Petition for Waiver of GE Appliances From the Department of Energy Residential Refrigerator and Refrigerator-Freezer Test Procedure and Grant of Interim Waiver, 55775-55781 [2014-22228]
Download as PDF
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 180 / Wednesday, September 17, 2014 / Notices
prescribed test procedures may evaluate
the basic model in a manner so
unrepresentative of its true energy
consumption characteristics as to
provide materially inaccurate
comparative data.’’ Sub-Zero requests
that the Assistant Secretary grant this
petition on both grounds.
In granting the Sanyo petition, DOE
acknowledged that wine storage
compartments cannot be tested at the
prescribed temperature of 38 °F (now 39
°F in the revised Refrigerator Test
Procedure), because the minimum wine
compartment temperature is higher.
Sanyo submitted an alternate test
procedure to account for the energy
consumption of its wine storage/
beverage center models. That alternate
procedure would test the wine storage
compartment at 55 °F, instead of the
prescribed 38 °F. To justify the use of
this standardized temperature for
testing; Sanyo stated in its petition that
it designed these models to provide an
average wine compartment temperature
of 55 to 57 °F, which it determined is
a commonly recommended temperature
for wine storage. This temperature is
presumed to be representative of
expected consumer use. DOE also noted
that the test procedures for wine
products adopted by the Association of
Home Appliance Manufacturers
(AHAM), California Energy Commission
(CEC), and Natural Resources Canada all
use the standardized temperature of 55
°F for wine storage compartments;
consistent with Sanyo’s petition.
Furthermore, DOE prescribed that
Sanyo also use the proposed K factor
(correction factor) value of 0.85 when
calculating energy consumption.
DOE granted Sanyo’s waiver petition
in 2012, acknowledging that the existing
test procedure cannot properly measure
the energy consumed in actual
consumer usage. Thereafter in 2013,
DOE granted PAPRSA’s similar waiver
application.
Sub-Zero is a family-owned company
that has been headquartered in
Madison, Wisconsin for over 65 years.
Sub-Zero developed the niche market
for customized built-in residential
refrigeration and manufactures all our
products in the United States, with
factories in Wisconsin and Arizona.
While technically not a ‘‘small
business’’ using DOE’s definition, SubZero is a small producer of refrigeration
products striving to compete in an age
of large, multi-national manufacturers
and is one of the few remaining U.S.
companies that produce all of its
products here in the U.S. The
company’s future viability is clearly
threatened by this situation and we
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:24 Sep 16, 2014
Jkt 232001
sincerely ask DOE to grant immediate
relief.
Issues with the DOE Test Procedure
Sub-Zero is requesting a waiver to the
test procedures for its hybrid models
that consist of a combination of one or
more refrigerated storage compartments
and a wine storage compartment. While
DOE considers such hybrid models as
covered products, there is no current
DOE test procedure appropriate to these
hybrid models. Therefore, the current
testing requirements do not measure
energy usage in a manner that truly
represents the energy-consumption
characteristics of these products.
Further, it is not even possible to test
these models under the existing testing
procedures. DOE fully recognizes these
issues associated with testing hybrid
wine products and has initiated a
rulemaking to address these products in
the future. Therefore Sub-Zero requests
this waiver until such time as DOE’s
rulemaking is complete.
As explained in the Sanyo petition,
wine connoisseurs recommend an
average of 55–57 °F for the long term
storage of wine, and Sub-Zero has also
designed the wine storage
compartments of its products with this
ideal average temperature in mind.
Since various wines have different ideal
drinking temperatures, products are
designed such that the wine storage
compartment can achieve a range of
temperatures above 39 °F. DOE’s test
procedures (10 CFR 430 Subpart B
Appendix A) specify that energy
consumption be determined at a
compartment temperature of 39 °F and
therefore cannot apply to a product that
is designed to be incapable of achieving
this temperature. Further, as described
in the Sanyo petition, hybrid models
will typically have door-opening usage
aligned with household freezers and
wine storage products. Thus, the K
factor (correction factor) of .85 from
CAN/CSA 300–08 6.3.1.2 and AHAM/
ANSI HRF–1 should be used to
determine energy consumption.
Proposed Modified Test Procedure
As in the two previously granted
petitions, the wine storage compartment
shall be tested at 55 °F.
Sub Zero shall use the K factor
(correction factor) value of 0.85 when
calculating the energy consumption of
the models listed below.
The energy consumption is defined by
the higher of the two values calculated
by the following two formulas
(according to 10 CFR Part 430, subpart
B, Appendix A):
Energy consumption of the wine
compartment:
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
55775
EWine = ET1 + [(ET2¥ET1) × (55
°F¥TW1)/(TW2¥TW1)] *0.85
Energy consumption of the
refrigerated compartment:
ERefrigerated Compartment = ET1 +
[(ET2¥ET1) × (39 °F¥TRC1)/
(TRC2¥TRC1)].
Affected Models
The basic models of Sub-Zero hybrid
refrigerated storage-wine storage
products affected are:
IW–30R
In conclusion, this is a critical issue
for our company and we request that
DOE expedite the handling of this
petition for an interim and final waiver.
Sub-Zero would be pleased to discuss
this waiver petition with DOE and
provide any additional information that
the Department might require. We will
also notify all manufacturers known to
us of similar domestically marketed
products of this waiver petition.
Sincerely,
Paul V. Sikir
Vice President of Design Engineering
Via email: AS_Waiver_Requests@
ee.doe.gov
[FR Doc. 2014–22227 Filed 9–16–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy
[Case No. RF–042]
Petition for Waiver of GE Appliances
From the Department of Energy
Residential Refrigerator and
Refrigerator-Freezer Test Procedure
and Grant of Interim Waiver
Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Notice of Petition for Waiver,
Notice of Granting Application for
Interim Waiver, and Request for Public
Comments.
AGENCY:
This notice announces receipt
of a petition for waiver from GE
Appliances (GE) seeking an exemption
from specified portions of the U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE) test
procedure for determining the energy
consumption of electric refrigerators
and refrigerator-freezers. GE seeks to use
an alternate test procedure to address
certain issues involved in testing certain
specific basic models identified in its
petition that are equipped with dualcompressor systems that GE contends
cannot be accurately tested using the
currently applicable DOE test
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\17SEN1.SGM
17SEN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
55776
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 180 / Wednesday, September 17, 2014 / Notices
procedure. DOE solicits comments, data,
and information concerning GE’s
petition and its suggested alternate test
procedure. Today’s notice also grants
GE with an interim waiver from the
electric refrigerator-freezer test
procedure, subject to use of the
alternative test procedure set forth in
this notice.
DATES: DOE will accept comments, data,
and information with respect to the GE
Petition until October 17, 2014.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by case number ‘‘RF–042,’’ by
any of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Email: AS_Waiver_Requests@
ee.doe.gov. Include the case number
[Case No. RF–042] in the subject line of
the message.
• Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S.
Department of Energy, Building
Technologies Program, Mailstop EE–2J/
1000 Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20585–0121.
Telephone: (202) 586–2945. Please
submit one signed original paper copy.
• Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda
Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy,
Building Technologies Program, 950
L’Enfant Plaza SW., Suite 600,
Washington, DC 20024. Please submit
one signed original paper copy.
Docket: For access to the docket to
review the background documents
relevant to this matter, you may visit the
U.S. Department of Energy, 950 L’Enfant
Plaza SW., Washington, DC 20024; (202)
586–2945, between 9:00 a.m. and 4:00
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays. Available documents
include the following items: (1) This
notice; (2) public comments received;
(3) the petition for waiver and
application for interim waiver; and (4)
prior DOE rulemakings regarding
similar refrigerator-freezers. Please call
Ms. Brenda Edwards at the above
telephone number for additional
information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mr. Bryan Berringer, U.S. Department
of Energy, Building Technologies
Program, Mail Stop EE–2J, Forrestal
Building, 1000 Independence Avenue
SW., Washington, DC 20585–0121.
Telephone: (202) 586–0371. Email:
Bryan.Berringer@ee.doe.gov.
Mr. Michael Kido, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of the General Counsel,
Mail Stop GC–71, Forrestal Building,
1000 Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20585–0103.
Telephone: (202) 586–8145. Email:
Michael.Kido@hq.doe.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:24 Sep 16, 2014
Jkt 232001
I. Background and Authority
Title III, Part B of the Energy Policy
and Conservation Act of 1975, as
amended (EPCA), Public Law 94–163
(42 U.S.C. 6291–6309, as codified),
established the Energy Conservation
Program for Consumer Products Other
Than Automobiles, a program covering
most major household appliances,
which includes the electric refrigerators
and refrigerator-freezers that are the
focus of this notice.1 Part B includes
definitions, test procedures, labeling
provisions, energy conservation
standards, and the authority to require
information and reports from
manufacturers. Further, Part B
authorizes the Secretary of Energy to
prescribe test procedures that are
reasonably designed to produce results
that measure the energy efficiency,
energy use, or estimated annual
operating costs of a covered product,
and that are not unduly burdensome to
conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) The test
procedure for electric refrigerators and
electric refrigerator-freezers is contained
in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix
A.
The regulations set forth in 10 CFR
430.27 contain provisions that enable a
person to seek a waiver from the test
procedure requirements for covered
products. The DOE will grant a waiver
if it is determined that the basic model
for which the petition for waiver was
submitted contains one or more design
characteristics that prevents testing of
the basic model according to the
prescribed test procedures, or if the
prescribed test procedures may evaluate
the basic model in a manner so
unrepresentative of its true energy
consumption characteristics as to
provide materially inaccurate
comparative data. 10 CFR 430.27(f)(2).
Petitioners must include in their
petition any alternate test procedures
known to the petitioner to evaluate the
basic model in a manner representative
of its energy consumption. The
Assistant Secretary may grant the
waiver subject to conditions, including
adherence to alternate test procedures.
10 CFR 430.27(f)(2). Waivers remain in
effect pursuant to the provisions of 10
CFR 430.27(l).
The waiver process also allows the
DOE to grant an interim waiver from test
procedure requirements to
manufacturers that have petitioned DOE
for a waiver of such prescribed test
procedures. 10 CFR 430.27(e)(2). Within
one year of issuance of an interim
waiver, DOE will either: (i) Publish in
the Federal Register a determination on
1 For editorial reasons, upon codification in the
U.S. Code, Part B was re-designated Part A.
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
the petition for waiver; or (ii) publish in
the Federal Register a new or amended
test procedure that addresses the issues
presented in the waiver. 10 CFR
430.27(h)(1). When DOE amends the test
procedure to address the issues
presented in a waiver, the waiver will
automatically terminate on the date on
which use of that test procedure is
required to demonstrate compliance. 10
CFR 430.27(h)(2).
II. Petition for Waiver of Test Procedure
On June 27, 2014, GE submitted a
petition for waiver from the test
procedure applicable to residential
electric refrigerators and refrigeratorfreezers set forth in 10 CFR part 430,
subpart B, appendix A. GE is seeking a
waiver because it is developing new
refrigerator-freezers that incorporate a
dual-compressor design that it believes
is not properly accounted for in DOE’s
amended test procedure published on
April 21, 2014 (78 FR 22320). In its
petition, GE seeks a waiver from the
new DOE test procedure applicable to
refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers
under 10 CFR part 430 for two basic
models of dual-compressor system
products. Specifically, based upon the
information provided by GE, these basic
models demonstrate non-uniform
cycling of their compressors, which
prevents the verification of two criteria
in the Appendix A test procedure—to
ensure (a) that the first part of the test
comprise a period of stable operation,
and (b) that the second part of the test
(used to measure the energy use
contribution of the defrost cycle(s)) start
and end during periods of stable
operation.
DOE previously granted a similar
waiver to GE through a subsequent
Decision and Order (78 FR 38699 (June
27, 2013)) under Case No. RF–029
pertaining to 10 CFR part 430, subpart
B, appendix A1. DOE also granted
similar waivers to Sub-Zero (77 FR 5784
(February 6, 2012)), LG (77 FR 18327
(March 26, 2013)); and Samsung (78 FR
35899 (June 14, 2014)) and (79 FR 19884
(April 10, 2014)).
In its final rule published on April 21,
2014 (78 FR 22320), which amended the
test procedure for refrigerators and
refrigerator-freezers in Appendix A,
DOE incorporated provisions to address
the testing of products with multiple
compressors, which were intended to
obviate the need for waivers for
multiple-compressor products such as
the ones previously granted to GE and
others, if these products are tested using
the new Appendix A. However, in its
petition for waiver, GE contends that
due to certain characteristics of the
basic models listed in the petition, the
E:\FR\FM\17SEN1.SGM
17SEN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 180 / Wednesday, September 17, 2014 / Notices
Appendix A test procedure does not
accurately measure the energy
consumption of these basic models.
Specifically, GE claims that
requirements in the Appendix A test
procedure—to ensure (a) that the first
part of the test comprise a period of
stable operation, and (b) that the second
part of the test (used to measure the
energy use contribution of the defrost
cycle(s)) start and end during periods of
stable operation—cannot be applied to
these basic models, because their
compressor cycles do not repeat
uniformly, which is one of the
assumptions built into the test
procedure.
In lieu of using Appendix A, GE has
submitted an alternate test procedure to
account for the energy consumption of
its refrigerator-freezer models with dual
compressors. GE’s alternative test is
essentially the same as the test for
multiple-compressor products with
automatic defrost in section 4.2.3 of
Appendix A, except that (a) the test
period for the first part of the test would
not be required to meet the
requirements for evaluation of stable
operation provided in section 1.22 of
Appendix A, (b) the second part of the
test would have a minimum duration—
this would be at least 24 hours, unless
a second defrost (other than the target
defrost captured within the test period)
occurs before the end of 24 hours, in
which case, the test period duration
would be at least 18 hours, (c) the start
of the second part of the test would
occur ‘‘at the end of a regular freezer
compressor on-cycle after the previous
defrost occurrence’’ rather than during a
period of stable operation as defined in
section 1.22 of Appendix A, and (d) the
end of the second part of the test would
occur ‘‘at the end of a freezer
compressor on-cycle before the next
defrost occurrence’’ rather than during a
period of stable operation as defined in
section 1.22 of Appendix A.
GE believes its alternate test
procedure will allow for the accurate
measurement of the energy use of these
products, which GE contends is not
achieved by the current Appendix A test
procedure. Specifically, due to the nonuniform compressor cycles of this
product, which prevent consistent
application of the requirements
provided in section 1.22 of Appendix A
for evaluating the stable operation of a
tested unit, the alternative test would
not explicitly impose these stable
operation requirements. Based on the
information provided by GE, the
variation in test results associated with
different selections of test periods
would be insignificant as long as the test
starts after the 24-hour stabilization
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:24 Sep 16, 2014
Jkt 232001
period, which is required both by the
Appendix A test procedure and the
alternative test procedure suggested by
GE. Further, GE’s alternative test’s
minimum duration for the second part
of the test would also not significantly
affect the results.
Although not explicitly stated in the
alternative test method, or in GE’s
petition, DOE understands the term
‘‘stable operation’’ used in the petition
to have a different meaning than the
same term as used in Appendix A, since
the alternative test method does not use
the same stability criteria. In this case,
DOE understands ‘‘stable operation’’ to
mean operation after steady-state
conditions have been achieved but
excluding any defrost cycles or events
associated with a defrost cycle, such as
precooling or recovery, and that this
term would apply in the same way for
the first and second parts of the test.
DOE understands the term also to mean
operation in which the average rate of
change of compartment temperatures is
zero or very close to zero—the
temperatures may fluctuate around
representative average temperatures as
the compressors cycle on and off, but
over several compressor cycles, these
average compartment temperatures
would not significantly change. The key
difference in this interpretation of stable
operation as compared with the
definition in Appendix A is that it
involves neither assignment of a specific
maximum rate of change of the average
temperature nor specification of a
method to verify that operation is stable.
DOE further notes that this particular
use of the term ‘‘stable operation’’ is
limited solely to the basic models that
are the subject of this waiver, as DOE
has verified using information provided
by GE about the actual operational
characteristics of these models that such
a test is appropriate in this limited case.
GE also requests an interim waiver
from the existing DOE test procedure.
An interim waiver may be granted if it
is determined that the applicant will
experience economic hardship if the
application for interim waiver is denied,
if it appears likely that the petition for
waiver will be granted, and/or the
Assistant Secretary determines that it
would be desirable for public policy
reasons to grant immediate relief
pending a determination of the petition
for waiver. See 10 CFR 430.27(e)(2).
As noted previously, DOE recently
addressed multiple compressor
products in its April 21, 2014 final rule.
In considering GE’s petition for waiver,
DOE sought additional details about the
specific operating characteristics of the
products that are the subject of the
petition in order to determine whether
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
55777
they cannot be tested using the section
of the amended test procedure that was
adopted specifically to address such
products. GE indicated in its petition
that the compressors serving the fresh
food and freezer compartments of these
models have non-synchronous cycles
that do not repeat uniformly, which
prevents these models from achieving
the temperature stability conditions
specified in the Appendix A test
procedure. To better understand GE’s
claim and the issues raised in the
petition, DOE requested data regarding
the operational characteristics of these
products, which GE provided. DOE was
specifically concerned that the use of
GE’s proposed test method could
present the risk of truncation error in
the energy use measurement or the
possibility of variation between separate
tests of the same unit due to
temperature drift in the compartments
or differences in the operational state of
the compressors at the beginning or end
of the test period. The data provided by
GE indicated that these models
demonstrate non-uniform cycling that
makes direct use of the Appendix A
requirements for evaluating temperature
stability problematic—these
requirements may be appropriate for
some operating modes of the basic
models, but not for other operating
modes. The data also showed that the
use of GE’s proposed test method is
unlikely to result in significant variation
in test measurements for these
particular models on the basis of the
selected test period. DOE notes,
however, that these conclusions are
limited to the models listed in GE’s
petition based upon the data provided
by GE and that other basic models may
demonstrate operating characteristics
that differ from these models as to make
this alternative test method
inappropriate for measuring their energy
use. Should DOE receive petitions for
waiver requesting use of the alternative
test identified in this notice for other
basic models, DOE may request from the
manufacturer information about the
operation of those basic models that
would demonstrate that their energy use
can be accurately measured using this
alternative test and that such models
cannot in fact be tested using the
currently assigned test method in
Appendix A.
For the reasons discussed above, DOE
has determined that use of the currently
required DOE test procedure for the
specific GE models identified in its
petition would provide test results so
unrepresentative as to provide
materially inaccurate comparative data.
Therefore, it appears likely that GE’s
E:\FR\FM\17SEN1.SGM
17SEN1
55778
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 180 / Wednesday, September 17, 2014 / Notices
specifically set out in the petition, not
future models that may be manufactured
by the petitioner. GE may submit a new
or amended petition for waiver and
request for grant of interim waiver, as
appropriate, for additional models of
refrigerator-freezers for which it seeks a
waiver from the DOE test procedure. In
addition, DOE notes that granting of an
interim waiver or waiver does not
release a petitioner from the
certification requirements set forth at 10
CFR part 429.
Further, this interim waiver is
conditioned upon the presumed validity
of statements, representations, and
documents provided by the petitioner.
DOE may revoke or modify this interim
waiver at any time upon a
determination that the factual basis
underlying the petition for waiver is
incorrect, or upon a determination that
the results from the alternate test
procedure are unrepresentative of the
basic models’ true energy consumption
characteristics.
III. Alternate Test Procedure
Where:
Part 430, Subpart B, Appendix A clause
5.2.1.2. CTi for compartment i with variable
defrost system is calculated as per 10 CFR
part 430 subpart B, Appendix A clause
5.2.1.3. (hours rounded to the nearest tenth
of an hour).
Test Measurement Frequency
— ET is the test cycle energy (kWh/day);
— 1440 = number of minutes in a day
— EP1 is the dual compressor energy
expended during the first part of the test (If
at least one compressor cycles, the test period
for the first part of the test shall include a
whole number of complete primary
compressor cycles comprising at least 24
hours of stable operation, unless a defrost
occurs prior to completion of 24 hours of
stable operation, in which case the first part
of the test shall include a whole number of
complete primary compressor cycles
comprising at least 18 hours of stable
operation);
—T1 is the length of time for EP1
(minutes);
—D is the total number of compartments
with distinct defrost systems;
—i is the variable that can equal to 1,2 or
more that identifies the compartment with
distinct defrost system;
—EP2i is the total energy consumed during
the second (defrost) part of the test being
conducted for compartment i. (kWh);
—T2i is the length of time (minutes) for the
second (defrost) part of the test being
conducted for compartment i.
—12 = conversion factor to adjust for a
50% run-time of the compressor in hours/day
—CTi is the compressor on time between
defrosts for only compartment i. CTi for
compartment i with long time automatic
defrost system is calculated as per 10 CFR
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:24 Sep 16, 2014
Jkt 232001
Stabilization:
The test shall start after a minimum
24 hours stabilization run for each
temperature control setting.
Test Period for EP2i, T2i:
EP2i includes precool, defrost, and
recovery time for compartment i, as well
as sufficient dual compressor cycles to
allow T2i to be at least 24 hours, unless
a defrost occurs prior to completion of
24 hours, in which case the second part
of the test shall include a whole number
of complete primary compressor cycles
comprising at least 18 hours. The test
period shall start at the end of a regular
freezer compressor on-cycle after the
previous defrost occurrence (refrigerator
or freezer). The test period also includes
the target defrost and following freezer
compressor cycles, ending at the end of
a freezer compressor on-cycle before the
next defrost occurrence (refrigerator or
freezer).
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
EPCA requires that manufacturers use
DOE test procedures when making
representations about the energy
consumption and energy consumption
costs of products covered by the statute.
(42 U.S.C. 6293(c)) Consistent
representations are important for
manufacturers to use in making
representations about the energy
efficiency of their products and to
demonstrate compliance with
applicable DOE energy conservation
standards. Pursuant to its regulations
applicable to waivers and interim
waivers from applicable test procedures
at 10 CFR 430.27, DOE will consider
setting an alternate test procedure for
GE in a subsequent Decision and Order.
During the period of the interim
waiver granted in this notice, GE shall
test the products listed above according
to the test procedures for residential
electric refrigerator-freezers prescribed
by DOE at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B,
appendix A, except that, for the GE
basic models listed above only, the
energy consumption shall be
determined as follows:
Measurements shall be taken at
regular interval not exceeding 1 minute.
*
*
*
*
*
IV. Summary and Request for
Comments
Through today’s notice, DOE grants
GE an interim waiver from the specified
portions of the test procedure applicable
to certain basic models of refrigeratorfreezers with dual compressors and
announces receipt of GE’s petition for
waiver from those same portions of the
test procedure. DOE is publishing GE’s
petition for waiver pursuant to 10 CFR
430.27(b)(1)(iv). The petition includes a
suggested alternate test procedure to
determine the energy consumption of
GE’s specified basic models of
refrigerator-freezers with dual
compressors. GE is required to follow
this alternate procedure as a condition
of its interim waiver, and DOE is
considering including this alternate
procedure in its subsequent Decision
and Order.
DOE solicits comments from
interested parties on all aspects of the
petition, including the suggested
alternate test procedure and calculation
E:\FR\FM\17SEN1.SGM
17SEN1
EN17SE14.019
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
petition for waiver will be granted. For
these same reasons, DOE has also
determined that it is desirable for public
policy reasons to grant GE immediate
relief pending a determination of the
petition for waiver. DOE grants GE’s
application for interim waiver from
testing of the two basic models of
refrigerator-freezers identified in
petition for waiver and request for
interim waiver.
Therefore, it is ordered that:
The application for interim waiver
filed by GE is hereby granted for GE’s
refrigerator-freezer product lines that
incorporate dual compressors subject to
the following specifications and
conditions below. GE shall be required
to test and rate its refrigerator-freezer
product line containing dual
compressors according to the alternate
test procedure as set forth in section III,
‘‘Alternate test procedure.’’
The interim waiver applies to the
following basic models:
ZIC30*****
ZIK30*****
DOE makes decisions on waivers and
interim waivers for only those models
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 180 / Wednesday, September 17, 2014 / Notices
methodology. Pursuant to 10 CFR
430.27(b)(1)(iv), any person submitting
written comments to DOE must also
send a copy of such comments to the
petitioner. The contact information for
the petitioner is: Earl F. Jones, Senior
Counsel, GE Appliances, Appliance
Park 2–225, Louisville, KY 40225. All
submissions received must include the
agency name and case number for this
proceeding. Submit electronic
comments in WordPerfect, Microsoft
Word, Portable Document Format (PDF),
or text (American Standard Code for
Information Interchange (ASCII)) file
format and avoid the use of special
characters or any form of encryption.
Wherever possible, include the
electronic signature of the author. DOE
does not accept telefacsimiles (faxes).
Issued in Washington, DC, on September
10, 2014.
Kathleen B. Hogan,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy
Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy.
U.S. Department of Energy
Application for Interim Waiver and Petition
for Waiver, 10CFR430, Subpart B, Appendix
A1-Uniform Test Method for Measuring the
Energy Consumption of Refrigerator-freezers
Case No. Non-Confidential Version
Submitted by: Earl F. Jones Senior Counsel,
GE Appliances, Appliance Park 2–225,
Louisville, KY 40225, earl.jones@ge.com,
502–452–3164 (voice), 502–452–0395 (fax).
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
U.S. Department of Energy Application
for Interim Waiver and Petition for
Waiver, 10CFR430, Subpart B,
Appendix A—Uniform Test Method for
Measuring Refrigerator-Freezers
I. Introduction
GE Appliances, an operating division
of General Electric Co., (‘‘GE’’) is a
leading manufacturer and marketer of
household appliances, including, as
relevant to this proceeding, refrigeratorfreezers (‘‘refrigerators’’), files this
Petition for Waiver and Application for
Interim Waiver (collectively,
‘‘Petition’’). On May 2, 2013, the
Assistant Secretary granted an interim
waiver 2 and on June 27 the final
waiver 3 pursuant to GE’s February 28
petition advising the Department that
the energy consumption of GE’s new
dual compressor refrigerator could not
be accurately measured using the test
procedure set forth in 430 Subpart B,
Appendix A1. GE continued to test the
product under the waiver-approved test
procedure. In issuing the new
refrigerator test procedure on April 21,
2014,4 the Assistant Secretary nullified
all Appendix A1 waivers, including the
one granted to GE. The Department’s
decision was explained as follows:
After DOE grants a waiver, the agency
must, pursuant to its waiver provisions,
initiate a rulemaking to amend its regulations
to eliminate the continued need for the
waiver. 10 CFR 430.27 (m). This final rule
addresses this requirement for the Sub-Zero
waiver by amending Appendix A to include
a test procedure for multiple-compressor
products that is based on the Sub-Zero
waiver procedure.
The Sub-Zero, Samsung, LG, and GE
waivers for multiple-compressor products
will terminate on September 15, 2014, the
same date that manufacturers must use the
test procedures in Appendix A for testing.5
The conclusion that GE can use the
Appendix A test procedure to accurately
measure energy consumption of the new
2014 models of the product that was
previously covered by waiver is,
unfortunately, erroneous. GE has made
this point to DOE consistently and on
multiple occasions: First, in the 2013
waiver petition, next, at the NOPR
stakeholders meeting held on July 25,
2013,6 and, finally, in its NOPR
comments.7
GE’s representative at the
stakeholders meeting most clearly
described the operation of GE’s
refrigerator:
MR. BROWN: Bill with GE Appliances.
Again, I would reiterate that stability for
multiple compressor products is not the same
as stability for a single compressor product.
If you did achieve .042 degrees per hour, it
may be more due to luck than actually the
product [being] what you’d consider to be
stable. Again, with both compressors
operating on their own schedule, with their
own controls, you may see that the fresh food
[temperature] is stable and the freezer’s not.
Then you’d keep going further and the
freezer is stable and the fresh food is not. So
that’s again why we chose just to use a longer
period of time instead of trying to invoke this
.042 degrees per hour.
*
*
*
*
*
So again, I would reiterate for multiple
compressor products, that . . . looking at
stability with a strict .042 degrees per hour
like you would on a single compressor
product is . . . just not applicable to the
multiple compressor product.
MR. BROOKMAN: Okay, thank you. Lucas.
MR. ADIN: Lucas Adin, DOE.
Just a quick follow-up question for
clarification. So it sounds like, based on your
comment Bill, that a single stability criteria
for multiple compressor products may not be
appropriate because of how they operate. It’s
different from single compressor products.
But is it reasonable to say that multiple
compressor products do get to some form of
4 79
FR 22320 et seq.
FR at 22323.
6 EERE–2012–BT–TP–0016–0023, p. 85–88.
7 79 FR at 22328 and 22329.
5 79
2 78
3 78
FR 25724 et seq.
FR 38699 et seq.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:24 Sep 16, 2014
Jkt 232001
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
55779
stability that is, you know, unique to perhaps
each individual product, but at least it’s
something that you know will repeat
consistently over time, or is it something that
you can actually identify?
MR. BROWN: Yes. This is Bill with GE
again.
You may see a repeating operation in the
freezer, and you may see it in the fresh food.
But you’d see it on different time frames. So
where a freezer temperature may be high, the
fresh food may be low, and you know, if you
just picture a sine curve, these are sine
curves that are out of phase with one
another.
So you would never get to a point, or you
may never get a point where you’ve got both
of these meeting this type of stability criteria
at the same time. So instead of trying to
search through the data, to find if there just
happens to be [a] place where this occurs, we
just chose in our waiver to . . . use a long
period of time 8 (emphasis supplied).
One reason GE’s product does not
achieve stability as described in
Appendix A is that it has two
compartments—one for fresh food and
one for frozen foods—but unlike what
we understand to be the Sub-Zero
design, the GE compressors are not
designed to synchronize such that both
compartments achieve temperature
stability at the same time. Stated
another way, it is not designed such that
. . . ‘‘the compartment temperature
averages for the first and last complete
compressor cycles [of each compressor
system can] lie completely within the
second part of the test [and] within 0.5
°F (0.3 °C) of the average compartment
temperature measured for the first part
of the test.’’ Appendix A, 4.2.3.4.2,
paraphrased. (See below for full
section.) 9
While the Appendix A test procedure
does adopt the definition of steady state
condition that was first approved in the
Sub-Zero waiver and subsequently GE’s
waiver, it imposes an unachievable goal
for GE by requiring that a 0.5 °F (0.3 °C)
steady state condition be achieved by
comparing the compartment
temperatures during a single freezer
compressor cycle to the average
compartment temperatures achieved
during 24 hours of fresh food and
freezer compressor cycles. This can only
be done if the cycles repeat uniformly.
As described above and illustrated
below, this does not occur with the GE
dual compressor refrigerator.
The non-synchronous nature of the
compressors’ operation is depicted in
8 EERE–2012–BT–TP–0016–0023,
at p. 88.
each compressor system, the compartment
temperature averages for the first and last complete
compressor cycles that lie completely within the
second part of the test must be within 0.5 °F (0.3
°C) of the average compartment temperature
measured for the first part of the test.
9 For
E:\FR\FM\17SEN1.SGM
17SEN1
55780
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 180 / Wednesday, September 17, 2014 / Notices
the following plot of Watts and
compartment temperatures versus time.
10 GE’s new models provide the additional
environmental benefit of not using HFC refrigerants:
Instead the two compressors use isobutane, which
has a GWP of two orders of magnitude less than
HFC–134a.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:24 Sep 16, 2014
Jkt 232001
II. GE’s Proposed Waiver
Based on the above GE requests that
the Assistant Secretary grant it a waiver
from the Appendix A test procedure and
allow GE to test its refrigerator-freezer
model pursuant to the modified
procedure previously approved in 78 FR
38699, case No. RF–029, and submitted
herewith as Attachment 1. This request
is filed pursuant to 10 C.F.R. § 430.27 11
as the test procedure does not allow the
energy used by GE’s new 2014 model.
The waiver should continue in effect
until DOE amends the test procedure to
accommodate such products. GE also
requests that the Department grant an
interim waiver to test and rate the
models listed on Attachment 2.
We would be pleased to discuss this
request with DOE and provide further
information as needed.
GE requests expedited treatment of
the Petition and Application. It is
critical that the Waiver request be acted
on, and hopefully granted, in July 2014
in order to provide sufficient time for
final design and testing by the
September 15, 2014 effective date of the
energy efficiency standard.
I hereby certify that all manufacturers
of domestically marketed units of the
same product type have been notified of
this Petition and Application, list of
which is found in Attachment 3, hereto.
11 The Department’s regulations provide that the
Assistant Secretary will grant a Petition upon
‘‘determin[ation] that the basic model for which the
waiver was requested contains a design
characteristic which either prevents testing of the
basic model according to the prescribed test
procedures, or the prescribed test procedures may
evaluate the basic model in a manner so
unrepresentative of its true energy consumption
characteristics as to provide materially inaccurate
comparative data.’’ 10 CFR § 430.27(l). GE requests
that the Assistant Secretary grant this Petition on
both grounds.
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Respectfully submitted,
Earl F. Jones, Senior Counsel and
Authorized Representative of GE
Appliances
Attachment 1
E:\FR\FM\17SEN1.SGM
17SEN1
EN17SE14.020
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
As is apparent from the above, at no
time during the freezer compressor
cycles before the defrost (at appx. 4270
mins.) are the fresh food and freezer
temperatures in phase: While the fresh
food temperature cycles repeat with
each fresh food compressor cycle, the
freezer temperature cycles repeat with
every two freezer compressor cycles.
Thus, the Appendix A assumption that
the cycles are uniform and in phase
does not hold for these GE models. The
only relevant impact of this nonuniformity is the confounding effect on
making the required calculation. The
product provides improved consumer
utility because it provides for better
temperature and humidity control.10
Where:
— ET is the test cycle energy (kWh/day);
— 1440 = number of minutes in a day
— EP1 is the dual compressor energy
expended during the first part of the test (If
at least one compressor cycles, the test period
for the first part of the test shall include a
whole number of complete primary
compressor cycles comprising at least 24
hours of stable operation, unless a defrost
occurs prior to completion of 24 hours of
stable operation, in which case the first part
of the test shall include a whole number of
complete primary compressor cycles
comprising at least 18 hours of stable
operation);
— T1 is the length of time for EP1
(minutes);
— D is the total number of compartments
with distinct defrost systems;
— i is the variable that can equal to 1,2 or
more that identifies the compartment with
distinct defrost system;
— EP2i is the total energy consumed during
the second (defrost) part of the test being
conducted for compartment i. (kWh);
— T2i is the length of time (minutes) for the
second (defrost) part of the test being
conducted for compartment i.
— 12 = conversion factor to adjust for a
50% run-time of the compressor in hours/day
— CTi is the compressor-on time between
defrosts for only compartment i. CTi for
compartment i with long time automatic
defrost system is calculated as per 10 CFR
Part 430, Subpart B, Appendix A clause
5.2.1.2. CTi for compartment i with variable
defrost system is calculated as per 10 CFR
part 430 subpart B, Appendix A clause
5.2.1.3. (hours rounded to the nearest tenth
of an hour).
Stabilization:
The test shall start after a minimum 24
hours stabilization run for each temperature
control setting.
Test Period for EP2i, T2i:
EP2i includes precool, defrost, and
recovery time for compartment i, as well as
sufficient dual compressor cycles to allow
T2i to be at least 24 hours, unless a defrost
occurs prior to completion of 24 hours, in
which case the second part of the test shall
include a whole number of complete primary
compressor cycles comprising at least 18
hours. The test period shall start at the end
of a regular freezer compressor on-cycle after
the previous defrost occurrence (refrigerator
or freezer). The test period also includes the
target defrost and following freezer
compressor cycles, ending at the end of a
freezer compressor on-cycle before the next
defrost occurrence (refrigerator or freezer).
Test Measurement Frequency
Measurements shall be taken at regular
intervals not exceeding 1 minute.
*
*
*
*
*
Attachment 2
ZIC30*****
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:24 Sep 16, 2014
Jkt 232001
ZIK30*****
[FR Doc. 2014–22228 Filed 9–16–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
[Docket No. CP14–548–000]
Natural Gas Pipeline Company of
America LLC ; Notice of Application
Take notice that on September 2,
2014, Natural Gas Pipeline Company of
America LLC (NGPL), 3250 Lacey Road,
Downers Grove, Illinois 60615, filed an
application pursuant to section 7(b) of
the Natural Gas Act (NGA) for
authorization to abandon by sale to
Devon Gas Services, L.P. approximately
96.28 miles of pipeline; 5,325
horsepower of compression; and various
taps and meters in Texas and Oklahoma,
all as more fully set forth in the
application which is on file with the
Commission and open to public
inspection. The filing is available for
review at the Commission in the Public
Reference Room or may be viewed on
the Commission’s Web site web at
https://www.ferc.gov using the
‘‘eLibrary’’ link. Enter the docket
number excluding the last three digits in
the docket number field to access the
document. For assistance, contact FERC
at FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov or call
toll-free, (886) 208–3676 or TYY, (202)
502–8659.
Any questions concerning this
application may be directed to Bruce H.
Newsome, Vice President, Natural Gas
Pipeline Company of America LLC,
3250 Lacey Road, Suite 700, Downers
Grove, Illinois 60515, by telephone at
(630) 725–3070, or by email at bruce_
newsome@kindermorgan.com.
Pursuant to section 157.9 of the
Commission’s rules, 18 CFR 157.9,
within 90 days of this Notice, the
Commission staff will either: Complete
its environmental assessment (EA) and
place it into the Commission’s public
record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or
issue a Notice of Schedule for
Environmental Review. If a Notice of
Schedule for Environmental Review is
issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the
Commission staff’s issuance of the EA
for this proposal. The filing of the EA
in the Commission’s public record for
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
55781
this proceeding or the issuance of a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental
Review will serve to notify federal and
state agencies of the timing for the
completion of all necessary reviews, and
the subsequent need to complete all
federal authorizations within 90 days of
the date of issuance of the Commission
staff’s EA.
There are two ways to become
involved in the Commission’s review of
this project. First, any person wishing to
obtain legal status by becoming a party
to the proceedings for this project
should, on or before the comment date
stated below file with the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426,
a motion to intervene in accordance
with the requirements of the
Commission’s Rules of Practice and
Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211)
and the Regulations under the NGA (18
CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party
status will be placed on the service list
maintained by the Secretary of the
Commission and will receive copies of
all documents filed by the applicant and
by all other parties. A party must submit
seven copies of filings made in the
proceeding with the Commission and
must mail a copy to the applicant and
to every other party. Only parties to the
proceeding can ask for court review of
Commission orders in the proceeding.
However, a person does not have to
intervene in order to have comments
considered. The second way to
participate is by filing with the
Secretary of the Commission, as soon as
possible, an original and two copies of
comments in support of or in opposition
to this project. The Commission will
consider these comments in
determining the appropriate action to be
taken, but the filing of a comment alone
will not serve to make the filer a party
to the proceeding. The Commission’s
rules require that persons filing
comments in opposition to the project
provide copies of their protests only to
the party or parties directly involved in
the protest.
Persons who wish to comment only
on the environmental review of this
project should submit an original and
two copies of their comments to the
Secretary of the Commission.
Environmental commentors will be
placed on the Commission’s
environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents,
and will be notified of meetings
E:\FR\FM\17SEN1.SGM
17SEN1
EN17SE14.021
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 180 / Wednesday, September 17, 2014 / Notices
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 180 (Wednesday, September 17, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55775-55781]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-22228]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
[Case No. RF-042]
Petition for Waiver of GE Appliances From the Department of
Energy Residential Refrigerator and Refrigerator-Freezer Test Procedure
and Grant of Interim Waiver
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Notice of Petition for Waiver, Notice of Granting Application
for Interim Waiver, and Request for Public Comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice announces receipt of a petition for waiver from GE
Appliances (GE) seeking an exemption from specified portions of the
U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) test procedure for determining the
energy consumption of electric refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers.
GE seeks to use an alternate test procedure to address certain issues
involved in testing certain specific basic models identified in its
petition that are equipped with dual-compressor systems that GE
contends cannot be accurately tested using the currently applicable DOE
test
[[Page 55776]]
procedure. DOE solicits comments, data, and information concerning GE's
petition and its suggested alternate test procedure. Today's notice
also grants GE with an interim waiver from the electric refrigerator-
freezer test procedure, subject to use of the alternative test
procedure set forth in this notice.
DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, and information with respect to
the GE Petition until October 17, 2014.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by case number ``RF-
042,'' by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Email: ASWaiverRequests@ee.doe.gov.
Include the case number [Case No. RF-042] in the subject line of the
message.
Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy,
Building Technologies Program, Mailstop EE-2J/1000 Independence Avenue
SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-2945. Please
submit one signed original paper copy.
Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department
of Energy, Building Technologies Program, 950 L'Enfant Plaza SW., Suite
600, Washington, DC 20024. Please submit one signed original paper
copy.
Docket: For access to the docket to review the background documents
relevant to this matter, you may visit the U.S. Department of Energy,
950 L'Enfant Plaza SW., Washington, DC 20024; (202) 586-2945, between
9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. Available documents include the following items: (1) This
notice; (2) public comments received; (3) the petition for waiver and
application for interim waiver; and (4) prior DOE rulemakings regarding
similar refrigerator-freezers. Please call Ms. Brenda Edwards at the
above telephone number for additional information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mr. Bryan Berringer, U.S. Department of Energy, Building
Technologies Program, Mail Stop EE-2J, Forrestal Building, 1000
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202)
586-0371. Email: Bryan.Berringer@ee.doe.gov.
Mr. Michael Kido, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General
Counsel, Mail Stop GC-71, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue
SW., Washington, DC 20585-0103. Telephone: (202) 586-8145. Email:
Michael.Kido@hq.doe.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background and Authority
Title III, Part B of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of
1975, as amended (EPCA), Public Law 94-163 (42 U.S.C. 6291-6309, as
codified), established the Energy Conservation Program for Consumer
Products Other Than Automobiles, a program covering most major
household appliances, which includes the electric refrigerators and
refrigerator-freezers that are the focus of this notice.\1\ Part B
includes definitions, test procedures, labeling provisions, energy
conservation standards, and the authority to require information and
reports from manufacturers. Further, Part B authorizes the Secretary of
Energy to prescribe test procedures that are reasonably designed to
produce results that measure the energy efficiency, energy use, or
estimated annual operating costs of a covered product, and that are not
unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) The test procedure
for electric refrigerators and electric refrigerator-freezers is
contained in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code,
Part B was re-designated Part A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The regulations set forth in 10 CFR 430.27 contain provisions that
enable a person to seek a waiver from the test procedure requirements
for covered products. The DOE will grant a waiver if it is determined
that the basic model for which the petition for waiver was submitted
contains one or more design characteristics that prevents testing of
the basic model according to the prescribed test procedures, or if the
prescribed test procedures may evaluate the basic model in a manner so
unrepresentative of its true energy consumption characteristics as to
provide materially inaccurate comparative data. 10 CFR 430.27(f)(2).
Petitioners must include in their petition any alternate test
procedures known to the petitioner to evaluate the basic model in a
manner representative of its energy consumption. The Assistant
Secretary may grant the waiver subject to conditions, including
adherence to alternate test procedures. 10 CFR 430.27(f)(2). Waivers
remain in effect pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 430.27(l).
The waiver process also allows the DOE to grant an interim waiver
from test procedure requirements to manufacturers that have petitioned
DOE for a waiver of such prescribed test procedures. 10 CFR
430.27(e)(2). Within one year of issuance of an interim waiver, DOE
will either: (i) Publish in the Federal Register a determination on the
petition for waiver; or (ii) publish in the Federal Register a new or
amended test procedure that addresses the issues presented in the
waiver. 10 CFR 430.27(h)(1). When DOE amends the test procedure to
address the issues presented in a waiver, the waiver will automatically
terminate on the date on which use of that test procedure is required
to demonstrate compliance. 10 CFR 430.27(h)(2).
II. Petition for Waiver of Test Procedure
On June 27, 2014, GE submitted a petition for waiver from the test
procedure applicable to residential electric refrigerators and
refrigerator-freezers set forth in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix
A. GE is seeking a waiver because it is developing new refrigerator-
freezers that incorporate a dual-compressor design that it believes is
not properly accounted for in DOE's amended test procedure published on
April 21, 2014 (78 FR 22320). In its petition, GE seeks a waiver from
the new DOE test procedure applicable to refrigerators and
refrigerator-freezers under 10 CFR part 430 for two basic models of
dual-compressor system products. Specifically, based upon the
information provided by GE, these basic models demonstrate non-uniform
cycling of their compressors, which prevents the verification of two
criteria in the Appendix A test procedure--to ensure (a) that the first
part of the test comprise a period of stable operation, and (b) that
the second part of the test (used to measure the energy use
contribution of the defrost cycle(s)) start and end during periods of
stable operation.
DOE previously granted a similar waiver to GE through a subsequent
Decision and Order (78 FR 38699 (June 27, 2013)) under Case No. RF-029
pertaining to 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix A1. DOE also granted
similar waivers to Sub-Zero (77 FR 5784 (February 6, 2012)), LG (77 FR
18327 (March 26, 2013)); and Samsung (78 FR 35899 (June 14, 2014)) and
(79 FR 19884 (April 10, 2014)).
In its final rule published on April 21, 2014 (78 FR 22320), which
amended the test procedure for refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers
in Appendix A, DOE incorporated provisions to address the testing of
products with multiple compressors, which were intended to obviate the
need for waivers for multiple-compressor products such as the ones
previously granted to GE and others, if these products are tested using
the new Appendix A. However, in its petition for waiver, GE contends
that due to certain characteristics of the basic models listed in the
petition, the
[[Page 55777]]
Appendix A test procedure does not accurately measure the energy
consumption of these basic models. Specifically, GE claims that
requirements in the Appendix A test procedure--to ensure (a) that the
first part of the test comprise a period of stable operation, and (b)
that the second part of the test (used to measure the energy use
contribution of the defrost cycle(s)) start and end during periods of
stable operation--cannot be applied to these basic models, because
their compressor cycles do not repeat uniformly, which is one of the
assumptions built into the test procedure.
In lieu of using Appendix A, GE has submitted an alternate test
procedure to account for the energy consumption of its refrigerator-
freezer models with dual compressors. GE's alternative test is
essentially the same as the test for multiple-compressor products with
automatic defrost in section 4.2.3 of Appendix A, except that (a) the
test period for the first part of the test would not be required to
meet the requirements for evaluation of stable operation provided in
section 1.22 of Appendix A, (b) the second part of the test would have
a minimum duration--this would be at least 24 hours, unless a second
defrost (other than the target defrost captured within the test period)
occurs before the end of 24 hours, in which case, the test period
duration would be at least 18 hours, (c) the start of the second part
of the test would occur ``at the end of a regular freezer compressor
on-cycle after the previous defrost occurrence'' rather than during a
period of stable operation as defined in section 1.22 of Appendix A,
and (d) the end of the second part of the test would occur ``at the end
of a freezer compressor on-cycle before the next defrost occurrence''
rather than during a period of stable operation as defined in section
1.22 of Appendix A.
GE believes its alternate test procedure will allow for the
accurate measurement of the energy use of these products, which GE
contends is not achieved by the current Appendix A test procedure.
Specifically, due to the non-uniform compressor cycles of this product,
which prevent consistent application of the requirements provided in
section 1.22 of Appendix A for evaluating the stable operation of a
tested unit, the alternative test would not explicitly impose these
stable operation requirements. Based on the information provided by GE,
the variation in test results associated with different selections of
test periods would be insignificant as long as the test starts after
the 24-hour stabilization period, which is required both by the
Appendix A test procedure and the alternative test procedure suggested
by GE. Further, GE's alternative test's minimum duration for the second
part of the test would also not significantly affect the results.
Although not explicitly stated in the alternative test method, or
in GE's petition, DOE understands the term ``stable operation'' used in
the petition to have a different meaning than the same term as used in
Appendix A, since the alternative test method does not use the same
stability criteria. In this case, DOE understands ``stable operation''
to mean operation after steady-state conditions have been achieved but
excluding any defrost cycles or events associated with a defrost cycle,
such as precooling or recovery, and that this term would apply in the
same way for the first and second parts of the test. DOE understands
the term also to mean operation in which the average rate of change of
compartment temperatures is zero or very close to zero--the
temperatures may fluctuate around representative average temperatures
as the compressors cycle on and off, but over several compressor
cycles, these average compartment temperatures would not significantly
change. The key difference in this interpretation of stable operation
as compared with the definition in Appendix A is that it involves
neither assignment of a specific maximum rate of change of the average
temperature nor specification of a method to verify that operation is
stable. DOE further notes that this particular use of the term ``stable
operation'' is limited solely to the basic models that are the subject
of this waiver, as DOE has verified using information provided by GE
about the actual operational characteristics of these models that such
a test is appropriate in this limited case.
GE also requests an interim waiver from the existing DOE test
procedure. An interim waiver may be granted if it is determined that
the applicant will experience economic hardship if the application for
interim waiver is denied, if it appears likely that the petition for
waiver will be granted, and/or the Assistant Secretary determines that
it would be desirable for public policy reasons to grant immediate
relief pending a determination of the petition for waiver. See 10 CFR
430.27(e)(2).
As noted previously, DOE recently addressed multiple compressor
products in its April 21, 2014 final rule. In considering GE's petition
for waiver, DOE sought additional details about the specific operating
characteristics of the products that are the subject of the petition in
order to determine whether they cannot be tested using the section of
the amended test procedure that was adopted specifically to address
such products. GE indicated in its petition that the compressors
serving the fresh food and freezer compartments of these models have
non-synchronous cycles that do not repeat uniformly, which prevents
these models from achieving the temperature stability conditions
specified in the Appendix A test procedure. To better understand GE's
claim and the issues raised in the petition, DOE requested data
regarding the operational characteristics of these products, which GE
provided. DOE was specifically concerned that the use of GE's proposed
test method could present the risk of truncation error in the energy
use measurement or the possibility of variation between separate tests
of the same unit due to temperature drift in the compartments or
differences in the operational state of the compressors at the
beginning or end of the test period. The data provided by GE indicated
that these models demonstrate non-uniform cycling that makes direct use
of the Appendix A requirements for evaluating temperature stability
problematic--these requirements may be appropriate for some operating
modes of the basic models, but not for other operating modes. The data
also showed that the use of GE's proposed test method is unlikely to
result in significant variation in test measurements for these
particular models on the basis of the selected test period. DOE notes,
however, that these conclusions are limited to the models listed in
GE's petition based upon the data provided by GE and that other basic
models may demonstrate operating characteristics that differ from these
models as to make this alternative test method inappropriate for
measuring their energy use. Should DOE receive petitions for waiver
requesting use of the alternative test identified in this notice for
other basic models, DOE may request from the manufacturer information
about the operation of those basic models that would demonstrate that
their energy use can be accurately measured using this alternative test
and that such models cannot in fact be tested using the currently
assigned test method in Appendix A.
For the reasons discussed above, DOE has determined that use of the
currently required DOE test procedure for the specific GE models
identified in its petition would provide test results so
unrepresentative as to provide materially inaccurate comparative data.
Therefore, it appears likely that GE's
[[Page 55778]]
petition for waiver will be granted. For these same reasons, DOE has
also determined that it is desirable for public policy reasons to grant
GE immediate relief pending a determination of the petition for waiver.
DOE grants GE's application for interim waiver from testing of the two
basic models of refrigerator-freezers identified in petition for waiver
and request for interim waiver.
Therefore, it is ordered that:
The application for interim waiver filed by GE is hereby granted
for GE's refrigerator-freezer product lines that incorporate dual
compressors subject to the following specifications and conditions
below. GE shall be required to test and rate its refrigerator-freezer
product line containing dual compressors according to the alternate
test procedure as set forth in section III, ``Alternate test
procedure.''
The interim waiver applies to the following basic models:
ZIC30*****
ZIK30*****
DOE makes decisions on waivers and interim waivers for only those
models specifically set out in the petition, not future models that may
be manufactured by the petitioner. GE may submit a new or amended
petition for waiver and request for grant of interim waiver, as
appropriate, for additional models of refrigerator-freezers for which
it seeks a waiver from the DOE test procedure. In addition, DOE notes
that granting of an interim waiver or waiver does not release a
petitioner from the certification requirements set forth at 10 CFR part
429.
Further, this interim waiver is conditioned upon the presumed
validity of statements, representations, and documents provided by the
petitioner. DOE may revoke or modify this interim waiver at any time
upon a determination that the factual basis underlying the petition for
waiver is incorrect, or upon a determination that the results from the
alternate test procedure are unrepresentative of the basic models' true
energy consumption characteristics.
III. Alternate Test Procedure
EPCA requires that manufacturers use DOE test procedures when
making representations about the energy consumption and energy
consumption costs of products covered by the statute. (42 U.S.C.
6293(c)) Consistent representations are important for manufacturers to
use in making representations about the energy efficiency of their
products and to demonstrate compliance with applicable DOE energy
conservation standards. Pursuant to its regulations applicable to
waivers and interim waivers from applicable test procedures at 10 CFR
430.27, DOE will consider setting an alternate test procedure for GE in
a subsequent Decision and Order.
During the period of the interim waiver granted in this notice, GE
shall test the products listed above according to the test procedures
for residential electric refrigerator-freezers prescribed by DOE at 10
CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix A, except that, for the GE basic
models listed above only, the energy consumption shall be determined as
follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17SE14.019
Where:
-- ET is the test cycle energy (kWh/day);
-- 1440 = number of minutes in a day
-- EP1 is the dual compressor energy expended during the first
part of the test (If at least one compressor cycles, the test period
for the first part of the test shall include a whole number of
complete primary compressor cycles comprising at least 24 hours of
stable operation, unless a defrost occurs prior to completion of 24
hours of stable operation, in which case the first part of the test
shall include a whole number of complete primary compressor cycles
comprising at least 18 hours of stable operation);
--T1 is the length of time for EP1 (minutes);
--D is the total number of compartments with distinct defrost
systems;
--i is the variable that can equal to 1,2 or more that
identifies the compartment with distinct defrost system;
--EP2i is the total energy consumed during the second (defrost)
part of the test being conducted for compartment i. (kWh);
--T2i is the length of time (minutes) for the second (defrost)
part of the test being conducted for compartment i.
--12 = conversion factor to adjust for a 50% run-time of the
compressor in hours/day
--CTi is the compressor on time between defrosts for only
compartment i. CTi for compartment i with long time automatic
defrost system is calculated as per 10 CFR Part 430, Subpart B,
Appendix A clause 5.2.1.2. CTi for compartment i with variable
defrost system is calculated as per 10 CFR part 430 subpart B,
Appendix A clause 5.2.1.3. (hours rounded to the nearest tenth of an
hour).
Stabilization:
The test shall start after a minimum 24 hours stabilization run for
each temperature control setting.
Test Period for EP2i, T2i:
EP2i includes precool, defrost, and recovery time for compartment
i, as well as sufficient dual compressor cycles to allow T2i to be at
least 24 hours, unless a defrost occurs prior to completion of 24
hours, in which case the second part of the test shall include a whole
number of complete primary compressor cycles comprising at least 18
hours. The test period shall start at the end of a regular freezer
compressor on-cycle after the previous defrost occurrence (refrigerator
or freezer). The test period also includes the target defrost and
following freezer compressor cycles, ending at the end of a freezer
compressor on-cycle before the next defrost occurrence (refrigerator or
freezer).
Test Measurement Frequency
Measurements shall be taken at regular interval not exceeding 1
minute.
* * * * *
IV. Summary and Request for Comments
Through today's notice, DOE grants GE an interim waiver from the
specified portions of the test procedure applicable to certain basic
models of refrigerator-freezers with dual compressors and announces
receipt of GE's petition for waiver from those same portions of the
test procedure. DOE is publishing GE's petition for waiver pursuant to
10 CFR 430.27(b)(1)(iv). The petition includes a suggested alternate
test procedure to determine the energy consumption of GE's specified
basic models of refrigerator-freezers with dual compressors. GE is
required to follow this alternate procedure as a condition of its
interim waiver, and DOE is considering including this alternate
procedure in its subsequent Decision and Order.
DOE solicits comments from interested parties on all aspects of the
petition, including the suggested alternate test procedure and
calculation
[[Page 55779]]
methodology. Pursuant to 10 CFR 430.27(b)(1)(iv), any person submitting
written comments to DOE must also send a copy of such comments to the
petitioner. The contact information for the petitioner is: Earl F.
Jones, Senior Counsel, GE Appliances, Appliance Park 2-225, Louisville,
KY 40225. All submissions received must include the agency name and
case number for this proceeding. Submit electronic comments in
WordPerfect, Microsoft Word, Portable Document Format (PDF), or text
(American Standard Code for Information Interchange (ASCII)) file
format and avoid the use of special characters or any form of
encryption. Wherever possible, include the electronic signature of the
author. DOE does not accept telefacsimiles (faxes).
Issued in Washington, DC, on September 10, 2014.
Kathleen B. Hogan,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy.
U.S. Department of Energy
Application for Interim Waiver and Petition for Waiver, 10CFR430,
Subpart B, Appendix A1-Uniform Test Method for Measuring the Energy
Consumption of Refrigerator-freezers
Case No. Non-Confidential Version
Submitted by: Earl F. Jones Senior Counsel, GE Appliances,
Appliance Park 2-225, Louisville, KY 40225, earl.jones@ge.com, 502-
452-3164 (voice), 502-452-0395 (fax).
U.S. Department of Energy Application for Interim Waiver and Petition
for Waiver, 10CFR430, Subpart B, Appendix A--Uniform Test Method for
Measuring Refrigerator-Freezers
I. Introduction
GE Appliances, an operating division of General Electric Co.,
(``GE'') is a leading manufacturer and marketer of household
appliances, including, as relevant to this proceeding, refrigerator-
freezers (``refrigerators''), files this Petition for Waiver and
Application for Interim Waiver (collectively, ``Petition''). On May 2,
2013, the Assistant Secretary granted an interim waiver \2\ and on June
27 the final waiver \3\ pursuant to GE's February 28 petition advising
the Department that the energy consumption of GE's new dual compressor
refrigerator could not be accurately measured using the test procedure
set forth in 430 Subpart B, Appendix A1. GE continued to test the
product under the waiver-approved test procedure. In issuing the new
refrigerator test procedure on April 21, 2014,\4\ the Assistant
Secretary nullified all Appendix A1 waivers, including the one granted
to GE. The Department's decision was explained as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 78 FR 25724 et seq.
\3\ 78 FR 38699 et seq.
\4\ 79 FR 22320 et seq.
After DOE grants a waiver, the agency must, pursuant to its
waiver provisions, initiate a rulemaking to amend its regulations to
eliminate the continued need for the waiver. 10 CFR 430.27 (m). This
final rule addresses this requirement for the Sub-Zero waiver by
amending Appendix A to include a test procedure for multiple-
compressor products that is based on the Sub-Zero waiver procedure.
The Sub-Zero, Samsung, LG, and GE waivers for multiple-
compressor products will terminate on September 15, 2014, the same
date that manufacturers must use the test procedures in Appendix A
for testing.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 79 FR at 22323.
The conclusion that GE can use the Appendix A test procedure to
accurately measure energy consumption of the new 2014 models of the
product that was previously covered by waiver is, unfortunately,
erroneous. GE has made this point to DOE consistently and on multiple
occasions: First, in the 2013 waiver petition, next, at the NOPR
stakeholders meeting held on July 25, 2013,\6\ and, finally, in its
NOPR comments.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ EERE-2012-BT-TP-0016-0023, p. 85-88.
\7\ 79 FR at 22328 and 22329.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
GE's representative at the stakeholders meeting most clearly
described the operation of GE's refrigerator:
MR. BROWN: Bill with GE Appliances.
Again, I would reiterate that stability for multiple compressor
products is not the same as stability for a single compressor
product. If you did achieve .042 degrees per hour, it may be more
due to luck than actually the product [being] what you'd consider to
be stable. Again, with both compressors operating on their own
schedule, with their own controls, you may see that the fresh food
[temperature] is stable and the freezer's not. Then you'd keep going
further and the freezer is stable and the fresh food is not. So
that's again why we chose just to use a longer period of time
instead of trying to invoke this .042 degrees per hour.
* * * * *
So again, I would reiterate for multiple compressor products,
that . . . looking at stability with a strict .042 degrees per hour
like you would on a single compressor product is . . . just not
applicable to the multiple compressor product.
MR. BROOKMAN: Okay, thank you. Lucas.
MR. ADIN: Lucas Adin, DOE.
Just a quick follow-up question for clarification. So it sounds
like, based on your comment Bill, that a single stability criteria
for multiple compressor products may not be appropriate because of
how they operate. It's different from single compressor products.
But is it reasonable to say that multiple compressor products do
get to some form of stability that is, you know, unique to perhaps
each individual product, but at least it's something that you know
will repeat consistently over time, or is it something that you can
actually identify?
MR. BROWN: Yes. This is Bill with GE again.
You may see a repeating operation in the freezer, and you may
see it in the fresh food. But you'd see it on different time frames.
So where a freezer temperature may be high, the fresh food may be
low, and you know, if you just picture a sine curve, these are sine
curves that are out of phase with one another.
So you would never get to a point, or you may never get a point
where you've got both of these meeting this type of stability
criteria at the same time. So instead of trying to search through
the data, to find if there just happens to be [a] place where this
occurs, we just chose in our waiver to . . . use a long period of
time \8\ (emphasis supplied).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ EERE-2012-BT-TP-0016-0023, at p. 88.
One reason GE's product does not achieve stability as described in
Appendix A is that it has two compartments--one for fresh food and one
for frozen foods--but unlike what we understand to be the Sub-Zero
design, the GE compressors are not designed to synchronize such that
both compartments achieve temperature stability at the same time.
Stated another way, it is not designed such that . . . ``the
compartment temperature averages for the first and last complete
compressor cycles [of each compressor system can] lie completely within
the second part of the test [and] within 0.5 [deg]F (0.3 [deg]C) of the
average compartment temperature measured for the first part of the
test.'' Appendix A, 4.2.3.4.2, paraphrased. (See below for full
section.) \9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ For each compressor system, the compartment temperature
averages for the first and last complete compressor cycles that lie
completely within the second part of the test must be within 0.5
[deg]F (0.3 [deg]C) of the average compartment temperature measured
for the first part of the test.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While the Appendix A test procedure does adopt the definition of
steady state condition that was first approved in the Sub-Zero waiver
and subsequently GE's waiver, it imposes an unachievable goal for GE by
requiring that a 0.5 [deg]F (0.3 [deg]C) steady state condition be
achieved by comparing the compartment temperatures during a single
freezer compressor cycle to the average compartment temperatures
achieved during 24 hours of fresh food and freezer compressor cycles.
This can only be done if the cycles repeat uniformly. As described
above and illustrated below, this does not occur with the GE dual
compressor refrigerator.
The non-synchronous nature of the compressors' operation is
depicted in
[[Page 55780]]
the following plot of Watts and compartment temperatures versus time.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17SE14.020
As is apparent from the above, at no time during the freezer
compressor cycles before the defrost (at appx. 4270 mins.) are the
fresh food and freezer temperatures in phase: While the fresh food
temperature cycles repeat with each fresh food compressor cycle, the
freezer temperature cycles repeat with every two freezer compressor
cycles. Thus, the Appendix A assumption that the cycles are uniform and
in phase does not hold for these GE models. The only relevant impact of
this non-uniformity is the confounding effect on making the required
calculation. The product provides improved consumer utility because it
provides for better temperature and humidity control.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ GE's new models provide the additional environmental
benefit of not using HFC refrigerants: Instead the two compressors
use isobutane, which has a GWP of two orders of magnitude less than
HFC-134a.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. GE's Proposed Waiver
Based on the above GE requests that the Assistant Secretary grant
it a waiver from the Appendix A test procedure and allow GE to test its
refrigerator-freezer model pursuant to the modified procedure
previously approved in 78 FR 38699, case No. RF-029, and submitted
herewith as Attachment 1. This request is filed pursuant to 10 C.F.R.
Sec. 430.27 \11\ as the test procedure does not allow the energy used
by GE's new 2014 model.
The waiver should continue in effect until DOE amends the test
procedure to accommodate such products. GE also requests that the
Department grant an interim waiver to test and rate the models listed
on Attachment 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ The Department's regulations provide that the Assistant
Secretary will grant a Petition upon ``determin[ation] that the
basic model for which the waiver was requested contains a design
characteristic which either prevents testing of the basic model
according to the prescribed test procedures, or the prescribed test
procedures may evaluate the basic model in a manner so
unrepresentative of its true energy consumption characteristics as
to provide materially inaccurate comparative data.'' 10 CFR Sec.
430.27(l). GE requests that the Assistant Secretary grant this
Petition on both grounds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We would be pleased to discuss this request with DOE and provide
further information as needed.
GE requests expedited treatment of the Petition and Application. It
is critical that the Waiver request be acted on, and hopefully granted,
in July 2014 in order to provide sufficient time for final design and
testing by the September 15, 2014 effective date of the energy
efficiency standard.
I hereby certify that all manufacturers of domestically marketed
units of the same product type have been notified of this Petition and
Application, list of which is found in Attachment 3, hereto.
Respectfully submitted,
Earl F. Jones, Senior Counsel and Authorized Representative of GE
Appliances
Attachment 1
[[Page 55781]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17SE14.021
Where:
-- ET is the test cycle energy (kWh/day);
-- 1440 = number of minutes in a day
-- EP1 is the dual compressor energy expended during the first
part of the test (If at least one compressor cycles, the test period
for the first part of the test shall include a whole number of
complete primary compressor cycles comprising at least 24 hours of
stable operation, unless a defrost occurs prior to completion of 24
hours of stable operation, in which case the first part of the test
shall include a whole number of complete primary compressor cycles
comprising at least 18 hours of stable operation);
-- T1 is the length of time for EP1 (minutes);
-- D is the total number of compartments with distinct defrost
systems;
-- i is the variable that can equal to 1,2 or more that
identifies the compartment with distinct defrost system;
-- EP2i is the total energy consumed during the
second (defrost) part of the test being conducted for compartment i.
(kWh);
-- T2i is the length of time (minutes) for the second
(defrost) part of the test being conducted for compartment i.
-- 12 = conversion factor to adjust for a 50% run-time of the
compressor in hours/day
-- CTi is the compressor-on time between defrosts for
only compartment i. CTi for compartment i with long time
automatic defrost system is calculated as per 10 CFR Part 430,
Subpart B, Appendix A clause 5.2.1.2. CTi for compartment
i with variable defrost system is calculated as per 10 CFR part 430
subpart B, Appendix A clause 5.2.1.3. (hours rounded to the nearest
tenth of an hour).
Stabilization:
The test shall start after a minimum 24 hours stabilization run
for each temperature control setting.
Test Period for EP2i, T2i:
EP2i includes precool, defrost, and recovery time for
compartment i, as well as sufficient dual compressor cycles to allow
T2i to be at least 24 hours, unless a defrost occurs
prior to completion of 24 hours, in which case the second part of
the test shall include a whole number of complete primary compressor
cycles comprising at least 18 hours. The test period shall start at
the end of a regular freezer compressor on-cycle after the previous
defrost occurrence (refrigerator or freezer). The test period also
includes the target defrost and following freezer compressor cycles,
ending at the end of a freezer compressor on-cycle before the next
defrost occurrence (refrigerator or freezer).
Test Measurement Frequency
Measurements shall be taken at regular intervals not exceeding 1
minute.
* * * * *
Attachment 2
ZIC30*****
ZIK30*****
[FR Doc. 2014-22228 Filed 9-16-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P