.
Btu/h.
Small-Duct, High-Velocity, 10.0 SEER....... 11.0 SEER....... 13.0 SEER....... No.
Air-Cooled (SDHV) Air See section II.A.4.
Conditioners, <65,000 Btu/h.
Small-Duct, High-Velocity, 10.0 SEER....... 11.0 SEER....... 13.0 SEER....... No.
Air-Cooled Heat Pumps, HSPF not listed 6.8 HSPF........ 7.7 HSPF........ See section II.A.4.
<65,000 Btu/h. [dagger][dagger
][dagger].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commercial Package Air-Conditioning and Heating Equipment--SPVACs and SPVHPs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Single Package Vertical Air 9.0 EER......... 10.0 EER........ 9.0 EER......... Yes.
Conditioners, <65,000 Btu/h. See section II.A.5.
Single Package Vertical Air 8.9 EER......... 10.0 EER........ 8.9 EER......... Yes.
Conditioners, >=65,000 and See section II.A.5.
<135,000 Btu/h.
Single Package Vertical Air 8.6 EER......... 10.0 EER........ 8.6 EER......... Yes.
Conditioners, >=135,000 and See section II.A.5.
<240,000 Btu/h.
Single Package Vertical Heat 9.0 EER......... 10.0 EER........ 9.0 EER......... Yes.
Pumps, <65,000 Btu/h. 3.0 COP......... 3.0 COPH ***.... 3.0 COP......... See section II.A.5.
Single Package Vertical Heat 8.9 EER......... 10.0 EER........ 8.9 EER......... Yes.
Pumps, >=65,000 and <135,000 3.0 COP......... 3.0 COPH ***.... 3.0 COP......... See section II.A.5.
Btu/h.
Single Package Vertical Heat 8.6 EER......... 10.0 EER........ 8.6 EER......... Yes.
Pumps, >=135,000 and 2.9 COP......... 3.0 COPH ***.... 2.9 COP......... See section II.A.5.
<240,000 Btu/h.
Single Package Vertical Air N/A............. 9.2 EER......... N/A [Dagger].... No.
Conditioners Nonweatherized See section II.A.5.
Space Constrained, <=30,000
Btu/h.
Single Package Vertical Air N/A............. 9.0 EER......... N/A [Dagger].... No.
Conditioners Nonweatherized See section II.A.5.
Space Constrained, >30,000
and <=36,000 Btu/h.
[[Page 20118]]
Single Package Vertical Heat N/A............. 9.2 EER......... N/A [Dagger].... No.
Pumps Nonweatherized Space 3.0 COPH........ See section II.A.5.
Constrained, <=30,000 Btu/h.
Single Package Vertical Heat N/A............. 9.0 EER......... N/A [Dagger].... No.
Pumps Nonweatherized Space 3.0 COPH........ See section II.A.5.
Constrained, >30,000 and
<=36,000 Btu/h.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commercial Water Heaters
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Electric Storage Water 20 + 35 V 0.3 + 27/Vm 0.3 + 27/Vm No.
Heaters, >12 kW, >=20 gal. [shel1]/[shel2] [Dagger][Dagger [Dagger][Dagger See Section II.B.
SL ][Dagger] %/h. ][Dagger] %/h.
[Dagger][Dagger
], Btu/h.
Gas Storage Water Heaters, 80% Et; Q/800 + 80% Et; Q/799 + 80% Et; Q/800 + No.
>75,000 Btu/h, <4,000 Btu/h/ 110 V [shel1]/ 16.6 V [shel1]/ 110 Vr [shel1]/ See section II.A.5.
gal. [shel2] SL [shel2] [shel2] Btu/hr.
[diam], Btu/h. SL[diam], Btu/h
[diam][diam].
Oil Storage Water Heaters, 78% Et; Q/800 + 80% Et; Q/799 + 78% Et; Q/800 + Yes.
>105,000 Btu/h, <4,000 Btu/h/ 110 V [shel1]/ 16.6 V [shel1]/ 110 Vr [shel1]/ See section II.A.5.
gal. [shel2] SL [shel2] SL [shel2] Btu/hr.
[diam], Btu/h. [diam], Btu/h
[diam][diam].
Gas Instantaneous Water 80% Et, Q/800 + 80% Et, Q/799 + 80% Et, Q/800 + No.
Heaters, >=200,000 Btu/h, 110 V [shel1]/ 16.6 V [shel1]/ 110 Vr [shel1]/ See section II.A.5.
>=4,000 Btu/h/gal, >=10 gal. [shel2] SL [shel2] SL [shel2] Btu/hr.
[diam], Btu/h. [diam], Btu/h
[diam][diam].
Oil Instantaneous Water 78% Et, Q/800 + 78% Et, Q/799 + 78% Et, Q/800 + No.
Heaters, >210,000 Btu/h, 110 V [shel1]/ 16.6 V [shel1]/ 110 Vr [shel1]/ See section II.A.5.
>=4,000 Btu/h/gal, >=10 gal. [shel2] SL [shel2] SL [shel2] Btu/hr.
[diam], Btu/h. [diam], Btu/h
[diam][diam].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* ``Et'' means thermal efficiency; ``EER'' means energy efficiency ratio; ``SEER'' means seasonal energy
efficiency ratio; ``HSPF'' means heating seasonal performance factor; ``COP'' and ``COPH'' mean coefficient of
performance; and ``Btu/h'' or ``Btu/hr'' means British thermal units per hour.
** ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 equipment classes may differ from the equipment classes defined in DOE's
regulations, but no loss of coverage will occur (i.e., all previously covered DOE equipment classes remained
covered equipment).
*** While ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 added a subscript H to COP for all heat pumps, its definition for
``coefficient of performance (COP), heat pump--heating'' has not changed. As a result, DOE believes the
subscript to be a clarifying change of nomenclature (to differentiate from the COP metric used for
refrigeration) only, rather than a change to the metric itself.
[dagger] ``Standard size'' refers to PTAC equipment with wall sleeve dimensions >=16 inches high or >=42 inches
wide. For DOE's purposes, this equipment class applies to standard-size equipment regardless of application
(e.g., new construction or replacement).
[dagger][dagger] ``Cap'' means cooling capacity in kBtu/h at 95[deg]F outdoor dry-bulb temperature.
[dagger][dagger][dagger] This may have been an editorial error in ASHRAE 90.1-2010.
[Dagger] While ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 added this equipment class, DOE believes that equipment falling into
these classes is already covered by Federal standards, most commonly in the residential space-constrained
central air conditioning equipment class with minimum standards of 12.0 SEER for air conditioners and heat
pumps and 7.4 HSPF for heat pumps. See section II.A.5.1 of this NODA.
[Dagger][Dagger] ``V'' means rated volume in gallons; ``SL'' means standby loss.
[Dagger][Dagger][Dagger] ``Vm'' means measured volume in tank.
[diam] ``Q'' means the nameplate input rate in Btu/hr; ``V'' means rated volume in gallons; ``SL'' means standby
loss. DOE's descriptor, ``Vr,'' also means rated volume in gallons and differs only in nomenclature.
[diam][diam] As explained in section II.A of this NODA, DOE believes this level was a mistake; the formula for
SI units was included instead of that for IP units.
DOE notes that ASHRAE 90.1-2013 also increased integrated energy
efficiency ratio (IEER) levels for additional equipment not listed in
Table I.1, including small, large, and very large air-cooled and water-
cooled air conditioners and heat pumps.\8\ However, because Federal
energy conservation standards for this equipment do not use IEER as a
rating metric, DOE is not triggered to review this equipment. In
February 2013, DOE published a request for information (RFI) and notice
of document availability for commercial air-cooled equipment. 78 FR
7296 (Feb. 1, 2013). In the RFI, DOE sought information on the merits
of adopting IEER as the energy efficiency descriptor for small, large,
and very large air-cooled commercial air conditioners and heat pumps.
Should DOE adopt new standards using IEER as the metric, future
increases in IEER levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 as compared to
the Federal energy conservation standards would trigger DOE to review
its efficiency levels for that equipment?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ ASHRAE 90.1-2013 also decreased the IEER levels for small,
large, and very large air-cooled variable refrigerant flow
equipment; however, on December 9, 2013, ASHRAE issued errata
indicating that this was an error for air conditioners. See: https://www.ashrae.org/File%20Library/docLib/StdsErrata/90-1-2013-IP_ErrataSheet_12-9-2013.pdf. DOE believes this was also an editorial
error for heat pumps.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Summary of DOE's Preliminary Assessment of Equipment for Energy
Savings Analysis
DOE has reached a preliminary conclusion for each of the classes of
commercial equipment in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 addressed in today's
NODA. For each class of commercial equipment addressed in this NODA,
section II presents DOE's initial determination as to whether ASHRAE
increased the efficiency level for a given type of equipment (based on
a rating metric used in the relevant Federal energy conservation
standards), a change that would require an energy-savings potential
analysis. As DOE is not required by EPCA to review additional changes
in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 for those equipment types where ASHRAE did
not increase the efficiency level or change the design requirements,
DOE has conducted no further analysis for those types of equipment
where efficiency levels clearly did not change. Additionally, for
equipment where ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 has increased the level in
comparison to the previous version of ASHRAE Standard 90.1, but the
level does not exceed the current Federal standard level, DOE does not
have the authority to conduct a rulemaking to consider a higher
standard for that equipment pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A) and did
not perform a potential energy-savings analysis. For those equipment
classes where ASHRAE increased the efficiency level (in comparison to
the Federal standard), DOE performed an analysis of the energy-savings
potential, unless DOE found no equipment in the market in that
equipment class (in which case there is no potential for energy
savings).\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ In the case where there is no equipment on the market or
insufficient data for analysis, DOE would adopt the ASHRAE level, as
required by the statute, without further analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 20119]]
Based upon DOE's analysis, as discussed in section II, DOE has
determined that ASHRAE increased the efficiency level for the following
equipment categories:
Small Three-Phase Commercial Air-Cooled Air Conditioners
(Single Package Only) and Heat Pumps (Single Package and Split System)
<65,000 Btu/h;
Water Source Heat Pumps;
Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners (Standard Size);
Single Package Vertical Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps;
and
Oil-Fired Storage Water Heaters.
For most of those equipment classes, DOE found that equipment is
available on the market and adequate information exists to reasonably
estimate potential energy savings, and DOE performed an analysis of the
energy-savings potential, which is described in section III. However,
when DOE did not find equipment available on the market (such as for
SPVACs and SPVHPs with capacities above 135,000 Btu/h), DOE did not
perform a potential energy savings analysis.
II. Discussion of Changes in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013
Before beginning an analysis of the potential energy savings that
would result from adopting the efficiency levels specified by ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2013 or more-stringent efficiency levels, DOE first
determined whether or not the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 efficiency
levels actually represented an increase in efficiency above the current
Federal standard levels or whether ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 adopted
new design requirements, thereby triggering DOE action. This section
contains a discussion of each equipment class where the ASHRAE Standard
90.1-2013 efficiency level differs from the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010
level (based on a rating metric used in the relevant Federal energy
conservation standards),\10\ along with DOE's preliminary conclusion
regarding the appropriate action to take with respect to that
equipment. In addition, this section contains a discussion of DOE's
determination with regard to newly created equipment classes in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2013 (i.e., nonweatherized, space-constrained SPVAC and
SPVHP). Finally, this section provides a brief discussion of the test
procedure updates contained in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 did not change any of the design
requirements for the commercial (HVAC) and water-heating equipment
covered by EPCA, so this potential category of change is not
discussed in this section.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Commercial Package Air-Conditioning and Heating Equipment
EPCA, as amended, defines ``commercial package air conditioning and
heating equipment'' as air-cooled, evaporatively-cooled, water-cooled,
or water source (not including ground water source) electrically
operated, unitary central air conditioners and central air conditioning
heat pumps for commercial use. (42 U.S.C. 6311(8)(A); 10 CFR 431.92)
EPCA also defines ``small,'' ``large,'' and ``very large'' commercial
package air conditioning and heating equipment based on the equipment's
rated cooling capacity. (42 U.S.C. 6311(8)(B)-(D); 10 CFR 431.92)
``Small commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment''
means equipment rated below 135,000 Btu per hour (cooling capacity).
(42 U.S.C. 6311(8)(B); 10 CFR 431.92) ``Large commercial package air
conditioning and heating equipment'' means equipment rated (i) at or
above 135,000 Btu per hour; and (ii) below 240,000 Btu per hour
(cooling capacity). (42 U.S.C. 6311(8)(C); 10 CFR 431.92) ``Very large
commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment'' means
equipment rated (i) at or above 240,000 Btu per hour; and (ii) below
760,000 Btu per hour (cooling capacity). (42 U.S.C. 6311(8)(D); 10 CFR
431.92)
1. Air-Cooled Equipment
The current Federal energy conservation standards for the three
classes of air-cooled commercial package air conditioners and heat
pumps for which ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 amended efficiency levels are
shown in Table I.1 and can be found in DOE's regulations at 10 CFR
431.97. The Federal energy conservation standards for air-cooled air
conditioners and heat pumps are differentiated based on the cooling
capacity (i.e., small, large, or very large). For small equipment,
there is an additional disaggregation into: (1) Equipment less than
65,000 Btu/h and (2) equipment greater than or equal to 65,000 Btu/h
and less than 135,000 Btu/h. Three-phase equipment less than 65,000
Btu/h, although commercial equipment, is rated with the same metric as
residential single-phase equipment (i.e., SEER). Unlike the current
Federal energy conservation standards, ASHRAE Standard 90.1 also
differentiates the equipment that is less than 65,000 Btu/h into split
system and single package subcategories. Historically, ASHRAE has set
equivalent efficiency levels for this equipment; however, effective
January 1, 2015, ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 increases the efficiency
level for single package air conditioners but not split system air
conditioners. The increased efficiency level for single package air
conditioners surpasses the current Federal energy conservation standard
level for the overall equipment class, while the efficiency level for
split system air conditioners meets and does not exceed the Federal
energy conservation standard for the overall equipment class. ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2013 also increases the efficiency levels, effective
January 1, 2015, for both single package and split system air-cooled
heat pumps, for SEER and HSPF, to efficiency levels that surpass the
current Federal energy conservation standard levels. ASHRAE Standard
90.1-2013 increases the HSPF level for split systems above that for
single package heat pumps.
In the past, DOE has separated the equipment classes for three-
phase air conditioners and heat pumps less than 65,000 Btu/h into
single package and split system classes, for a total of four classes.
However, when EISA 2007 increased the efficiency levels to identical
levels across single package and split system equipment, effective in
2008, DOE combined the equipment classes in the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR), resulting in only two equipment classes, one for air
conditioners and one for heat pumps. Because ASHRAE has increased the
standard for only single package air conditioners, and has increased
the HSPF level to a more-stringent level for split system heat pumps
than for single package heat pumps, and DOE is obligated to adopt, at a
minimum, the increased level in ASHRAE 90.1-2013 for that equipment
class, DOE proposes to re-create separate equipment classes for single
package and split system equipment in the overall equipment classes of
small commercial package air conditioners and heat pumps (air-cooled,
three-phase) less than 65,000 Btu/h. DOE requests comment on whether it
should re-create these separate equipment classes, which is identified
as Issue 1 in section IV.B, ``Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment.''
DOE conducted an analysis of the potential energy savings due to
amended standards for single package air conditioners and single
package and split system heat pumps (air-cooled, three-phase, less than
65,000 Btu/h), which is described in section III of this NODA. DOE did
not conduct an analysis of the potential energy savings for split
system air conditioners.
[[Page 20120]]
2. Water-Source Equipment
The current Federal energy conservation standards for the three
classes of commercial water source heat pumps for which ASHRAE Standard
90.1-2013 amended efficiency levels are shown in Table I.1 and can be
found in DOE's regulations at 10 CFR 431.97. The Federal energy
conservation standards for water source equipment are differentiated
based on the cooling capacity. ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 increased the
energy efficiency levels for all three equipment classes to efficiency
levels that surpass the current Federal energy conservation standard
levels. Therefore, DOE conducted an analysis of the potential energy
savings due to amended standards for this equipment, which is described
in section III of this NODA.
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 also changed the name of this equipment
class from ``water source'' to ``water to air, water loop.'' DOE
believes this to be an editorial change only and that this new
nomenclature refers to the same water source heat pump equipment
covered by Federal energy conservation standards. ASHRAE also changed
the descriptor for this equipment from COP to COPH. DOE
believes this is also an editorial change to clarify the difference
between COP for refrigeration and COP for heat pumps. DOE requests
comment on whether these changes are other than editorial, which is
identified as Issue 2 in section IV.B, ``Issues on Which DOE Seeks
Comment.''
EPCA does not define ``water source heat pump'' other than to
exclude ground-water-source units from the definition of ``commercial
package air conditioning and heating equipment.'' (42 U.S.C.
6311(8)(A)) However, DOE notes that there are several related types of
water-source and ground-water-source heat pumps, as shown in Table
II.1. ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 included new nomenclature for all such
types of heat pumps. DOE further notes that the vast majority of water-
source (water-to-air, water-loop) heat pump models are also rated for
performance in ground-loop or ground-water heat pump applications. It
is DOE's understanding that design differences of the models used in
the different applications are minimal, including potentially more
corrosion-resistant metal in the water coil (for open-loop systems
only) and/or added insulation for ground-water or ground-loop systems.
Efficiency ratings are different across these three application types
primarily because of the different test conditions (ground and ground-
water-source are tested with cooler entering water). Because of the
similarity in models across application, DOE believes that increased
efficiency standards for water-loop applications may affect heat pumps
for ground-source and ground-water applications, although they are
excluded from coverage. DOE is not aware of any differences between
water-source heat pumps for residential and commercial applications.
Table II.1--Nomenclature for Types of Water-Loop, Ground-Loop, and Ground-Water-Source Heat Pumps
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 Test procedure
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Water-source (86[deg] entering water).. Water-to-air, water-loop.. ISO Standard 13256-1.
Ground-water-source 59[deg] entering Water-to-air, ground-water
water.
Ground-water source 77[deg] entering Brine-to-air, ground-loop.
water.
Water-source water-to-water 86[deg] Water-to-water, water-loop ISO Standard 13256-2.
entering water.
Water-source water-to-water 59[deg] Water-to-water, ground-
entering water. water.
Ground-water-source brine-to-water Brine-to-water, ground-
77[deg] entering water. loop.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As noted above, DOE views these changes in nomenclature as
nonsubstantive in terms of the associated standard levels.
Consequently, DOE is maintaining its current requirements for these
equipment classes.
However, DOE is considering adding a definition for ``water-source
heat pump'' to the CFR that would include both single-phase and three-
phase units of all capacities (up to 760,000 Btu/h) and would be
applicable to water-to-air heat pumps. DOE is considering adapting the
definition from that in the ASHRAE handbook: \11\ ``A water-source heat
pump is a [single-phase or three-phase] reverse-cycle heat pump that
uses [a circulating water loop] as the heat source for heating and as
the heat sink for cooling. The main components are a compressor,
refrigerant-to-water heat exchanger, refrigerant-to-air heat exchanger,
refrigerant expansion devices, and refrigerant reversing valve.'' DOE
requests comment on this definition, which is identified as Issue 3 in
section IV.B, ``Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ 2012 ASHRAE Handbook, Heating, Ventilating, and Air-
Conditioning Systems and Equipment. ASHRAE, Atlanta, GA. Chapter 9
(Available at: https://www.ashrae.org/resources-publications/description-of-the-2012-ashrae-handbook-hvac-systems-and-equipment).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners
EPCA defines a ``packaged terminal air conditioner'' as ``a wall
sleeve and a separate unencased combination of heating and cooling
assemblies specified by the builder and intended for mounting through
the wall. It includes a prime source of refrigeration, separable
outdoor louvers, forced ventilation, and heating availability by
builder's choice of hot water, steam, or electricity.'' (42 U.S.C.
6311(10)(A); 10 CFR 431.92)
In February 2013, DOE published a notice of public meeting and
availability of the Framework Document regarding energy conservation
standards for packaged terminal air conditioners and heat pumps
standards. 78 FR 12252 (Feb. 22, 2013). This framework was published as
a first step toward meeting the six-year look back requirement
specified in EISA 2007. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C)(i)) As part of the
six-year look back, DOE expects to issue a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NOPR) for PTAC and PTHP equipment that will include
equipment classes for which ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 increased
efficiency levels (i.e., standard-size PTACs), as well as those for
which it did not. The PTACs/PTHPs NOPR will be issued along a timeline
that meets the six-year look back requirements (for those equipment
classes where DOE was not triggered), as well as either the 18 or 30
month timeline noted previously (for those equipment classes where DOE
was triggered).
The current Federal energy conservation standards for the three
classes of PTACs for which ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 amended efficiency
levels are shown in Table I.1 and are found in DOE's regulations at 10
CFR 431.97. The Federal energy conservation standards for PTACs are
differentiated based on the cooling capacity and physical dimensions
(standard versus nonstandard size). ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 increased
the energy efficiency levels for all three standard-size PTAC equipment
classes to efficiency levels that meet those for
[[Page 20121]]
PTHPs and surpass the current Federal energy conservation standard
levels for PTACs. Therefore, DOE conducted an analysis of the potential
energy savings due to amended standards for standard-size PTACs, which
is described in section III of this NODA.
4. Small-Duct, High-Velocity, and Through-The-Wall Equipment
EPCA does not separate small-duct high-velocity (SDHV) or through-
the-wall (TTW) heat pumps from other types of small commercial package
air-conditioning and heating equipment in its definitions. (42 U.S.C.
6311(8)) Therefore, EPCA's definition of ``small commercial package air
conditioning and heating equipment'' would include SDHV and TTW heat
pumps.
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 appeared to change some of the efficiency
levels for these classes of equipment. Specifically, ASHRAE Standard
90.1-2010 had increased the cooling efficiency requirements for TTW
heat pumps to 13.0 SEER in comparison to the efficiency levels of 12.0
SEER in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2007. However, in March 2011, ASHRAE
issued Proposed Addendum h for public review that would correct the
minimum SEER for this equipment to 12.0 SEER, and this addendum was
approved and incorporated into ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013. Therefore,
this change in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 was correcting an editorial
error in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010.
For SDHV air conditioners and heat pumps, ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013
increases the cooling efficiency requirement from 10.0 SEER to 11.0
SEER. It also includes a heating efficiency requirement for SDHV heat
pumps of 6.8 HSPF, which was present in ASHRAE 90.1-2007 but not ASHRAE
90.1-2010 (which DOE also thought to be an editorial error). These
changes were made through Addendum bj to ASHRAE 90.1-2010, which noted
that the previously adopted Addendum j to ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 had
deleted the SDHV equipment class entirely because all SDHV models sold
were single-phase residential products, but that Addendum bj was re-
establishing the equipment class because manufacturers had expressed an
intention to introduce three-phase equipment to the market. In
addition, Addendum bj noted that it contained minimum efficiency levels
identical to those established by DOE for single-phase residential SDHV
products.
The DOE standards for both commercial TTW and SDHV air
conditioners, which are 13.0 SEER, and for heat pumps, which are 13.0
SEER and 7.7 HSPF, were established for the overall equipment category
of small commercial package air-conditioning and heating equipment by
EISA 2007, which amended EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(7)(D)) Because the
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 efficiency levels for TTW and SDHV equipment
are less than those in the DOE standards, DOE has tentatively concluded
that it is not required to take action on this equipment at this time.
5. Single-Package Vertical Air Conditioners and Single-Package Vertical
Heat Pumps
EPCA, as amended, defines ``single package vertical air
conditioner'' as air-cooled commercial package air conditioning and
heating equipment that:
(1) is factory-assembled as a single package that:
(i) has major components that are arranged vertically;
(ii) is an encased combination of cooling and optional heating
components; and
(iii) is intended for exterior mounting on, adjacent interior to,
or through an outside wall;
(2) is powered by a single- or 3-phase current;
(3) may contain one or more separate indoor grilles, outdoor
louvers, various ventilation options, indoor free air discharges,
ductwork, wall plenum, or sleeves; and
(4) has heating components that may include electrical resistance,
steam, hot water, or gas, but may not include reverse cycle
refrigeration as a heating means. (42 U.S.C. 6311(22);\12\ 10 CFR
431.92)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ In the EISA 2007 amendments to EPCA, Congress renumbered
several statutory definitions to accommodate new definitions.
Consequently, the definition for ``harvest rate'' was moved from 42
U.S.C. 6311(21) to 42 U.S.C. 6311(22). However, in a separate
provision, EISA 2007 provided for a definition of ``single package
vertical air conditioner'' at 42 U.S.C. 6311(22). Similarly, EISA
2007 added a definition for ``single package vertical heat pump'' at
42 U.S.C. 6311(23), which given the other definitions present,
probably should have been codified at 42 U.S.C. 6311(24). DOE has
implemented these statutory provisions as if the drafting error had
not occurred.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPCA, as amended, defines ``single package vertical heat pump'' as
a single-package vertical air conditioner that
(1) uses reverse cycle refrigeration as its primary heat source;
and
(2) may include secondary supplemental heating by means of
electrical resistance, steam, hot water, or gas. (42 U.S.C. 6311(23);
10 CFR 431.92)
The current Federal energy conservation standards for the six
classes of SPVUs for which ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 amended efficiency
levels are shown in Table I.1 and can be found in DOE's regulations at
10 CFR 431.97. The product classes for SPVACs and SPVHPs, as well as
their attendant Federal energy conservation standards, are
differentiated based on cooling capacity. ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013
increased the energy efficiency levels for all six equipment classes to
efficiency levels that surpass the current Federal energy conservation
standard levels. Therefore, DOE conducted an analysis of the potential
energy savings due to amended standards for this equipment, which is
described in section III of this NODA.
DOE reviewed the SPVU market and identified several models of SPVUs
in the 65,000 Btu/h or less equipment class. However, DOE did not
identify any models of SPVUs in the large category >=135,000 Btu/h and
<240,000 Btu/h or any models of SPVHPs in the category >=65,000 Btu/h
and <135,000 Btu/h. As a result of the apparent lack of a market for
large SPVUs and for SPVHPs >=65,000 Btu/h and <135,000 Btu/h, DOE
conducted complete preliminary energy saving estimates only for the
equipment classes SPVAC and SPVHP <65,000 Btu/h and SPVACs >=65,000
Btu/h and <135,000 Btu/h. For the equipment classes with no market, DOE
would adopt the ASHRAE levels as the Federal standard, as required by
the statute, without further analysis.
6. Consideration of a Space-Constrained Single-Package Vertical Unit
Equipment Class
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 created a new equipment class for SPVACs
and SPVHPs used in space-constrained applications. Specifically, ASHRAE
defined ``nonweatherized space constrained single-package vertical
unit'' as a SPVAC or SPVHP that meets all of the following
requirements:
(1) is for indoor use only;
(2) has rated cooling capacities no greater than 36,000 Btu/h;
(3) is a single-package unit requiring opening in an exterior wall
with overall exterior dimensions that require or use an existing sleeve
that meets one of the following criteria:
1. width of less than 32 inches and a height of less than 45 inches
2. fits inside an existing 1,310 in\2\ opening;
(4) is commonly installed in site-built commercial buildings;
(5) is of a similar cooling capacity and, if a heat pump, similar
heating capacity;
(6) draws outdoor air for heat exchange directly through an
existing
[[Page 20122]]
opening, used for both inlet and outlet, in the exterior wall;
(7) is restricted to applications where an existing air
conditioner, heat pump, or gas/electric unit, installed in an existing
exterior wall opening, is to be replaced; and
(8) bears a permanent ``Replacement'' marking, conspicuously placed
and clearly indicating that its application is limited to installations
where an existing air conditioner or heat pump is to be replaced.
DOE has carefully considered the possibility of establishing an
equipment class for space-constrained SPVUs. After reviewing the SPVU
market, DOE identified two distinct market segments: (1) Traditional
SPVUs, which are typically wall hung or installed indoors and intended
for use in schools, telecommunications shelters, office buildings, and
similar applications; and (2) through-the-wall units that are being
classified as SPVUs and are designed to be installed through-the-wall
in hotels, apartments, dormitories, assisted living facilities, and
other similar applications (i.e., ``lodging'' applications). Many of
the units that are intended primarily for use in lodging applications
would meet the definition of a space-constrained SPVU in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2013, while conversely, none of the models that were
intended primarily to serve traditional SPVU applications meet the
criteria.
In examining the models that would meet the definition of a ``space
constrained SPVU'' under ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013, DOE discovered that
certain models that are currently classified by manufacturers and in
the Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI)
Directory \13\ as being an SPVU do not have major components arranged
vertically, which is a key provision in the SPVAC and SPVHP definitions
provided by EPCA (and discussed earlier in this section). For the
purposes of determining the applicability of DOE energy conservation
standards, the product classification is based on the applicable
product and equipment definitions in EPCA and DOE's regulations. DOE
does not consider models without the major components arranged
vertically to be SPVUs. Depending on the product characteristics (e.g.,
electrical power phase, capacity), these models should be classified,
tested, and certified to DOE as compliant with the applicable standards
for either central air conditioners or one of the other equipment types
provided by DOE regulations. Accordingly, DOE did not consider these
models in its analyses of SPVUs and did not evaluate them when making a
determination regarding whether to establish a space-constrained
equipment class within the SPVU equipment type.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ AHRI Directory of Certified Product Performance can be
accessed at: https://www.ahridirectory.org/ahridirectory/pages/home.aspx.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Furthermore, while reviewing the market to consider a potential
space-constrained SPVU equipment class, DOE also discovered that many
models characterized by industry as SPVUs, particularly those that are
primarily used for lodging applications (which were also the models
that met the ASHRAE definition for ``space-constrained''), are
advertised for use in multiple applications including both commercial
and residential applications. Many of the models characterized as SPVUs
on the market are advertised to a significant extent for use in
residential, multi-family applications; however, DOE notes that these
products are currently classified and certified in the AHRI Directory
as single-package vertical units, a type of commercial equipment.
Further, DOE found that certain models of SPVUs in the AHRI Directory
that would be categorized as ``space-constrained'' were previously
classified as through-the-wall central air conditioners.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ DOE defined a product class for space-constrained central
air conditioners, a consumer product type, in a January 22, 2001
final rule, which DOE stated would include through-the-wall products
among several other types of space-constrained products. However,
DOE did not set minimum standards for the space-constrained product
class. 66 FR 7170, 7197. In a May 23, 2002 final rule, DOE
established a separate product class with minimum standards for
through-the-wall products. 67 FR 36368, 36406. Upon establishing
that product class, DOE also provided in its definition of
``through-the-wall air conditioner'' that the class would cease to
exist on January 23, 2010. Id. In a June 27, 2011 direct final rule,
DOE stated that products in the through-the-wall product class of
central air conditioners would meet the definition of a ``space
constrained central air conditioner.'' 76 FR 37408, 37446. The
American Energy Manufacturing Technical Corrections Act (AEMTCA),
Pub. L. 112-210 (enacted Dec. 18, 2012), prescribed definitions for
``through-the-wall central air conditioner'' and ``through-the-wall
central air conditioning heat pump.'' 42 U.S.C. 6295(d)(4)(A)(ii).
In a proposed rule published on December 20, 2013 78FR77019, DOE
proposed to eliminate the previous definition for through-the-wall
products and adopted these statutory definitions. DOE noted that
such products must be assigned to a product class based on the
product's characteristics and suggested that most would be assigned
to one of the space-constrained product classes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Upon discovering the dual-market applications of these units, DOE
considered whether the classification of these products as SPVUs--a
type of commercial equipment--is appropriate. SPVUs are classified as a
type of commercial air conditioner under 42 U.S.C. chapter 77,
subchapter III, Part A-1, ``Certain Industrial Equipment.'' EPCA
defines industrial equipment as any article of equipment of certain
specified types that consumes, or is designed to consume, energy, which
is distributed to any significant extent for industrial and commercial
use, and which is not a covered product as defined in 42 U.S.C.
6291(2), without regard to whether such article is in fact distributed
in commerce for industrial or commercial use. (42 U.S.C. 6311(2)(A))
EPCA defines ``consumer product'' as any article of a type that
consumes or is designed to consume energy, and, to any significant
extent, is distributed in commerce for personal use or consumption by
individuals without regard to whether such article of such type is in
fact distributed in commerce for personal use or consumption by an
individual. (42 U.S.C. 6291(1))
Thus, consumer products and industrial equipment are mutually
exclusive categories. An appliance model can only be considered
commercial/industrial equipment under EPCA if it does not fit the
definition of ``consumer product.'' Further, DOE must make a
determination as to whether a model is a consumer product or commercial
equipment, ``without regard'' to how the model is ``in fact''
distributed. DOE notes that many of the products that are currently
classified by industry as a commercial SPVU and advertised for multi-
family residential applications would meet EPCA's definitions for
``SPVUs'' from a technical standpoint. (42 U.S.C. 6311(22) and (23))
However, DOE reviewed the characteristics of these products and
concluded that they would also meet the definition of a ``central air
conditioner.'' (42 U.S.C. 6291(21)) EPCA defines ``central air
conditioner'' as a product, other than a packaged terminal air
conditioner, which: (1) Is powered by single phase electric current;
(2) is air-cooled; (3) is rated below 65,000 Btu per hour; (4) is not
contained within the same cabinet as a furnace with a rated capacity
above 225,000 Btu per hour; and (5) is a heat pump or a cooling only
unit. (42 U.S.C. 6291(21); 10 CFR 430.2) DOE has concluded that,
because these products meet the definition of a ``central air
conditioner,'' are similar to products used in residential
applications, and are seemingly (based on product literature and
advertising of known products and manufacturers) distributed for
personal use or consumption by individuals, they are appropriately
categorized as
[[Page 20123]]
consumer products under the statute.\15\ Because such units meet the
definition for a ``consumer product'' under 42 U.S.C. 6291(1), they
cannot meet the definition of commercial ``industrial equipment'' under
42 U.S.C. 6311(2). In fact, as noted above, certain products that are
currently categorized by manufacturers as commercial SPVUs were at one
time categorized as through-the-wall central air conditioners by their
manufacturers but have since been reclassified as commercial equipment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ An air conditioner that cools a single apartment and is
controlled by the residents of that apartment is for personal use,
just like an air conditioner found in a single-family home, duplex,
condo, or townhouse.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Through-the-wall models for commercial lodging applications that
are not specifically advertised for the residential multi-family market
(and that were not previously categorized as through-the-wall
residential units) are appropriately classified as consumer products
because they are for personal use or consumption by individuals. DOE
examined the types of models that are currently characterized as SPVUs
and are intended to serve the lodging market but have not been
reclassified from the through-the-wall central air conditioner product
class. It noted similarities in the design, construction, and
applications for these products as compared to the products that were
classified previously as through-the-wall central air conditioners.
Given the similarities between through-the-wall units intended for
installation in multi-family residential applications and those
intended primarily for installation in commercial lodging applications,
DOE has tentatively concluded that these products should be treated the
same under its regulatory scheme.
In examining the through-the-wall models on the market that are not
advertised for residential applications or were not reclassified, DOE
has determined that the available models would all meet the definition
of a ``central air conditioner'' and, more specifically, a ``space
constrained product.'' 10 CFR 430.2. In the proceedings that led to the
development of the space-constrained central air conditioner product
class, DOE recognized that through-the-wall products have severe space
constraints and, accordingly, established a product class with less-
stringent energy conservation standards for such units.\16\ 67 FR
36368, 36406 (May 23, 2002). Because the space-constrained central air
conditioner product class has already been established to account for
products whose outer dimensions are severely limited by their
application and, given the similarities and overlap between models used
in commercial lodging applications and models used in residential
multi-family applications, DOE believes that any single-package
vertical units that are ``space-constrained'' are appropriately
categorized and regulated as central air conditioners.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ Through-the-wall air conditioners are typically not as wide
or deep as standard air conditioning units and, in the case of units
intended for replacement, must fit into a pre-existing hole in the
wall. This size limitation affects the size of both the evaporator
and condensing heat exchangers. Additionally, the airflow through
the unit is restricted by this size limitation, which reduces the
heat exchanger's effectiveness.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As a result, DOE has determined that, based on the available
product literature, as well as the governing definitions in EPCA,
certain units currently listed by manufacturers as SPVUs are being
misclassified and are appropriately classified as central air
conditioners (and in most cases as space-constrained central air
conditioners). The majority of these products are models that would
meet the ``space constrained'' definition in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013.
Because DOE has established a space-constrained product class to
account for space-constrained through-the-wall units and because these
units meet the existing definitions, DOE has tentatively concluded that
there is no need to establish a separate space-constrained class for
SPVUs. Therefore, DOE has not analyzed separate standards for space-
constrained SPVU equipment in this NODA. DOE requests comment on this
conclusion, which is identified as Issue 4 in section IV.B, ``Issues on
Which DOE Seeks Comment.'' In making this determination, DOE was also
mindful of the purposes underlying EPCA and the Department's energy and
water conservation standards regulations: To conserve energy and water
supplies and to increase energy and cost savings for American
businesses and consumers. Allowing a model of a product type that is
sold for personal use to evade DOE's energy conservation standards for
consumer products, simply because it is sold in some instances to
commercial or industrial users, would undermine this purpose.
B. Commercial Water Heaters
EPCA defines ``storage water heater'' as a water heater that heats
and stores water within the appliance at a thermostatically controlled
temperature for delivery on demand and that is industrial equipment.
This term does not include units with an input rating of 4,000 Btu/h or
more per gallon of stored water. (42 U.S.C. 6311(12)(A); 10 CFR
431.102) EPCA defines ``instantaneous water heater'' as a water heater
that has an input rating of at least 4,000 Btu/h per gallon of stored
water and that is industrial equipment, including products meeting this
description that are designed to heat water to temperatures of
180[deg]F or higher. (42 U.S.C. 6311(12)(B); 10 CFR 431.102)
The current Federal energy conservation standards for the five
classes of storage and instantaneous water heaters for which ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2013 amended efficiency levels are shown in Table I.1 and
set forth in DOE's regulations at 10 CFR 431.110. The product classes
for commercial storage and instantaneous water heaters, and attendant
Federal energy conservation standards, are differentiated based on fuel
type. ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 appeared to change the standby loss
levels for four equipment classes (gas-fired storage water heaters,
oil-fired storage water heaters, gas-fired instantaneous water heaters,
and oil-fired instantaneous water heaters) to efficiency levels that
surpass the current Federal energy conservation standard levels.
However, upon review of the changes, DOE believes that all changes to
standby loss levels for these equipment classes were editorial errors
because they are identical to SI (International System of Units; metric
system) formulas rather than I-P (Inch-Pound; English system) formulas.
Therefore, DOE did not conduct an analysis of the potential energy
savings for this equipment. ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 also changed the
standby loss level for electric storage water heaters, in this case in
a purposeful manner to align with the current Federal energy
conservation standard level. Because these levels meet and do not
exceed the current Federal standards, DOE did not conduct an analysis
of the potential energy savings for this equipment class. ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2013 also increased the thermal efficiency levels for
oil-fired storage water heaters to efficiency levels that surpass the
current Federal energy conservation standards. Therefore, DOE conducted
an analysis of the potential energy savings due to amended thermal
efficiency standards for oil-fired storage water heaters, which is
described in section III of this NODA.
C. Test Procedures
EPCA requires the Secretary to amend the test procedures for ASHRAE
equipment to the latest version generally accepted by industry or the
rating procedures developed or
[[Page 20124]]
recognized by AHRI or by ASHRAE, as referenced by ASHRAE/IES Standard
90.1, unless the Secretary determines by clear and convincing evidence
that the latest version of the industry test procedure does not meet
the requirements for test procedures described in paragraphs (2) and
(3) of 42 U.S.C. 6314(a).\17\ (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(4)(B)) ASHRAE Standard
90.1-2013 updated several of its test procedures for ASHRAE equipment.
Specifically, ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 updated to the most recent
editions of test procedures for small commercial package air
conditioners and heating equipment (AHRI 210/240-2008 \18\ with
Addendum 1 and 2, Performance Rating of Unitary Air-Conditioning & Air-
Source Heat Pump Equipment), large and very large commercial package
air conditioners and heating equipment (AHRI 340/360-2007 with Addenda
1 and 2, Performance Rating of Commercial and Industrial Unitary Air-
Conditioning and Heat Pump Equipment), variable refrigerant flow
equipment (AHRI 1230-2010 with Addendum 1, Performance Rating of
Variable Refrigerant Flow (VRF) Multi-Split Air-Conditioning and Heat
Pump Equipment), commercial warm-air furnaces (ANSI (American National
Standards Institute) Z21.47-2012, Standard for Gas-Fired Central
Furnaces), and commercial water heaters (ANSI Z21.10.3-2011, Gas Water
Heaters, Volume III, Storage Water Heaters with Input Ratings Above
75,000 Btu Per Hour, Circulating and Instantaneous).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ Specifically, the relevant provisions (42 U.S.C.
6314(a)(2)-(3)) provide that test procedures must be reasonably
designed to produce test results that reflect energy efficiency,
energy use, and estimated operating costs of a type (or class) of
industrial equipment during a representative average use cycle and
must not be unduly burdensome to conduct. Moreover, if the test
procedure is for determining estimated annual operating costs, it
must provide that such costs will be calculated from measurements of
energy use in a representative average-use cycle, and from
representative average unit costs of the energy needed to operate
the equipment during such cycle. The Secretary must provide
information to manufacturers of covered equipment regarding
representative average unit costs of energy.
\18\ ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 technically cites ``AHRI 210/240-
200 with Addendum 1 and 2.'' However, DOE believes that this is an
editorial error and that ASHRAE meant to cite AHRI 210/240-2008,
which is the most recent published year of that test procedure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE has preliminarily reviewed each of the test procedures that
were updated in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 and discusses the changes to
the test procedures below.
1. Updates to the AHRI 210/240 Test Method
In 2011 and 2012, AHRI published Addendum 1 and Addendum 2,
updating AHRI Standard 210/240-2008. AHRI Standard 210/240, Performance
Rating of Unitary Air-Conditioning & Air-Source Heat Pump Equipment, is
incorporated by reference as the DOE test procedure for small
commercial air conditioners and air-source heat pumps with a cooling
capacity below 65,000 Btu/h at 10 CFR 431.95. Although ASHRAE 90.1-2013
referenced the addenda to the 2008 version for the first time, the
changes contained in the addenda \19\ were previously evaluated by DOE
and adopted as part of a seven year test procedure review (conducted
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(1)(A)) in a final rule for commercial
heating, air-conditioning, and water heating equipment, published in
the Federal Register on May 16, 2012. 77 FR 28928. In that test
procedure amendment, DOE concluded that the addenda would not impact
the Federal energy efficiency ratings for small commercial air
conditioners and heat pumps, and it proceeded to incorporate AHRI
Standard 210/240-2008 with Addendum 1 and Addendum 2. 77 FR 28928,
28943, 28989 (May 16, 2012). Because DOE has already incorporated by
reference the most recent AHRI 210/240 addenda referenced by ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2013, DOE does not need to take action at this time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ The addenda to AHRI 210/240-2008 generally replace any
references to the part-load metric (i.e., integrated part load value
(IPLV)) with references to the new part load metric (i.e., IEER). 77
FR 28928, 28943.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Updates to the AHRI 340/360 Test Method
In 2010 and 2011, AHRI published Addendum 1 and Addendum 2,
respectively, updating AHRI 340/360-2007. AHRI Standard 340/360,
Performance Rating of Commercial and Industrial Unitary Air-
Conditioning and Heat Pump Equipment, is incorporated by reference as
the DOE test procedure for small, large, and very large commercial air
conditioners and air-source heat pumps with a cooling capacity greater
than or equal to 65,000 Btu/h at 10 CFR 431.95. Although ASHRAE 90.1-
2013 referenced the addenda to the 2007 version for the first time, the
changes contained in the addenda \20\ were previously evaluated by DOE
and adopted as part of a seven-year test procedure look back in a final
rule for commercial heating, air-conditioning, and water heating
equipment, published in the Federal Register on May 16, 2012, 77 FR
28928. In that test procedure amendment, DOE concluded that the addenda
would not impact the Federal energy efficiency ratings for small,
large, and very large commercial air conditioners and heat pumps, and
it proceeded to incorporate AHRI 340/360 with Addendum 1 and Addendum
2. 77 FR 28928, 28943, 28989 (May 16, 2012). Because DOE has already
incorporated by reference the most recent AHRI 340/360 addenda
referenced by ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013, DOE does not need to take
action at this time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ The addenda to AHRI 340/360-2007 expand the scope of the
standard to include air-cooled package unitary air conditioners with
cooling capacities from 250,000 Btu/h to less than 760,000 Btu/h,
add a -0.00 inch H2O to a 0.05 inch H2O
tolerance to the external static pressure test condition, and add an
external static pressure equation and a tolerance to the leaving
dry-bulb temperature to the IEER part-load test. 77 FR 28928, 28943.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Updates to the AHRI 1230 Test Method
In 2011, AHRI published Addendum 1, updating AHRI Standard 1230-
2010. AHRI Standard 1230, Performance Rating of Variable Refrigerant
Flow (VRF) Multi-Split Air-Conditioning and Heat Pump Equipment, is
incorporated by reference into the DOE test procedure for variable
refrigerant flow multi-split systems at 10 CFR 431.95. Although ASHRAE
90.1-2013 referenced the addenda to the 2010 version for the first
time, DOE incorporated by reference AHRI 1230-2010 with Addendum 1 in a
final rule for commercial heating, air-conditioning, and water heating
equipment, published in the Federal Register on May 16, 2012, 77 FR
28928, 28989. Because DOE has already incorporated by reference the
most recent AHRI 1230 edition and addendum referenced by ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2013, DOE does not need to take action at this time.
4. Updates to the ANSI Z21.47 Test Method
In 2012, ANSI updated ANSI Z21.47, Standard for Gas-Fired Central
Furnaces. DOE's test procedure for measuring the energy efficiency of
gas-fired warm air furnaces incorporates by reference ANSI Z21.47-2006
at 10 CFR 431.75, but the uniform test method set out at 10 CFR 431.76
only directs one to use those procedures contained in ANSI Z21.47-2006
that are relevant to the steady-state efficiency measurement (i.e.,
sections 1.1, 2.1 through 2.6, 2.39, and 4.2.1 of ANSI Z21.47). As a
result, DOE focused its test procedure review on the relevant sections
of ANSI Z21.47
[[Page 20125]]
that DOE's test procedure references. In those sections referenced by
DOE's test procedures, ANSI did not make any updates. Therefore, DOE
has preliminarily determined that the changes to ANSI Z21.47-2012 are
not relevant to the DOE test procedure for gas-fired warm air furnaces
and, therefore, do not impact the energy efficiency ratings for gas-
fired furnaces. Consequently, no further action is required at this
time. DOE seeks comments regarding this tentative conclusion. This is
identified as Issue 5 in section IV.B, ``Issues on Which DOE Seeks
Comment.''
5. Updates to the ANSI Z21.10.3 Test Method
In 2011, ANSI updated ANSI Z21.10.3, Gas Water Heaters, Volume III,
Storage Water Heaters with Input Ratings Above 75,000 Btu Per Hour,
Circulating and Instantaneous. DOE's test procedure for gas-fired water
heaters incorporates by reference ANSI Z21.10.3-2011 at 10 CFR 431.105,
but the uniform test method set out at 10 CFR 431.106 only directs one
to use sections G1 (Method of Test for Measuring Thermal Efficiency)
and G2 (Method of Test for Measuring Standby Loss) of the ANSI Z21.10.3
test procedure. Although ASHRAE 90.1-2013 referenced the 2011 version
for the first time, the version was previously evaluated by DOE and
adopted \21\ as part of a 7-year test procedure review (conducted
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(1)(A)) in a final rule for commercial
heating, air-conditioning, and water heating equipment, published in
the Federal Register on May 16, 2012. 77 FR 28928. In that test
procedure amendment, DOE concluded that the new version would not alter
the DOE test method or the energy efficiency ratings for commercial
water heaters as compared to adopting ANSI Z21.10.3-2004, and it
proceeded to incorporate ANSI Z21.10.3-2011 by reference. 77 FR 28928,
28944, 28996 (May 16, 2012). Because DOE has already incorporated by
reference ANSI Z21.10.3-2011, the test procedure referenced by ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2013, DOE does not need to take action at this time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ DOE also adopted a correction regarding Figures 2 and 3 in
Exhibit G of ANSI Z21.10.3-2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Analysis of Potential Energy Savings
As required under 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A), DOE performed an
analysis to determine the energy-savings potential of amending Federal
energy conservation standard levels to the efficiency levels specified
in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013, as well as to more-stringent efficiency
levels than those specified in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013. As explained
previously, DOE's energy-savings analysis is limited to types of
equipment covered by Federal energy conservation standards for which
the amended ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 increase the efficiency levels
and for which a market exists and sufficient data are available.\22\
Based upon the conclusions reached in section II, DOE is conducting the
energy-savings analysis for:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ As discussed in section II, when no products are available
on the market or no reliable data exist for calculating potential
energy savings, DOE did not perform an analysis. The products for
which ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 increase the efficiency level, but
for which DOE did not perform an analysis due to lack of a market or
lack of data include: (1) SPVHP 65,000 to less than 135,000 Btu/h;
(2) SPVAC 135,000 to less than 240,000 Btu/h; and (3) SPVHP 135,000
to less than 240,000 Btu/h. (See section II.A.5.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Three equipment classes of small air-cooled, three-phase
commercial packaged air-conditioning and heating equipment: (1) Single-
package air conditioners less than 65,000 Btu/h, (2) single-package
heat pumps less than 65,000 Btu/h, and (3) split system heat pumps less
than 65,000 Btu/h;
Three equipment classes of small commercial water-source
heat pumps: (1) Less than 17,000 Btu/h, (2) 17,000 to less than 65,000
Btu/h, and (3) 65,000 to less than 135,000 Btu/h;
Three equipment classes of standard size PTACs: (1) Less
than 7,000 Btu/h, (2) 7,000 to 15,000 Btu/h, and (3) greater than
15,000 Btu/h;
Three equipment classes of SPVUs: (1) SPVACs less than
65,000 Btu/h, (2) SPVHPs less than 65,000 Btu/h, and (3) SPVACs 65,000
to less than 135,000 Btu/h; and
One equipment class of commercial water-heating equipment:
(1) Oil-fired storage water heaters greater than 105,000 Btu/h and less
than 4,000 Btu/h/gal.
The following discussion provides an overview of the energy-savings
analysis conducted for these 13 classes of equipment, followed by
summary results of that analysis. For each efficiency level analyzed,
DOE calculated the potential energy savings to the Nation as the
difference between a base-case projection (without amended standards)
and the standards-case projection (with amended standards). The
national energy savings (NES) refers to cumulative lifetime energy
savings for equipment purchased in a 30-year period that differs by
equipment (i.e., the compliance date differs by equipment class because
of the ASHRAE trigger legal requirements). The analysis is based on a
stock accounting method. In the standards case, equipment that is more
efficient gradually replaces less-efficient equipment over time. This
affects the calculation of the potential energy savings, which are a
function of the total number of units in use and their efficiencies.
Savings depend on annual shipments and equipment lifetime. Inputs to
the energy-savings analysis are presented below, and details are
available in the ASHRAE NODA technical support document (TSD) on DOE's
Web site.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ The ASHRAE NODA TSD is available on the Web page for ASHRAE
Products at: https://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/rulemaking.aspx?ruleid=90
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Annual Energy Use
This section describes the energy use analysis performed for each
type of equipment. The Federal standard and higher efficiency levels
are expressed in terms of an efficiency metric or metrics. For each
equipment class, this section describes how DOE developed estimates of
annual energy consumption at the baseline efficiency level and at
higher levels for each equipment type. These annual unit energy
consumption (UEC) estimates form the basis of the national energy
savings estimates discussed in section III.E. More detailed discussion
is found in the ASHRAE NODA TSD.
1. Small Commercial Packaged Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps
To estimate the UEC for each class of small commercial packaged air
conditioning and heating equipment less than 65,000 Btu/h (air-cooled,
three-phase), DOE began with the cooling UECs for single-phase
equipment installed in commercial buildings as presented in the
national impact analysis associated with the 2010 notice of public
meeting and availability of preliminary technical support document for
residential central air conditioners and heat pumps. (EERE-2008-BT-STD-
0006-0003). DOE believes that three-phase commercial equipment would
have similar energy usage to single-phase equipment, as it would tend
to be used in similar locations and in a similar manner. DOE seeks
comment on this assumption, which is identified as Issue 6 in section
IV.B, ``Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment.''
In the 2010 analysis, the UECs for split and single-package systems
were very similar (and therefore comparable), but UECs were available
for higher efficiency levels for split systems than
[[Page 20126]]
for single-package equipment. As a result, DOE used the 2010 UECs for
split systems for all equipment classes analyzed for today's NODA,
including both split and single-package systems.
Although ASHRAE 90.1-2013 increased the HSPF levels for this
equipment, DOE did not include heating UECs in this analysis. For
commercial installations in the 2010 analysis, DOE determined that the
heating UECs did not scale proportionally with HSPF. Based on these
data, DOE has preliminarily determined that using available data to
quantify energy savings related to increasing HSPF for small commercial
heat pumps is not possible. DOE seeks data and information related to
the heating energy use of commercial heat pumps, as related to HSPF,
which is identified as Issue 7 in section IV.B, ``Issues on Which DOE
Seeks Comment.''
Table III.1 shows the UEC estimates for the current Federal
standards levels (baseline), the ASHRAE 90.1-2013 levels, and the
higher efficiency levels for the three small air-cooled commercial
packaged air-conditioning and heating equipment classes analyzed. DOE
derived the ``max-tech'' level from the market maximum in the AHRI
Certified Directory \24\ as of November 2013. However, the highest
available efficiency level for split system heat pumps was only 16.2,
whereas for single-package units it was 18.05. DOE believes that split
system heat pumps are capable of reaching the same efficiency level as
single-package units because the same technologies to increase
efficiency can be employed for each type of equipment and, therefore,
analyzed a ``max-tech'' level of 18.05 for both single package and
split system heat pumps.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ Available at: https://www.ahridirectory.org/ahridirectory/pages/home.aspx.
Table III.1--National UEC Estimates for Air-Cooled Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Small three- Small three- Small three-
phase air-cooled phase air-cooled phase air-cooled
single-package single-package split system
air conditioners heat pumps heat pumps
<65,000 Btu/h <65,000 Btu/h <65,000 Btu/h
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Efficiency Level (SEER)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline--Federal Standard................................ 13.0 13.0 13.0
ASHRAE Level (1).......................................... 14.0 14.0 14.0
Efficiency Level 2........................................ 15.0 15.0 15.0
Efficiency Level 3........................................ 16.0 16.0 16.0
Efficiency Level 4........................................ 17.5 -- --
Efficiency Level 5--``Max-Tech''--........................ 19.15 18.05 18.05
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UEC (kwh/year)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline--Federal Standard................................ 2,408 2,418 2,418
ASHRAE Level (1).......................................... 2,349 2,387 2,387
Efficiency Level 2........................................ 2,237 2,282 2,282
Efficiency Level 3........................................ 2,125 2,177 2,177
Efficiency Level 4........................................ 2,086 -- --
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Efficiency Level 5--``Max-Tech''--........................ 2,047 2,123 2,123
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Water-Source Heat Pumps
To estimate the UEC for each class of water-source heat pump, DOE
began with the cooling UECs for water-source heat pumps published in
Appendix D of the 2000 Screening Analysis for EPACT-Covered Commercial
HVAC and Water-Heating Equipment. (EERE-2006-STD-0098-0015) Where
identical efficiency levels were available, DOE used the UEC directly
from the screening analysis. For additional efficiency levels, DOE
scaled the UECs based on the ratio of EER, as was done in the original
analysis. DOE seeks comment on the appropriateness of the cooling UECs
derived from the 2000 screening analysis, adjusted based on equipment
EER to be inversely proportional to EER, including whether energy use
for this equipment would have changed significantly since the last
analysis. This is identified as Issue 8 in section IV.B, ``Issues on
Which DOE Seeks Comment.''
Although ASHRAE 90.1-2013 increased the COP levels for this
equipment, DOE did not include heating UEC in this analysis as a result
of lack of information regarding the heating-mode energy use of this
equipment. DOE seeks data and information related to water-source heat
pump heating energy use. This is identified as Issue 9 in section IV.B,
``Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment.''
Table III.2 shows the UEC estimates for the current Federal
standard levels, the ASHRAE 90.1-2013 levels, and the higher efficiency
levels for the three water-source heat pump classes analyzed. The
``max-tech'' levels represent the market maximum identified in the AHRI
Certified Directory as of November 2013.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ For variable-capacity models listed at both minimum and
maximum capacity, DOE analyzed the efficiency of the maximum
capacity only.
[[Page 20127]]
Table III.2--National UEC Estimates for Water-Source Heat Pumps
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Water-source Water-source
Water-source heat pumps heat pumps
heat pumps >=17,000 and >=65,000 and
<17,000 Btu/h <65,000 Btu/h <135,000 Btu/h
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Efficiency Level (EER)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline--Federal Standard................................ 11.2 12.0 12.0
ASHRAE Level (1).......................................... 12.2 13.0 13.0
Efficiency Level 2........................................ 13.0 14.6 14.0
Efficiency Level 3........................................ 14.0 16.6 15.0
Efficiency Level 4........................................ 15.7 18.0 16.0
Efficiency Level 5........................................ 16.5 19.2 --
Efficiency Level 6--``Max-Tech''--........................ 18.1 21.6 17.2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UEC (kwh/year)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline--Federal Standard................................ 1,738 4,868 11,528
ASHRAE Level (1).......................................... 1,595 4,493 10,641
Efficiency Level 2........................................ 1,497 4,001 9,881
Efficiency Level 3........................................ 1,390 3,519 9,223
Efficiency Level 4........................................ 1,240 3,245 8,646
Efficiency Level 5........................................ 1,180 3,042 --
Efficiency Level 6--``Max-Tech''--........................ 1,075 2,704 8,043
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners
To estimate the UEC for each class of PTACs, DOE began with the
cooling UECs for PTACs used in the 2008 energy conservation standards
final rule. 73 FR 58772 (Oct. 7, 2008). With the UECs given for each
State, the population of each State was used to weight the UECs to
obtain a nationally representative UEC. Where identical efficiency
levels and cooling capacities were available, DOE used the UEC directly
from the rulemaking. For additional efficiency levels, DOE scaled the
UECs based on interpolations between EERs at a constant cooling
capacity. Likewise, for additional cooling capacities, DOE scaled the
UECs based on interpolations between cooling capacities at constant
EER.
Table III.3 shows the UEC estimates for the current Federal
standard levels, the ASHRAE 90.1-2013 levels, and the higher efficiency
levels for the three PTAC classes analyzed. The ``max-tech'' levels
correspond to those in the PTAC Framework Document published in 2013.
78 FR 12252 (Feb. 22, 2013) (EERE-2012-BT-STD-0029-0002).
Table III.3--National UEC Estimates for PTACs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PTAC <7,000 Btu/ PTAC >=7,000 and PTAC >15,000 Btu/
h <=15,000 Btu/h h
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Efficiency Level (EER)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline--Federal Standard................................ 11.7 11.1 9.3
ASHRAE Level (1).......................................... 11.9 11.3 9.5
Efficiency Level 2........................................ 12.2 11.5 9.7
Efficiency Level 3........................................ 12.6 12.0 10.0
Efficiency Level 4........................................ 13.1 12.4 10.4
Efficiency Level 5........................................ 13.6 12.9 10.8
Efficiency Level 6--``Max-Tech'' -........................ 14.0 13.3 11.2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UEC (kwh/year)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline--Federal Standard................................ 849 1,026 1,607
ASHRAE Level (1).......................................... 838 1,014 1,591
Efficiency Level 2........................................ 824 1,000 1,577
Efficiency Level 3........................................ 799 973 1,547
Efficiency Level 4........................................ 773 946 1,517
Efficiency Level 5........................................ 748 919 1,487
Efficiency Level 6--``Max-Tech''--........................ 723 892 1,458
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Single-Package Vertical Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps
Based on information received from manufacturer interviews
conducted in preparation for the forthcoming SPVU NOPR, DOE has
determined that approximately 35 percent of SPVAC shipments go to
educational facilities, and the majority of those installations are for
space conditioning of modular classroom buildings. Another
approximately 35 percent of the shipments go to providing cooling for
telecommunications and electronics enclosures. The remainder of the
shipments (30 percent) is used in a wide variety of commercial
buildings, including offices, temporary buildings, and some
miscellaneous facilities. In almost all of these commercial building
[[Page 20128]]
applications, the buildings served are expected to be of modular
construction, because SPVUs, as packaged air conditioners installed on
external building walls, do not impact site preparation costs for
modular buildings, which may be relocated multiple times over the
building's life. The vertically-oriented configuration of SPVUs allows
the building mounting to be unobtrusive and minimizes impacts on
modular building transportation requirements. These advantages do not
apply to a significant extent to site-constructed buildings. DOE
further understands that shipments of SPVHP equipment would primarily
be to educational facilities or office-type end uses but would be
infrequently used for telecommunication or electronic enclosures for
which the heating requirements are often minimal.
DOE analyzed energy use in three different classes of commercial
buildings that utilize SPVU equipment: (1) modular classrooms; (2)
modular offices; and (3) telecommunication shelters. To estimate the
energy use of SPVU equipment in these building types, DOE developed
building simulation models for use with DOE's EnergyPlus software.\26\
A prototypical building model was developed for each building type,
described by the building footprint, general building size, and design.
The building types were represented by a 1,568 ft\2\ wood-frame modular
classroom, a 1,568 ft\2\ wood-frame modular office, and a 240 ft\2\
concrete-wall telecommunications shelter. In each case, the building
construction (footprint, window-wall ratio, general design) was
developed to be representative of typical designs within the general
class of building. Operating schedules, internal load profiles,
internal electric receptacle (plug) loads, and occupancy for the
modular classroom were based upon classroom-space-type data found in
the DOE Primary School commercial prototype building model.\27\
Operating schedules, internal load profiles, internal plug loads, and
occupancy for modular office buildings were those from office space in
the DOE Small Office commercial prototype building model. Id. For the
telecommunications shelter, DOE did not identify a source for typical
representative internal electronic loads as a function of building
size, nor did it find information on representative internal gain
profiles. However, based on feedback from shelter manufacturers, DOE
used a 36,000 Btu/h (10.55 kW) peak internal load to reflect internal
design load in the shelter. DOE determined that, on average over the
year, this load ran at a scheduled 65 percent of peak value, reflecting
estimates for computer server environments.\28\ Each of these three
building models was used to establish the energy usage of SPVAC and
SPVHP equipment in the same building class.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ EnergyPlus Energy Simulation Software and documentation are
available at: https://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/energyplus/.
\27\ The commercial prototype building models are available on
DOE's Web site as Energy Plus input files at: https://www.energycodes.gov/development/commercial/90.1_models.
Documentation of the initial model development is provided in: Deru,
M., et al., U.S. Department of Energy Commercial Reference Building
Models of the National Building Stock, NREL/TP-5500-46861 (2011).
\28\ EnergyConsult Pty Ltd., Equipment Energy Efficiency
Committee Regulatory Impact Statement Consultation Draft: Minimum
Energy Performance Standards and Alternative Strategies for Close
Control Air Conditioners, Report No 2008/11 (2008) (Available at:
www.energyrating.gov.au).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Envelope performance (e.g., wall, window, and roof insulation, and
window performance) and lighting power inputs were based on
requirements in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2004.\29\ DOE believes that the
requirements in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2004 are sufficiently
representative of a mixture of both older and more recent construction
and that resulting SPVU equipment loads will be representative of
typical SPVU equipment loads in the building stock. Ventilation levels
were based on ASHRAE Standard 62.1-2004.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-
Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE), Energy Standard for Buildings
Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings, ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA Standard
90.1-2004 (2005).
\30\ American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-
Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE), Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor
Air Quality, ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 62.1-2004 (2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE simulated each building prototype in 237 U.S. climate
locations, taking into account variation in building envelope
performance for each climate as required by ASHRAE 90.1-2004. For
simulations used to represent SPVU equipment of less than 65,000 Btu/h,
no outside air economizers were assumed for the modular office and
modular classroom buildings.\31\ However, for simulations used to
represent equipment of greater than or equal to 65,000 Btu/h but less
than 135,000 Btu/h, economizer usage was presumed to be climate-
dependent in these building types, based on ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2004
requirements for unitary equipment in that capacity range. For the
telecommunications shelter, economizers were assumed for 45 percent of
buildings, based on manufacturer interviews. In addition, for the
telecommunications shelter, redundant identical air conditioners with
alternating usage were assumed when establishing average annual energy
consumption per unit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ An ``outside air economizer'' is a combination of
ventilation and exhaust air dampers and controls that increase the
amount of outside air brought in to a building when the outside air
conditions (i.e., temperature and humidity) are low, such that
increasing the amount of ventilation air reduces the equipment
cooling loads.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Simulations were done for the buildings using SPVAC equipment and
electric resistance heating, and then a separate set of simulations was
done for buildings with SPVHP equipment. For each equipment type and
building type combination, DOE simulated each efficiency level
identified in the engineering analysis for each equipment class. Fan
power at these efficiency levels was based on manufacturers' literature
and reported fan power consumption data as developed in the engineering
analysis. Brushless permanent magnet (BPM) supply air blower motors
were assumed at an EER of 10.0 and higher for all classes of equipment
based on results from the engineering analysis. The supply air blower
motors are assumed to run at constant speed and constant power while
operating.
DOE used typical meteorological weather data (TMY3) for each
location in the simulations.\32\ DOE sized equipment for each building
simulation using a design-day sizing method incorporating the design
data found in the EnergyPlus design-day weather data files for each
climate.\33\ DOE also incorporated an additional cooling sizing factor
of 1.1 for the equipment used in the modular office and modular
classroom simulations, reflective of the typical sizing adjustment
needed to account for discrete available equipment capacities in SPVAC
and SPVHP equipment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ Wilcox S. and W. Marion, User's Manual for TMY3 Data Sets,
National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Report No. NREL/TP-581-43156
(2008).
\33\ EnergyPlus TMY3-based weather data files and design-day
data files available at: https://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/energyplus/weatherdata_about.cfm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EER and heating COP were converted to corresponding simulation
inputs for each efficiency level simulated. These inputs, along with
the calculated fan power at each efficiency level, were used in the
building simulations. Further details of the building model and the
simulation inputs for the SPVAC and SPVHP equipment can be found in
chapter 3 of the NODA TSD.
From the annual simulation results for SPVAC equipment, DOE
extracted the condenser energy use for cooling, the supply air blower
energy use for
[[Page 20129]]
both heating and cooling hours, the electric resistance heating energy,
and the equipment capacity for each building type, climate, and
efficiency level. From these, DOE developed corresponding normalized
annual cooling energy per cooling ton and annual blower energy per ton
for the efficiency levels simulated. DOE also developed the electrical
heating energy per ton for the building. These per-ton cooling and
blower energy values were added together and then multiplied by the
average cooling capacity estimated for the equipment class simulated to
arrive at an initial energy consumption estimate for SPVAC. In a
deviation from the 2011 NODA analysis, DOE also noted that, where fan
power was reduced for higher efficiency levels, there was a
corresponding increase in the amount of heating required in each
climate to make up for the loss of heat energy imparted into the supply
air stream through the use of the more-efficient supply air blower
during the heating season. This impact was climate dependent, with
little heating impact in warm climates, and greater heating impact in
cold climates where heating energy requirements dominate during the
year. DOE calculated this heating ``take back'' effect for higher
efficiency levels as a deviation from the baseline heating energy use
for each equipment capacity. The final SPVAC energy consumption
estimates were then based on the calculated cooling and supply blower
energy uses plus this heating take back, which allowed the resulting
energy savings estimates to correctly account for the heating energy
increase during the year. In addition, it was estimated that 5 percent
of the market for the class of SPVAC less than 65,000 Btu/h utilize gas
furnace heating. The heating take back for these systems was estimated
based on the heating load of the systems with electric resistance heat
and assuming an average 81-percent furnace annual fuel utilization
efficiency (AFUE).
The analytical method for SPVHP was carried out in a similar
fashion; however, for heat pumps, DOE included the heating energy
(compressor heating and electric resistance backup) directly from the
simulation results and, thus, did not separately calculate a heating
take back effect. From these data, DOE developed per-ton energy
consumption values for cooling, supply blower, and heating electric
loads. These per-ton energy figures were summed and multiplied by the
nominal capacity for the equipment class simulated to arrive at the
annual per-ton energy consumption for SPVHP for each combination of
building type, climate, and efficiency level.
For each combination of equipment class, building type, climate,
and efficiency level, DOE developed UEC values for each State using
weighting factors to establish the contribution of each climate in each
State. National average UEC estimates for each equipment class and
efficiency level were also established based on population-based
weighting across States and shipment weights to the different building
types. With regard to the latter, while DOE established shipment
weights for SPVAC equipment related to the three building types
(educational, office, and telecommunications), DOE determined that
SPVHP equipment was not used to a significant extent in
telecommunications facilities and, thus, only allocated shipments of
SPVHP equipment to two building types, educational and office.
For details of this energy use analysis, see chapter 3 of the NODA
TSD.
Table III.4 shows the annual UEC estimates for SPVAC and SPVHP
corresponding to the efficiency levels analyzed. For all levels above
the baseline, SPVAC less than 65,000 Btu/h also include a heating take-
back UEC of 53 kBtu/year.
Table III.4--National UEC Estimates for SPVUs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SPVAC >=65,000
SPVAC <65,000 SPVHP <65,000 and <135,000 Btu/
Btu/h Btu/h h
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Efficiency Level (EER)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline--Federal Standard................................ 9.0 9.0 8.9
ASHRAE Level (1).......................................... 10.0 10.0 10.0
Efficiency Level 2........................................ 10.5 10.5 ................
Efficiency Level 3........................................ 11.0 11.0 ................
Efficiency Level 4........................................ 11.8 11.8 ................
Efficiency Level 5--``Max-Tech''--........................ 12.3 12.3 ................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UEC (kwh/year)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline--Federal Standard................................ 6,814 20,222 13,604
ASHRAE Level (1).......................................... 6,113 19,689 12,119
Efficiency Level 2........................................ 5,864 19,236 ................
Efficiency Level 3........................................ 5,638 18,951 ................
Efficiency Level 4........................................ 5,335 18,115 ................
Efficiency Level 5--``Max-Tech''--........................ 5,136 17,977 ................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE seeks input on its analysis of UECs for these equipment classes
and its use in establishing the energy savings potential for higher
standards. Of particular interest to DOE is input on shipments of SPVHP
equipment to telecommunications shelters and the frequency of use of
economizers in equipment serving these shelters. DOE also recognizes
that there may be regional differences between the shipments of heat
pumps and air conditioners to warmer or cooler climates and requests
stakeholder input on how, or if, such differences can be taken into
account in the energy use characterization. DOE identified these topics
as Issues 10 and 11 under ``Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment'' in
section IV.B of this NODA.
5. Commercial Water Heaters
To provide an estimate of the UEC of commercial oil-fired storage
water heaters (greater than 105,000 Btu/h and less than 4,000 Btu/h/
gal), DOE calculated the shipment-weighted average UEC of gas-fired
commercial storage water heaters using data in the 2000 Screening
Analysis for EPACT-Covered Commercial HVAC and Water-
[[Page 20130]]
Heating Equipment. (EERE-2006-STD-0098-0015) DOE then calculated the
ratio of UEC of oil-fired to gas-fired commercial water heaters based
on the water heating information derived from the Energy Information
Administration's 2003 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption
Survey.\34\ DOE applied this ratio to the shipment-weighted average UEC
of gas-fired commercial storage water heaters to arrive at the UEC of
oil-fired commercial storage water heaters. DOE assumed this UEC
corresponded to the baseline efficiency of 78 percent. For additional
efficiency levels above 78 percent, DOE scaled the UECs based on the
ratio of thermal efficiency at the baseline and each specific
efficiency level. DOE seeks comment on its approach to estimating UECs
for oil-fired commercial storage water heaters. DOE has identified this
topic as Issue 12 under ``Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment'' in
section IV.B of this NODA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ U.S. Department of Energy: Energy Information
Administration, Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey
(2003) (Last accessed Jan. 2014) (Available at: https://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cbecs/).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table III.5 shows the UEC estimates for the current Federal
standard levels, the ASHRAE 90.1-2013 levels, and the higher efficiency
levels for oil-fired commercial storage water heaters.
Table III.5--National UEC Estimates for Commercial Water-Heating
Equipment
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oil-fired storage
water-heating
equipment (>105,000
Btu/h and <4,000 Btu/
h/gal)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Efficiency Level (Et)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline--Federal Standard........................ 78%
ASHRAE Level (1).................................. 80%
Efficiency Level 2................................ 81%
Efficiency Level 3--``Max-Tech''--................ 82%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
UEC (MMBtu/year)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline--Federal Standard........................ 131
ASHRAE Level (1).................................. 128
Efficiency Level 2................................ 126
Efficiency Level 3--``Max-Tech''--................ 125
------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Shipments
1. Small Commercial Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps
DOE previously estimated shipments of air-cooled, three-phase
equipment less than 65,000 Btu/h by equipment class for the year 1999
as part of the 2000 Screening Analysis for EPACT-Covered Commercial
HVAC and Water-Heating Equipment. (EERE-2006-STD-0098-0015) Table III.6
shows these data. While the U.S. Census provides shipments data for
air-cooled equipment less than 65,000 Btu/h, it does not disaggregate
the shipments into single-phase and three-phase. Therefore, DOE used
the Census data from 1999 to 2010 \35\ as a trend from which to
extrapolate DOE's 1999 estimated shipments data (which is divided by
equipment class) for three-phase equipment for the time period from
2000 to 2010. DOE then used the estimated shipments from 1999 to 2010
to establish a trend from which to project shipments beyond 2010. For
heat pumps, DOE used a linear trend, which is slightly decreasing for
single-package units and increasing for split systems. However, for
single-package air conditioners, the trend was precipitously declining.
As a result, for single-package air conditioners for the years after
2010, DOE used the average value from 1999 to 2010. The full time
series of shipments can be found in the ASHRAE NODA TSD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ U.S. Census Bureau. Current Industrial Reports for
Refrigeration, Air Conditioning, and Warm Air Heating Equipment,
MA333M. Note that the current industrial reports were discontinued
in 2010, so more recent data are not available. Available at: https://www.census.gov/manufacturing/cir/historical_data/ma333m/.
Table III.6--DOE Estimated Shipments of Small Three-Phase Commercial Air
Conditioners and Heat Pumps <65,000 Btu/h
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Equipment Class 1999
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Single-Package AC............................................ 213,728
Single-Package HP............................................ 27,773
Split System HP.............................................. 11,903
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Water-Source Heat Pumps
The U.S. Census published historical (1980, 1983-1994, 1997-2006,
and 2008-2010) water-source heat pump shipment data.\36\ Table III.7
exhibits the shipment data provided for a selection of years. DOE
analyzed data from the years 1990-2010 to establish a trend from which
to project shipments beyond 2010. DOE used a linear trend. Because the
Census data do not distinguish between equipment capacities, DOE used
the shipments data by equipment class provided by AHRI in 1999, and
published in the 2000 Screening Analysis for EPACT-Covered Commercial
HVAC and Water-Heating Equipment (EERE-2006-STD-0098-0015), to
distribute the total water-source heat pump shipments to individual
equipment classes. Table III.8 exhibits the shipment data provided for
1999. DOE assumed that this distribution of shipments across the
various equipment classes remained constant and has used this same
distribution in its projection of future shipments of water-source heat
pumps. The complete historical data set and the projected shipments for
each equipment class can be found in the ASHRAE NODA TSD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ Id.
Table III.7--Total Shipments of Water-Source Heat Pumps (Census Product
Code: 333415E181)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Equipment class 1989 1999 2009
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total.................................. 157,080 120,545 180,101
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table III.8--Total Shipments of Water-Source Heat Pumps (AHRI)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Equipment class 1999 Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
WSHP <17000 Btu/h................................... 41,000 31
WSHP 17000-65000 Btu/h.............................. 86,000 65
WSHP 65000-135000 Btu/h............................. 5,000 4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE notes that an EIA report on geothermal heat pump manufacturers
\37\ shows shipments of water-source units (defined by EIA as those
tested to ARI-320) as only 22,009 in 2009 and 7,808 in 2000, which is
significantly less than that reported by the Census (product code
333415E181) and by AHRI. DOE notes that both the Census data and the
EIA report show consistent shipments of separately-reported ground-
source and ground-water-source heat pumps (listed as Census product
code 333415G and defined by EIA as those tested to ARI-325/330) at
approximately 87,000 shipments in 2009; DOE is not counting these
shipments in its estimates as reported in Table III.7. DOE believes
that water-source heat pumps operate with a water loop using a boiler
or chiller as the heat source or sink, and that, therefore, may not be
considered ``geothermal''; in this case, the EIA report may not include
a comprehensive number of water-source heat pump shipments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ U.S. Energy Information Administration, Geothermal Heat
Pump Manufacturing Activities 2009 (2010) (Available at: https://www.eia.gov/renewable/renewables/geothermalrpt09.pdf).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE seeks comment on the market for water-source heat pumps,
especially what magnitude of annual shipments is most accurate, and how
shipments are expected to change over time. DOE also
[[Page 20131]]
seeks comment on the share of the market for ground-source and ground-
water-source heat pump applications that use models also rated for
water-loop application. DOE identified these as Issues 13 and 14 under
``Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment'' in section IV.B of this NODA.
3. Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners
To estimate yearly shipments of PTACs, DOE examined new
construction and replacement shipments. New construction shipments were
calculated using projected new construction floor space of healthcare,
lodging, and small office buildings from the Annual Energy Outlook 2013
(AEO 2013) \38\ and historical saturation data, which were calculated
from historical shipments data and historical new construction floor
space as shown in Table III.9. Replacement shipments equaled the number
of units that failed in a given year, based on a stock model and
distribution of equipment lifetimes. DOE determined the distribution of
shipments among the equipment classes using shipments data by equipment
class provided by AHRI for the 2008 PTAC and PTHP rulemaking, as shown
in Table III.10.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ AEO 2013 can be accessed at: https://www.eia.gov/forecasts/archive/aeo13/index.cfm.
\39\ U.S. Department of Energy--Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy. Energy Conservation Program for Commercial and
Industrial Equipment: Packaged Terminal Air Conditioner and Packaged
Terminal Heat Pump Energy Conservation Standards (Available at:
https://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=EERE-2007-BT-STD-0012).
Table III.9--Historical PTAC and PTHP Shipments With New Construction Floor Space Values Used to Calculate
Saturation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Saturation
Year Health care Lodging Small Office Total (million Construction (units/million
(million s.f.) (million s.f.) (million s.f.) s.f.) Shipments s.f.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2000 68 172 179 419 66,407 6,315
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table III.10--Shipments of PTACs by Equipment Class (AHRI)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PTAC PTHP
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<7,000 >=7,000--<=15,000 >15,000 <7,000 >=7,000--<=15,000 >15,000
Btu/h Btu/h Btu/h Btu/h Btu/h Btu/h
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1998-2004 Average Shipments... 12,898 205,355 15,407 7,702 168,068 13,534
Percent....................... 3% 48% 4% 2% 40% 3%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Single-Package Vertical Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps
To develop the SPVU shipments model, DOE started with 2005 shipment
estimates from the Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute (ARI,
now AHRI) for units less than 65,000 Btu/h as published in a previous
rulemaking \40\ (more recent data are not available). Table III.11
shows these data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ U.S. Department of Energy--Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Technical Support Document: Energy Efficiency
Program for Commercial and Industrial Equipment: Efficiency
Standards for Commercial Heating, Air-Conditioning, and Water
Heating Equipment Including Packaged Terminal Air-Conditioners and
Packaged Terminal Heat Pumps, Small Commercial Packaged Boiler,
Three-Phase Air-Conditioners and Heat Pumps <65,000 Btu/h, and
Single-Package Vertical Air Conditioners and Single-Package Vertical
Heat Pumps <65,000 Btu/h (March 2006) (Available at: https://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/commercial/pdfs/ashrae_products/ashrae_products_draft_tsd_030206.pdf). This TSD
was prepared for the rulemaking that resulted in the Final Rule:
Energy Efficiency Program for Certain Commercial and Industrial
Equipment: Efficiency Standards for Commercial Heating, Air-
Conditioning, and Water-Heating Equipment. 72 FR 10038 (March 7,
2007).
Table III.11--Total Shipments of Single Package Vertical Units
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Equipment class 2005
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SPVAC <65,000 Btu/h, single-phase............................ 31,976
SPVAC <65,000 Btu/h, three-phase............................. 13,125
SPVHP <65,000 Btu/h, single-phase............................ 14,301
SPVHP <65,000 Btu/h, three-phase............................. 6,129
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE added additional shipments for SPVACs greater than or equal to
65,000 Btu/h and less than 135,000 Btu/h, which make up 3 percent of
the market, based on manufacturer interviews. As there are no models on
the market for SPVHP greater than or equal to 65,000 Btu/h and less
than 135,000 Btu/h, or for any SPVUs greater than or equal to 135,000
Btu/h, DOE did not develop shipments estimates (or generate NES) for
these equipment classes. See chapter 4 of the NODA TSD for more details
on the initial shipment estimates by equipment class that were used as
the basis for the shipments projections discussed subsequently.
To project shipments of SPVUs for new construction (starting in
2006), DOE relied primarily on sector-based estimates of saturation and
projections of floor space. Based on manufacturer interview
information, DOE allocated 35 percent of shipments to the education
sector, 35 percent to telecom, and 30 percent to offices. DOE used the
2005 new construction shipments and 2005 new construction floor space
for offices and education (from AEO 2013) to estimate a saturation rate
for each end use.\41\ DOE applied this saturation rate to AEO 2013
projections of new construction floor space to project shipments to new
construction through 2044. For shipments to telecom, DOE developed an
index based on County Business Pattern data for establishments \42\ and
projected this trend forward. To allocate the total projected shipments
for office, education, and telecom into the equipment classes, DOE used
the fraction of shipments from 2005 for each equipment class. This
fraction remained constant over time. The complete discussion of
shipment allocation and projected shipments for the different
[[Page 20132]]
equipment classes can be found in chapter 4 of the NODA TSD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ Manufacturers reported that in 2012, 50 percent of
shipments were for new construction. DOE allocated a larger
percentage of shipments to new construction in 2005 in order to
arrive at 50 percent in 2012.
\42\ U.S. Census Bureau, County Business Patterns for NAICS
237130 Power and Communication Line and Related Structures
Construction (Available at: https://www.census.gov/econ/cbp/) (Last accessed May 2, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In order to model shipments for replacement SPVUs, DOE developed
historical shipments for SPVUs back to 1981 based on an index of square
footage production data from the Modular Buildings Institute.\43\
Shipments prior to 1994 were extrapolated based on a trend from 2005 to
1997. In the stock model, the lifetime of SPVUs follows a distribution
with a minimum of 10 years and a maximum of 25 years (and an average of
15 years). All retired units are assumed to be replaced with new
shipments. The complete discussion of the method for extrapolating
historical shipments can be found in chapter 4 of the NODA TSD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ Available at: https://www.modular.org/HtmlPage.aspx?name=analysis (Last accessed May 18, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Commercial Water Heaters
DOE derived the shipments for commercial oil-fired storage water
heaters (greater than 105,000 Btu/h and less than 4,000 Btu/h/gal) from
the 2000 Screening Analysis for EPACT-Covered Commercial HVAC and
Water-Heating Equipment (EERE-2006-STD-0098-0015) and the AHRI model
database.\44\ The PNNL study estimated the shipments of gas-fired
storage water heaters in 1999. DOE estimated that the shipments in 2000
are the same as the shipments in 1999, and then applied a 1% per year
growth rate after 2000. To derive the shipments of oil-fired storage
water heaters, DOE calculated the ratio of oil- versus gas-fired
storage water heaters using the number of models in the AHRI model
database, which was 3.3 percent. DOE multiplied this ratio by the
shipments of gas-fired storage water heaters to calculate the shipments
of oil-fired storage water heaters. The complete series of shipments
can be found in chapter 4 of the NODA TSD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ Available at: https://www.ahridirectory.org/ahridirectory/pages/home.aspx.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE seeks input and data regarding its shipments methodologies and
projections for all equipment analyzed in today's NODA. DOE identified
this as Issue 15 under ``Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment'' in section
IV.B of this NODA.
C. Base-Case Efficiency Distribution
DOE reviewed manufacturer interview data (for SPVUs) or the AHRI
certified products directory for relevant equipment classes (for all
other equipment) to determine the distribution of efficiency levels for
commercially-available models within each equipment class analyzed in
today's NODA. DOE bundled the efficiency levels into ``efficiency
ranges'' and determined the percentage of models within each range. The
distribution of efficiencies in the base case for each equipment class
can be found in the ASHRAE NODA TSD.
For the standards case for all equipment in today's NODA, DOE
assumed shipments at lower efficiencies were most likely to roll up
into higher efficiency levels in response to more-stringent energy
conservation standards. For each efficiency level analyzed within a
given equipment class, DOE used a ``roll-up'' scenario to establish the
market shares by efficiency level for the year that standards would
become effective (e.g., 2015, 2017, or 2020). DOE estimated that the
efficiencies of equipment in the base case that did not meet the
standard level under consideration would roll up to meet the standard
level. Available information also suggests that all equipment
efficiencies in the base case that were above the standard level under
consideration would not be affected. Table III.12 shows an example of
the distribution of efficiencies within the base-case and the roll-up
scenarios to establish the distribution of efficiencies in the
standards cases for oil-fired commercial storage water heaters. For all
the tables of the distribution of efficiencies in the base case and
standards cases by equipment class, see the ASHRAE NODA TSD.
Table III.12--Distribution of Efficiencies in the Base Case and
Standards Cases for Oil-Fired Commercial Storage Water Heaters
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thermal efficiency (%)
-----------------------------------
78 80 81 82
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Base Case........................... 52.6% 23.7% 10.5% 13.2%
ASHRAE 90.1-2013 Standard........... ....... 76.3% 10.5% 13.2%
Efficiency Level 2.................. ....... ....... 86.8% 13.2%
Max-Tech............................ ....... ....... ....... 100.0%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE seeks input on its determination of the base-case distribution
of efficiencies and its projection of how amended energy conservation
standards would affect the distribution of efficiencies in each
standards case. DOE identified this as Issue 16 under ``Issues on Which
DOE Seeks Comment'' in section IV.B of this NODA.
Using the distribution of efficiencies in the base case and in the
standards cases for each equipment class analyzed in today's NODA, as
well as the UECs for each specified EER, SEER, or thermal efficiency
(discussed previously), DOE calculated market-weighted average
efficiency values. The market-weighted average efficiency value
represents the average efficiency of the total units shipped at a
specified amended standard level. The market-weighted average
efficiency values for the base case and the standards cases for each
efficiency level analyzed within the equipment classes is provided in
the ASHRAE NODA TSD.
D. Other Analytical Inputs
1. Conversion of Site Energy Savings
DOE converted the annual site energy savings into the annual amount
of energy saved at the source of electric generation (i.e., primary
energy) using annual multiplicative factors calculated from the AEO
2013 projections.\45\ For electricity, the conversion factors vary over
time because of projected changes in generation sources (i.e., the
types of power plants projected to provide electricity to the country).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ AEO 2013 can be accessed at: https://www.eia.gov/forecasts/archive/aeo13/index.cfm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to the recommendations of a committee on ``Point-of-Use
and Full-Fuel-Cycle Measurement Approaches to Energy Efficiency
Standards'' appointed by the National Academy of Sciences, DOE
announced its intention to use full-fuel-cycle (FFC) measures of energy
use and greenhouse gas and other emissions in the national impact
analyses and emissions analyses included in future energy conservation
standards rulemakings. 76 FR 51281 (August 18, 2011). After evaluating
[[Page 20133]]
analytical models and the approaches discussed in the August 18, 2011
notice, DOE published a statement of amended policy in which DOE
explained its determination that the National Energy Modeling System
(NEMS) is the most appropriate tool for its FFC analysis and its
intention to use NEMS for that purpose. 77 FR 49701 (August 17, 2012).
The calculations in today's notice use FFC multipliers derived from
NEMS.
2. Equipment Lifetime
DOE defines ``equipment lifetime'' as the age when a unit is
retired from service. DOE reviewed available literature to establish
typical equipment lifetimes. For air-cooled equipment, water-source
heat pumps, and commercial storage water heaters, DOE used the
estimated product lifetimes from the 2000 screening analysis for EPACT-
Covered Commercial HVAC and Water-Heating Equipment (EERE-2006-STD-
0098-0015). The average lifetime for air-cooled equipment is 15 years,
for water-source equipment 19 years, and for water heaters 7 years.
For PTACs, DOE used the same average lifetime of 10 years as used
in the 2008 final rule for PTACs. 73 FR 58772, 58789 (Oct. 7, 2008).
For SPVUs, DOE used an average of 15 years based on a review of a range
of packaged cooling equipment lifetime estimates found in published
studies and online documents. For further details on equipment
lifetime, see the ASHRAE NODA TSD.
3. Compliance Date and Analysis Period
If DOE were to propose a rule prescribing energy conservation
standards at the efficiency levels contained in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2013, EPCA states that any such standard shall become effective on or
after a date that is two or three years (depending on equipment type or
size) after the effective date of the applicable minimum energy
efficiency requirement in the amended ASHRAE standard (i.e., ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2013). (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(D)) All equipment for which
analysis was performed in this NODA falls into the two-year category.
For all PTACs and air-cooled equipment in this rulemaking, the
effective date in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 is January 1, 2015. Thus,
if DOE decides to adopt the levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013, the
rule would apply to PTACs and air-cooled equipment manufactured on or
after January 1, 2017, which is two years from the effective date
specified in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013. For all water-source heat
pumps, SPVUs, and commercial water heaters in this rulemaking, ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2013 did not specify an effective date, so the
publication date of October 9, 2013 is assumed. Thus, if DOE decides to
adopt the levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013, the rule would apply to
water-source heat pumps, SPVUs, and commercial water heaters
manufactured on or after October 9, 2015, which is two years from the
publication date of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013.
If DOE were to propose prescribing energy conservation standards
higher than the efficiency levels contained in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2013, under EPCA, any such standard will become effective for equipment
manufactured four years after the date of publication of a final rule
in the Federal Register. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(D)) Thus, for equipment
for which DOE might adopt a level more stringent than the ASHRAE
efficiency level, the rule would apply to equipment manufactured on and
after a date which is four years from the date of publication of the
final rule adopting standards higher than the ASHRAE efficiency levels
(with a requirement to complete that final rule no later than 30 months
after publication of the revised ASHRAE Standard 90.1, which occurred
on October 9, 2013). Under this timeline, compliance with such more
stringent standards would be required no later than April 9, 2020.
For purposes of calculating the NES for water-source heat pumps,
SPVUs, and commercial water heaters, DOE used an analysis period of
2015 (the assumed compliance date if DOE were to adopt the ASHRAE
levels as Federal standards for this equipment) through 2044. For PTACs
and air-cooled equipment, DOE used an analysis period of 2017 (the
assumed compliance date if DOE were to adopt the ASHRAE levels as
Federal standards for this equipment) through 2046. This is the
standard analysis period of 30 years that DOE typically uses in its NES
analysis. While the analysis periods remain the same for assessing the
energy savings of Federal standard levels higher than the ASHRAE
levels, those energy savings would not begin accumulating until 2020
(the assumed compliance date if DOE were to determine that standard
levels more stringent than the ASHRAE levels are justified).
For each equipment class for which DOE developed a potential energy
savings analysis, Table III.13 exhibits the approximate compliance
dates of an amended energy conservation standard.
Table III.13--Approximate Compliance Date of an Amended Energy Conservation Standard for Each Equipment Class
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Approximate compliance
Approximate compliance date for adopting more-
Equipment class date for adopting the stringent efficiency
efficiency levels in levels than those in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Three-Phase Air-Cooled Single Package Air Conditioners 01/2017 04/2020
<65,000 Btu/h............................................
Three-Phase Air-Cooled Single Package Heat Pumps <65,000 01/2017 04/2020
Btu/h....................................................
Three-Phase Air-Cooled Split System Heat Pumps <65,000 Btu/ 01/2017 04/2020
h........................................................
Water Source HP <17,000 Btu/h............................. 10/2015 04/2020
Water Source HP >=17,000 to <65,000 Btu/h................. 10/2015 04/2020
Water Source HP >=65,000 to 135,000 Btu/h................. 10/2015 04/2020
PTAC <7,000 Btu/h......................................... 01/2017 04/2020
PTAC >=7,000 to <=15,000 Btu/h............................ 01/2017 04/2020
PTAC >15,000 Btu/h........................................ 01/2017 04/2020
SPVAC <65,000 Btu/h....................................... 10/2015 04/2020
SPVHP <65,000 Btu/h....................................... 10/2015 04/2020
SPVAC >=65,000 to <135,000 Btu/h.......................... 10/2015 04/2020
Oil-Fired Storage Water Heaters >105,000 Btu/h and <4,000 10/2015 04/2020
Btu/h/gal................................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 20134]]
E. Estimates of Potential Energy Savings
DOE estimated the potential primary energy savings in quads (i.e.,
10\15\ Btu) for each efficiency level considered within each equipment
class analyzed. The potential energy savings for efficiency levels more
stringent than those specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 were
calculated relative to the efficiency levels that would result if
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 standards were adopted. Table III.14 through
Table III.26 show the potential energy savings resulting from the
analyses conducted as part of this NODA. The reported energy savings
are cumulative over the period in which equipment shipped in the 30-
year analysis continues to operate.
Table III.14--Potential Energy Savings for Small Three-Phase Air-Cooled Single-Package Air Conditioners <65,000
Btu/h
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary energy savings FFC energy savings
Efficiency level estimate* (quads) estimate* (quads)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level 1--ASHRAE--14 SEER.................................. 0.02 0.02
Level 2--15 SEER.......................................... 0.04 0.04
Level 3--16 SEER.......................................... 0.10 0.10
Level 4--17.5 SEER........................................ 0.12 0.12
Level 5--``Max-Tech''--19.15 SEER......................... 0.14 0.15
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The potential energy savings for efficiency levels more stringent than those specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2013 were calculated relative to the efficiency levels that would result if ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013
standards were adopted.
Table III.15--Potential Energy Savings for Small Three-Phase Air-Cooled Single-Package Heat Pumps <65,000 Btu/h
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary energy savings FFC energy savings
Efficiency level estimate* (quads) estimate* (quads)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level 1--ASHRAE--14 SEER.................................. 0.001 0.001
Level 2--15 SEER.......................................... 0.007 0.007
Level 3--16 SEER.......................................... 0.014 0.014
Level 4--``Max-Tech''--18.05 SEER......................... 0.018 0.019
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The potential energy savings for efficiency levels more stringent than those specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2013 were calculated relative to the efficiency levels that would result if ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013
standards were adopted.
Table III.16--Potential Energy Savings for Small Three-Phase Air-Cooled Split System Heat Pumps <65,000 Btu/h
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary energy savings FFC energy savings
Efficiency level estimate* (quads) estimate* (quads)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level 1--ASHRAE--14 SEER.................................. 0.002 0.002
Level 2--15 SEER.......................................... 0.012 0.012
Level 3--16 SEER.......................................... 0.026 0.026
Level 4--``Max-Tech''--18.05 SEER......................... 0.033 0.033
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The potential energy savings for efficiency levels more stringent than those specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2013 were calculated relative to the efficiency levels that would result if ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013
standards were adopted.
Table III.17--Potential Energy Savings for Water-Source Heat Pumps <17,000 Btu/h
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary energy savings FFC energy savings
Efficiency level estimate* (quads) estimate* (quads)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level 1--ASHRAE--12.2 EER................................. 0.001 0.001
Level 2--13 EER........................................... 0.007 0.007
Level 3--14 EER........................................... 0.025 0.026
Level 4--15.7 EER......................................... 0.063 0.064
Level 5--16.5 EER......................................... 0.082 0.083
Level 6--``Max-Tech''--18.1 EER........................... 0.116 0.118
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The potential energy savings for efficiency levels more stringent than those specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2013 were calculated relative to the efficiency levels that would result if ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013
standards were adopted.
[[Page 20135]]
Table III.18--Potential Energy Savings for Water-Source Heat Pumps >=17,000 and <65,000 Btu/h
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary energy savings FFC energy savings
Efficiency level estimate* (quads) estimate* (quads)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level 1--ASHRAE--13 EER................................... 0.001 0.001
Level 2--14.6 EER......................................... 0.064 0.065
Level 3--16.6 EER......................................... 0.280 0.284
Level 4--18 EER........................................... 0.451 0.459
Level 5--19.2 EER......................................... 0.591 0.601
Level 6--``Max-Tech''--21.6 EER........................... 0.831 0.844
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The potential energy savings for efficiency levels more stringent than those specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2013 were calculated relative to the efficiency levels that would result if ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013
standards were adopted.
Table III.19--Potential Energy Savings for Water-Source Heat Pumps >=65,000 and <135,000 Btu/h
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary energy savings FFC energy savings
Efficiency level estimate * (quads) estimate * (quads)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level 1--ASHRAE--13 EER................................... (**) (**)
Level 2--14 EER........................................... 0.004 0.004
Level 3--15 EER........................................... 0.013 0.014
Level 4--16 EER........................................... 0.032 0.033
Level 5--``Max-Tech''--17.2 EER........................... 0.057 0.058
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The potential energy savings for efficiency levels more stringent than those specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2013 were calculated relative to the efficiency levels that would result if ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013
standards were adopted.
** There are no potential savings for this Level because all models currently on the market exceed this
efficiency level, and thus would not be affected by a standard set at this level.
Table III.20--Potential Energy Savings for PTAC <7,000 Btu/h
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary energy savings FFC energy savings
Efficiency level estimate * (quads) estimate * (quads)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level 1--ASHRAE--11.9 EER................................. (**) (**)
Level 2--12.2 EER......................................... (**) (**)
Level 3--12.6 EER......................................... 0.001 0.001
Level 4--13.1 EER......................................... 0.002 0.002
Level 5--13.6 EER......................................... 0.003 0.003
Level 6--``Max-Tech''--14.0 EER........................... 0.004 0.004
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The potential energy savings for efficiency levels more stringent than those specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2013 were calculated relative to the efficiency levels that would result if ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013
standards were adopted.
** There are no potential savings for this Level because all models currently on the market exceed this
efficiency level, and thus would not be affected by a standard set at this level.
Table III.21--Potential Energy Savings for PTAC >=7,000 and <=15,000 Btu/h
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary energy savings FFC energy savings
Efficiency level estimate * (quads) estimate * (quads)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level 1--ASHRAE--11.3 EER................................. 0.001 0.001
Level 2--11.5 EER......................................... 0.005 0.005
Level 3--12.0 EER......................................... 0.022 0.023
Level 4--12.4 EER......................................... 0.040 0.040
Level 5--12.9 EER......................................... 0.058 0.058
Level 6--``Max-Tech''--13.3 EER........................... 0.076 0.077
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The potential energy savings for efficiency levels more stringent than those specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2013 were calculated relative to the efficiency levels that would result if ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013
standards were adopted.
Table III.22--Potential Energy Savings for PTAC >15,000 Btu/h
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary energy savings FFC energy savings
Efficiency level estimate* (quads) estimate* (quads)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level 1--ASHRAE--9.5 EER.................................. 0.0009 0.0009
Level 2--9.7 EER.......................................... 0.0007 0.0007
Level 3--10.0 EER......................................... 0.0022 0.0023
Level 4--10.4 EER......................................... 0.0037 0.0038
Level 5--10.8 EER......................................... 0.0053 0.0053
[[Page 20136]]
Level 6--``Max-Tech''--11.2 EER........................... 0.0068 0.0069
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The potential energy savings for efficiency levels more stringent than those specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2013 were calculated relative to the efficiency levels that would result if ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013
standards were adopted.
Table III.23--Potential Energy Savings Estimates for SPVAC <65,000 Btu/h
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary energy savings FFC energy savings
Efficiency level estimate* (quads) estimate* (quads)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level 1--ASHRAE--10 EER................................... 0.21 0.21
Level 2--10.5 EER......................................... 0.07 0.07
Level 3--11 EER........................................... 0.14 0.14
Level 4--11.8 EER......................................... 0.22 0.23
Level 4--``Max-Tech''--12.3 EER........................... 0.28 0.29
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The potential energy savings for efficiency levels more stringent than those specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2013 were calculated relative to the efficiency levels that would result if ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013
standards were adopted.
Table III.24--Potential Energy Savings Estimates for SPVHP<65,000 Btu/h
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary energy savings FFC energy savings
Efficiency level estimate* ** (quads) estimate* ** (quads)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level 1--ASHRAE--10 EER................................... 0.06 0.06
Level 2--10.5 EER......................................... 0.05 0.05
Level 3--11 EER........................................... 0.08 0.08
Level 4--11.8 EER......................................... 0.17 0.18
Level 4--``Max-Tech''--12.3 EER........................... 0.19 0.19
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The potential energy savings for efficiency levels more stringent than those specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2013 were calculated relative to the efficiency levels that would result if ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013
standards were adopted.
** For SPVHPs, the energy savings estimates are based on both cooling savings (EER) and heating savings (COP).
Table III.25--Potential Energy Savings Estimates for SPVAC >=65,000 and <135,000 Btu/h
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary energy savings FFC energy savings
Efficiency level estimate (quads) estimate (quads)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level 1--ASHRAE--10.0 EER............................... 0.02 0.02
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table III.26--Potential Energy Savings Estimates for Commercial Oil-Fired Storage Water Heaters >105,000 Btu/h
and <4,000 Btu/h/gal
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary energy savings FFC energy savings
Efficiency level estimate* (quads) estimate* (quads)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level 1--ASHRAE--80% Et....................................... 0.002 0.002
Level 2--81% Et............................................... 0.001 0.001
Level 3--``Max-Tech''--82% Et................................. 0.002 0.002
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The potential energy savings for efficiency levels more stringent than those specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2013 were calculated relative to the efficiency levels that would result if ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013
standards were adopted.
IV. Public Participation
A. Submission of Comments
DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this NODA
no later than the date provided in the DATES section at the beginning
of this notice. Interested parties may submit comments, data, and other
information using any of the methods described in the ADDRESSES section
at the beginning of this notice.
Submitting comments via www.regulations.gov. The
www.regulations.gov Web page will require you to provide your name and
contact information. Your contact information will be viewable to DOE
Building Technologies staff only. Your contact information will not be
publicly viewable except for your first and last names, organization
name (if any), and submitter representative name (if any). If your
comment is not processed properly because of technical difficulties,
DOE will use this information to contact you. If DOE cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact
[[Page 20137]]
you for clarification, DOE may not be able to consider your comment.
However, your contact information will be publicly viewable if you
include it in the comment itself or in any documents attached to your
comment. Any information that you do not want to be publicly viewable
should not be included in your comment, nor in any document attached to
your comment. Otherwise, persons viewing comments will see only first
and last names, organization names, correspondence containing comments,
and any documents submitted with the comments.
Do not submit to www.regulations.gov information for which
disclosure is restricted by statute, such as trade secrets and
commercial or financial information (hereinafter referred to as
Confidential Business Information (CBI)). Comments submitted through
www.regulations.gov cannot be claimed as CBI. Comments received through
the Web site will waive any CBI claims for the information submitted.
For information on submitting CBI, see the Confidential Business
Information section below.
DOE processes submissions made through www.regulations.gov before
posting. Normally, comments will be posted within a few days of being
submitted. However, if large volumes of comments are being processed
simultaneously, your comment may not be viewable for up to several
weeks. Please keep the comment tracking number that www.regulations.gov
provides after you have successfully uploaded your comment.
Submitting comments via email, hand delivery/courier, or mail.
Comments and documents submitted via email, hand delivery, or mail also
will be posted to www.regulations.gov. If you do not want your personal
contact information to be publicly viewable, do not include it in your
comment or any accompanying documents. Instead, provide your contact
information in a cover letter. Include your first and last names, email
address, telephone number, and optional mailing address. The cover
letter will not be publicly viewable as long as it does not include any
comments.
Include contact information each time you submit comments, data,
documents, and other information to DOE. Email submissions are
preferred. If you submit via mail or hand delivery/courier, please
provide all items on a CD, if feasible, in which case, it is not
necessary to submit printed copies. No telefacsimiles (faxes) will be
accepted.
Comments, data, and other information submitted to DOE
electronically should be provided in PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or
Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file format. Provide documents that
are not secured, that are written in English, and that are free of any
defects or viruses. Documents should not contain special characters or
any form of encryption and, if possible, they should carry the
electronic signature of the author.
Campaign form letters. Please submit campaign form letters by the
originating organization in batches of between 50 to 500 form letters
per PDF or as one form letter with a list of supporters' names compiled
into one or more PDFs. This reduces comment processing and posting
time.
Confidential business information. Pursuant to 10 CFR 1004.11, any
person submitting information that he or she believes to be
confidential and exempt by law from public disclosure should submit via
email, postal mail, or hand delivery/courier two well-marked copies:
One copy of the document marked ``confidential'' that includes all the
information believed to be confidential, and one copy of the document
marked ``non-confidential'' with the information believed to be
confidential deleted. Submit these documents via email or on a CD, if
feasible. DOE will make its own determination about the confidential
status of the information and treat it according to its determination.
Factors of interest to DOE when evaluating requests to treat
submitted information as confidential include: (1) A description of the
items; (2) whether and why such items are customarily treated as
confidential within the industry; (3) whether the information is
generally known by or available from other sources; (4) whether the
information has previously been made available to others without
obligation concerning its confidentiality; (5) an explanation of the
competitive injury to the submitting person which would result from
public disclosure; (6) when such information might lose its
confidential character due to the passage of time; and (7) why
disclosure of the information would be contrary to the public interest.
It is DOE's policy that all comments may be included in the public
docket, without change and as received, including any personal
information provided in the comments (except information deemed to be
exempt from public disclosure).
B. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment
Although DOE welcomes comments on any aspect of this notice, DOE is
particularly interested in receiving comments and views of interested
parties concerning the following issues:
(1) DOE's proposal to re-create separate equipment classes for
single-package and split system equipment in the overall equipment
classes of small commercial package air conditioning and heating
equipment (air-cooled, three-phase) less than 65,000 Btu/h;
(2) The nomenclature changes in ASHRAE 90.1-2013 from ``water
source'' to ``water to air, water loop'' and from ``COP'' to ``COPH'',
and whether in fact they are editorial in nature;
(3) The proposed definition for ``water-source heat pump;''
(4) DOE's tentative proposal to not establish a separate space-
constrained class for SPVUs;
(5) DOE's preliminary conclusion that the updates to the most
recent versions of ANSI Z21.47 do not have a substantive impact on the
measurement of energy efficiency for gas-fired furnaces;
(6) Whether energy usage for three-phase commercial air-cooled
equipment would be similar to that modeled for single-phase equipment
in commercial buildings;
(7) Whether increasing the HSPF for commercial air-cooled equipment
less than 65,000 Btu/h will result in significant energy savings, and,
if so, data to support such conclusion;
(8) The appropriateness of using the cooling UECs for water-source
heat pumps developed in the 2000 screening analysis, or other sources
of data for this analysis;
(9) Data and information related to water-source heat pump heating
energy use;
(10) DOE's analysis of UEC for SPVUs and its use in establishing
the energy savings potential for more-stringent standards. Of
particular interest to DOE is input on shipments of SPVHP equipment to
telecommunications shelters and the frequency of use of economizers in
equipment serving these shelters;
(11) Input on how or if regional differences between the shipments
of heat pumps and air conditioners to warmer or cooler climates can be
taken into account in the SPVU energy use characterization;
(12) DOE's derivation of UECs for oil-fired storage water heaters;
(13) Data and information related to the current shipments of
water-source heat pumps and expected future trends;
(14) The share of the market for ground-source and ground-water-
source heat pump applications that use models also rated for water-loop
application;
[[Page 20138]]
(15) DOE's shipment methodologies and projections for all equipment
analyzed in today's NODA, and any shipments data related to these
equipment; and
(16) DOE's determination of the base-case distribution efficiencies
and its prediction on how amended energy conservation standards would
affect the distribution of efficiencies in the standards case for the
thirteen classes of equipment for which analysis was performed.
V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of this notice of
data availability.
Issued in Washington, DC, on April 7, 2014.
Kathleen B. Hogan,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy.
[FR Doc. 2014-08214 Filed 4-10-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P