Notice of Petition for Waiver of Big Ass Solutions (BAS) From the Department of Energy Ceiling Fan Test Procedure, and Grating of Interim Waiver, 12726-12734 [2018-05932]
Download as PDF
12726
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 57 / Friday, March 23, 2018 / Notices
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with NOTICES
electricity customers. As the electric
power system continues to evolve, with
stakeholders integrating higher amounts
of variable renewable generation,
deploying electric vehicles and
associated charging infrastructure, and
connecting more dynamic end-use
devices and subsystems, substations
will need to evolve as well. These
critical nodes will need to continue
providing their traditional functions as
well as new functions and capabilities
required in a future grid.
The SSPS Roadmap will present a
path for the strategic integration of high
voltage power electronic converters in
substations to provide enhanced
capabilities and support the evolution of
the grid. Ultimately envisioned as a
modular, scalable, flexible, and
adaptable power block that can be used
within all substations, SSPS converters
will serve as power routers or hubs that
have the capability to electrically isolate
system components and provide
bidirectional alternating current or
direct current power flow control from
one or more sources to one or more
loads—indifferent to magnitude and
frequency. Deployment of SSPS
technology within substations can
facilitate evolution of the grid by
enabling better asset utilization,
increasing system efficiency, enhancing
security and resilience, and easing the
integration of distributed energy
resources and microgrids.
II. Request for Information
The draft SSPS Roadmap was
developed by the OE Transformer
Resilience and Advanced Components
program with support from the
Savannah River National Laboratory.
The roadmap is structured to provide
the context, rationale, and potential
benefits of utilizing SSPS technology,
and articulates a research and
development pathway to accelerate
maturation of SSPS. It aims to capture
the state-of-the-art in critical enabling
technologies, highlight research gaps
and opportunities, and align disparate
activities across the stakeholder
communities to realize the SSPS vision.
This RFI provides the public,
industry, and interested stakeholders,
the opportunity to play an important
role in defining and refining the SSPS
vision and the potential technology
development pathway. The intent of
this RFI is to solicit input concerning
the benefits offered by SSPS technology,
the application areas where SSPS
technology can provide a value
proposition, the current state-of-the-art,
and the gaps that are most critical to fill.
The information obtained will be public
and is meant to be used by DOE to guide
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:54 Mar 22, 2018
Jkt 244001
and inform research and development
activities. Please provide your
comments next to the relevant questions
in the Excel spreadsheet and supporting
information if noted, including studies,
reports, references, data, and examples
relevant to SSPS.
SSPS Roadmap Questions
Chapter 1–2: Introduction and
Conventional Substations
What issues and concerns not
captured in the roadmap most deeply
impact the ability of substations to meet
the demands of an evolving grid? What
are additional challenges faced by
utilities that would necessitate power
electronic converters in substations?
Are there any other issues or
comments regarding these Chapters?
Chapter 3–4: Solid State Power
Substations and SSPS Technology
Development Pathway
Is there evidence of a growing need
for power electronic converters in
substations? If so, in what capacity?
What specific challenges would the use
of power electronic converters address?
Comments are requested on the SSPS
vision and the three classification of
SSPS converters articulated in the
roadmap, as well as on the defining
feature and functions and the voltage
and power ratings.
Comments are requested on the SSPS
technology development pathway
presented in the roadmap. For each
classification of SSPS converters, are
there other potential applications that
have not been captured?
What are additional benefits of using
SSPS converters that should be
captured?
Are there any other issues or
comments regarding these Chapters?
Chapter 5: SSPS Technology Challenges,
Gaps, and Goals
Comments are requested on the R&D
challenges identified in the roadmap
and their associated goals. Are they
sufficiently aggressive and appropriate
to realize the defining feature and
functions for each classification of SSPS
converter? What R&D challenges not yet
identified would prevent SSPS
technologies from being realized, as
envisioned? For these additional R&D
challenges, what would be the
associated goals for each classification
of SSPS converter?
Comments are requested on the stateof-the-art and the research gaps
identified in the roadmap for each of the
R&D challenges. What on-going work,
that can be publicly shared, should be
reflected in the state-of-the-art? What
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
additional gaps needs to be highlighted
to address the R&D challenges
identified? What specific actions will
need to be taken in the near-, mid-, and
long-term to sufficiently address the
gaps identified?
What additional non-technical
challenges are there that would prevent
SSPS converters from being accepted by
industry? What additional standards
would be relevant to SSPS technology,
as envisioned? What are potential
market or regulatory barriers that will
need to be addressed?
Are there any other issues or
comments regarding this Chapter?
General Comments
Comments are requested on the
technology topic described in the
roadmap. What is the appropriate
Federal role in advancing this
technology area? What are some
organizational roles in helping to
advance this technology concept? What
amount of resources would be required
to fully implement the roadmap?
Issued in Washington, DC, on March 16,
2018.
Bruce Walker,
Assistant Secretary, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of Electricity Delivery and
Energy Reliability.
[FR Doc. 2018–05940 Filed 3–22–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Case No. 2017–011]
Notice of Petition for Waiver of Big Ass
Solutions (BAS) From the Department
of Energy Ceiling Fan Test Procedure,
and Grating of Interim Waiver
Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Notice of petition for waiver,
notice of grant of an interim waiver, and
request for comments.
AGENCY:
This notice announces receipt
of and publishes a petition for waiver
from Big Ass Solutions (BAS) seeking an
exemption from specified portions of
the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)
test procedure for determining the
efficiency of ceiling fans under
appendix U (appendix U). BAS seeks to
use an alternate test procedure to
address issues involved in testing
certain basic models identified in its
petition. According to BAS, testing at
low speed for the low-speed smalldiameter ceiling fan basic models
identified in the petition, may cause
BAS undue hardship in meeting the
stability requirements contained in
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\23MRN1.SGM
23MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 57 / Friday, March 23, 2018 / Notices
appendix U. Consequently, BAS
recommended relaxing the low speed
stability criteria from DOE’s
requirement of 5 percent to 10 percent.
This notice also grants BAS an interim
waiver from the DOE’s ceiling fan test
procedure for its specified basic models,
subject to use of the alternative test
procedure as set forth in this notice.
DOE solicits comments, data, and
information concerning BAS’s petition
and its suggested alternate test
procedure.
DOE will accept comments, data,
and information with respect to the BAS
petition until April 23, 2018.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by case number ‘‘2017–011’’,
and Docket number ‘‘EERE–2017–BT–
WAV–0049,’’ by any of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Email: BASFan2017WAV0049@
ee.doe.gov. Include the case number
[Case No. 2017–011] in the subject line
of the message. 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. Lucy deButts, U.S.
Department of Energy, Building
Technologies Office, Mailstop EE–5B,
Petition for Waiver Case No. 2017–011,
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.
• Hand Delivery/Courier: Appliance
and Equipment Standards Program, U.S.
Department of Energy, Building
Technologies Office, 950 L’Enfant Plaza
SW, Room 6055, Washington, DC 20024.
Please submit one signed original paper
copy.
Docket: The docket, which includes
Federal Register notices, comments,
and other supporting documents/
materials, is available for review at
https://www.regulations.gov. All
documents in the docket are listed in
the https://www.regulations.gov index.
However, some documents listed in the
index, such as those containing
information that is exempt from public
disclosure, may not be publicly
available.
The docket Web page can be found at
https://www.regulations.gov/#!docket
Detail;D=EERE-2017-BT-WAV-0049.
The docket Web page will contain
simple instruction on how to access all
documents, including public comments,
in the docket.
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with NOTICES
DATES:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:54 Mar 22, 2018
Jkt 244001
Ms.
Lucy deButts, U.S. Department of
Energy, Building Technologies Office,
Mailstop EE–5B, 1000 Independence
Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585–
0121. Email: AS_Waiver_Request@
ee.doe.gov.
Elizabeth Kohl, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of the General Counsel,
Mail Stop GC–33, Forrestal Building,
1000 Independence Avenue SW,
Washington, DC 20585–0103. E-mail:
Elizabeth.Kohl@hq.doe.gov. Telephone
202–586–7796.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
I. Background and Authority
Title III, Part B 1 of the Energy Policy
and Conservation Act of 1975 (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 that includes
ceiling fans that are the subject of this
notice.2 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 measuring energy efficiency,
energy use, or estimated operating costs
during a representative average use
cycle or period of use, and that are not
unduly burdensome to conduct. (42
U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) The test procedure for
ceiling fans is contained in 10 CFR part
430, subpart B, appendix U (referred to
in this notice as ‘‘appendix U’’).
DOE’s regulations set forth at 10 CFR
430.27 contain provisions that allow a
person to seek a waiver from the test
procedure requirements for a particular
basic model of a type of covered product
when: The basic model for which the
petition for waiver was submitted
contains one or more design
characteristics that (1) prevent testing
according to the prescribed test
procedure, or (2) cause the prescribed
test procedure to 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(a)(1). A petitioner must include
in its petition any alternate test
procedures known to the petitioner to
evaluate the basic model in a manner
representative of its energy
1 For editorial reasons, upon codification in the
U.S. Code, Part B was re-designated Part A.
2 All references to EPCA in this document refer
to the statute as amended through the Energy
Efficiency Improvement Act of 2015 (EEIA), Public
Law 114–11 (April 30, 2015).
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
12727
consumption characteristics. 10 CFR
430.27(b)(1)(iii).
DOE may grant a waiver subject to
conditions, including adherence to
alternate test procedures. 10 CFR
430.27(f)(2). As soon as practicable after
the granting of any waiver, DOE will
publish in the Federal Register a notice
of proposed rulemaking to amend its
regulations so as to eliminate any need
for the continuation of such waiver. As
soon thereafter as practicable, DOE will
publish in the Federal Register a final
rule. 10 CFR 430.27(l).
The waiver process also allows DOE
to grant an interim waiver if it appears
likely that the petition for waiver will be
granted and/or if DOE determines that it
would be desirable for public policy
reasons to grant immediate relief
pending a determination on the petition
for waiver. 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
and Application for Interim Waiver
On June 14, 2017, BAS filed a petition
for waiver and an application for
interim waiver from the test procedure
applicable to ceiling fans set forth in 10
CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix U.
According to BAS, testing at low speed
for the basic models listed in the
petition,3 may cause BAS undue
hardship in meeting the requirements of
the stability requirements contained in
appendix U. Consequently, in its
petition, BAS offered two alternate test
procedures for determining the stability
criteria for testing low-speed smalldiameter ceiling fans at low speed: (1)
BAS’s preferred method, which would
require BAS to employ a stability
criteria using airflow instead of air
velocity measurements, and (2) BAS’s
alternate method, which would require
relaxing the low speed stability criteria
from DOE’s requirement of 5 percent to
10 percent. BAS initially stated that this
second method is not preferred because
it could add significant variability to the
3 The specific basic models for which the petition
applies are ceiling fan basic models Isis F–IS2–
0601S4 and Isis F–IS2–0601. These basic model
names were provided by BAS in its June 2017
petition.
E:\FR\FM\23MRN1.SGM
23MRN1
12728
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 57 / Friday, March 23, 2018 / Notices
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with NOTICES
calculated airflow on low speed. BAS
also requests an interim waiver from the
existing DOE test procedure.
However, by email dated December 6,
2017, BAS withdrew their preferred
method for modifying the stability
criteria from consideration. Instead,
BAS requested that DOE consider their
alternative method as their
recommendation for the alternate test
procedure.4
DOE understands that the basic
models identified in BAS’s petition
cannot be tested under the DOE test
procedure because at the lower
operating speeds for these fans, air
speed is so low that the acceptable
variance under the stability criteria
(often less than 2 feet per minute) falls
below the required accuracies for air
velocity sensors in section 3.2 of the
DOE test procedure. DOE also
understands that absent an interim
waiver, BAS’s products cannot be tested
and rated according to the DOE test
procedure, and BAS is unable to
advertise performance data for these
models. DOE has reviewed the alternate
procedure suggested by BAS and
concludes that relaxing the stability
criteria for low speed will allow for the
accurate measurement of efficiency of
these products, while alleviating the
testing problems associated with BAS’s
implementation of ceiling fan testing for
the basic models specified in its
petition. Further discussion on DOE’s
review of the alternate test procedure
are provided in section IV of this notice.
Consequently, DOE has determined that
BAS’s petition for waiver will likely be
granted. Furthermore, DOE has
determined that it is desirable for public
policy reasons to grant BAS immediate
relief pending a determination of the
petition for waiver.
III. Summary of Grant of an Interim
Waiver
DOE has reviewed the manufacturer
specifications and test data provided by
BAS and agrees that it demonstrates that
the basic models specified in the
petition cannot be tested under the DOE
test procedure because, when testing the
basic models at low speed, the air speed
is so low that the acceptable variance
under the stability criteria (often less
than 2 feet per minute) falls below the
required accuracies for air velocity
sensors in section 3.2 of the DOE test
procedure. DOE compared BAS’s test
data to DOE’s own test data from
previous rulemakings and observed that
the air velocities at low speed for the
4 A copy of the email is available at
regulations.gov, under docket number EERE–2017–
BT–WAV–0049.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:54 Mar 22, 2018
Jkt 244001
new BAS basic models are much lower
than the test data previously evaluated.
DOE’s understanding is that the primary
purpose of low speed for the basic
models included in BAS’s petition is to
mix air in the room. Achieving the
desired mixing effect requires much
lower airflow that creates highly
variable airflow patterns in the room.
These atypically variable airflow
patterns make it hard for the ceiling fan
to achieve the stability criteria required
by the DOE test procedure.
For the reasons stated above, DOE is
granting BAS’s application for interim
waiver from testing for its specified
ceiling fan basic models. The substance
of DOE’s Interim Waiver Order is
summarized.
BAS is required to use the alternate
test procedure set forth in this notice to
test and rate the ceiling fan basic models
listed in the petition (Isis F–IS2–
0601S4, Isis F–IS2–0601, Isis F–IS2–
0401L8S4, Isis F–IS2–0401L8, Isis F–
IS2–0401I06L8S4, Isis F–IS2–
0401I06L8, Isis F–IS2–0501L8S4 and
Isis F–IS2–0501L8). BAS is permitted to
make representations about the ceiling
fan efficiency of these basic models for
compliance, marketing, or other
purposes to the extent that such
products have been tested in accordance
with the provisions set forth in the
alternate test procedure and such
representations fairly disclose the
results of such testing in accordance
with 10 CFR 429.32.
DOE makes decisions on waivers and
interim waivers for only those basic
models specifically set out in the
petition, not future models that may be
manufactured by the petitioner. BAS
may request that DOE extend the scope
of a waiver or an interim waiver to
include additional basic models
employing the same technology as the
basic model(s) set forth in the original
petition consistent with 10 CFR
430.27(g). 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. See also 10 CFR 430.27(a)
and (i).
The interim waiver shall remain in
effect consistent with the provisions of
10 CFR 430.27(h). Furthermore, this
interim waiver is conditioned upon the
presumed validity of statements,
representations, and documents
provided by the petitioner. DOE may
rescind or modify a waiver or interim
waiver at any time upon a
determination that the factual basis
underlying the petition for waiver or
interim waiver is incorrect, or upon a
determination that the results from the
alternate test procedure are
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
unrepresentative of the basic model’s
true energy consumption characteristics.
See 10 CFR 430.27(k)(1). Similarly, BAS
may request that DOE rescind or modify
a waiver or interim waiver if BAS
discovers an error or determines that the
waiver is no longer necessary or for
other appropriate reasons. 10 CFR
430.27(k)(2).
IV. Alternate Test Procedure
Under EPCA, manufacturers may not
make representations with respect to the
energy use or efficiency of a covered
product unless the basic model has been
tested in accordance with the applicable
DOE test procedure and the
representation fairly discloses the
results of such testing. (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 the regulations
applicable to waivers from applicable
test procedures at 10 CFR 430.27, DOE
will consider setting an alternate test
procedure for BAS in a subsequent
Decision and Order.
In its petition, BAS proposes that the
basic models listed in the petition be
tested according to the test procedure
for ceiling fans prescribed by DOE at 10
CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix U,
except that the stability criteria at low
speed for low-speed small-diameter
ceiling fans be modified to either of the
recommended alternate test procedures
as follows:
(1) Replace the stability criteria to
allow a percentage variation around
airflow, instead of average air velocity,
between two consecutive tests.
Therefore, the suggested test procedure
should instead state: ‘‘In a successive set
of measurements, the lower recorded
value for airflow multiplied by 1.03 is
greater than or equal to the higher
recorded value for airflow, or these
airflow measurements vary less than 15
cfm’’ (preferred), OR
(2) Relax the current low speed
stability criteria tolerances such that the
average air velocity measurements for
each sensor varies by less than 10
percent, instead of 5 percent, compared
to the average air velocity measured for
the same sensor in a successive set of air
velocity measurements (alternative).
However, by email dated December 6,
2017, BAS withdrew their preferred
method for modifying the stability
criteria. Instead, BAS requested that
DOE consider their alternative method
as their recommendation for the
alternate test procedure.
E:\FR\FM\23MRN1.SGM
23MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 57 / Friday, March 23, 2018 / Notices
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with NOTICES
DOE reviewed both alternate test
procedures and preliminarily concluded
that the BAS alternate test procedure of
applying stability criteria to airflow
instead of air velocity could allow a
greater variation in airflow and
efficiency results between multiple tests
of the same fan. Under the current DOE
test procedure, air velocity is measured
at each sensor along the sensor arm, and
airflow is calculated based on these
measurements. The air velocity
measurements indicate both the amount
and location of air provided by the fan
within the effective area (i.e., the air
profile). DOE found that large variations
in air profile often indicate test room
instability (e.g., localized temperature
gradients that effect airflow). Applying
stability criteria to the air velocity
measurements ensures that successive
sets of measurements result in similar
air profiles, which is indicative of test
room stability. On the other hand, DOE
observed that stability criteria applied
only to airflow could be met with large
variations in air profile (i.e., at unstable
test room conditions). This allows for
airflow, and in turn fan efficiency, to
vary significantly between multiple tests
of the same fan because stable airflow
can be achieved at varied test room
conditions.
DOE also evaluated whether increased
tolerances for the air velocity stability
criteria for low speed tests could be
used to reduce test burden without
materially affecting the results of the
test procedure. Specifically, DOE used
test data from the previous rulemaking
to compare the airflow and efficiency
results using the current test procedure
and the alternate test procedure. DOE
found that increasing the stability
criteria to 10 percent for low speed
would allow more fans to meet the
stability criteria and reduce the number
of successive measurements needed to
do so without materially changing the
efficiency results of the test procedure.
Under this approach, the section of the
test procedure would read as follows:
3.3.2 Airflow and Power Consumption
Testing Procedure
Measure the airflow (CFM) and power
consumption (W) for HSSD ceiling fans
until stable measurements are achieved,
measuring at high speed only. Measure
the airflow and power consumption for
LSSD ceiling fans until stable
measurements are achieved, measuring
first at low speed and then at high
speed. Airflow and power consumption
measurements are considered stable for
high speed if:
(1) The average air velocity for all
axes for each sensor varies by less than
5% compared to the average air velocity
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:54 Mar 22, 2018
Jkt 244001
measured for that same sensor in a
successive set of air velocity
measurements, and
(2) Average power consumption
varies by less than 1% in a successive
set of power consumption
measurements.
Airflow and power consumption
measurements are considered stable for
low speed if:
(1) The average air velocity for all
axes for each sensor varies by less than
10% compared to the average air
velocity measured for that same sensor
in a successive set of air velocity
measurements, and
(2) Average power consumption
varies by less than 1% in a successive
set of power consumption
measurements.
V. Summary and Request for Comments
Through this notice, DOE announces
receipt of BAS’s petition for waiver from
the DOE test procedure for certain basic
models of BAS ceiling fans, and grants
BAS an interim waiver from the test
procedure for the ceiling fan basic
models listed in BAS’s petition. DOE is
publishing BAS’s petition for waiver
pursuant to 10 CFR 439.27(b)(1)(iv).
BAS provided confidential performance
information that is not included in this
notice.
DOE solicits comments from
interested parties on all aspects of the
petition, including the alternate test
procedures offered by the petitioner.
DOE seeks comment on whether either
of BAS’ alternative test procedures
would more accurately or fully comply
with the EPCA test procedure
requirements that a test procedure
measure the energy use or energy
efficiency of ceiling fans during a
representative use cycle or period of
use, and not be unduly burdensome to
conduct. DOE seeks comment on
whether the alternate test procedure of
applying stability criteria to airflow
instead of air velocity a greater variation
in airflow and efficiency results
between multiple tests of the same fan.
DOE also seeks comment on whether
use of the test method specified in this
interim waiver would result in
variability in the calculated airflow, and
if so, to what extent.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 430.27(d), 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 Taylor
Sawyer ,
Big Ass Solutions, 2348 Innovation
Drive, Lexington, KY 40511. All
comment submissions to DOE must
include the Case Number 2017–011 for
this proceeding. Submit electronic
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
12729
comments in 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).
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 two copies: One copy of
the document including all the
information believed to be confidential,
and one copy of the document with the
information believed to be confidential
deleted. DOE will make its own
determination about the confidential
status of the information and treat it
according to its determination.
Issued in Washington, DC, on March 16,
2018.
Kathleen B. Hogan,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy
Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy.
Big Ass Solutions
2348 Innovation Drive
Lexington, KY 40511
Contact: Taylor Sawyer. (859) 629–
6203/tsawyer@bigasssolutions.com
June 14, 2017
Via Electronic Mail
Submitted To:
Mr. John Cymbalsky
Ms. Ashley Armstrong
Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy
Building Technologies Program
EE–2J U.S. Department of Energy
1000 Independence Avenue SW
Washington, DC, 20585
AS_Waiver_Requests@ee.doe.gov
Submitted by:
Big Ass Solutions
2348 Innovation Drive
Lexington, KY 40511
Contact: Taylor Sawyer. (859) 629–
6203/tsawyer@bigasssolutions.com
Re: Petition to waive select provisions
under Test Procedures for Ceiling Fans
Dear Mr. Cymbalsky and Ms.
Armstrong,
Big Ass Solutions respectfully
requests a waiver of one element in the
Test Procedures for Ceiling Fans,
finalized by DOE on July 25, 2016. The
compliance date for representations
made with respect to the energy use or
efficiency of ceiling fans under this final
rule was January 23, 2017. The docket
number is EERE–2013–BT–TP–0050.
It has come to our attention that the
stability requirements contained in the
E:\FR\FM\23MRN1.SGM
23MRN1
12730
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 57 / Friday, March 23, 2018 / Notices
final test procedure, when tested at low
speed for certain small-diameter ceiling
fan models, may cause Big Ass
Solutions undue hardship in meeting
the requirements of the test procedure.
Details
The final rule includes a specification
for the stability criteria of the sensors
used on small-diameter ceiling fans to
evaluate airflow and power
consumption:
Airflow and power consumption
measurements are considered stable
if: (1) the average air velocity for all
axes for each sensor varies by less
than 5% compared to the average
air velocity measured for that same
sensor in a successive set of air
velocity measurements, and (2)
average power consumption varies
by less than 1% in a successive set
of power consumption
measurements.
When Big Ass Solutions initiated
testing, we discovered that we are
unable to meet this stability requirement
at the lower operating speeds of a
certain fan containing design
characteristics that prevent testing per
the current DOE test procedures. The
average air speed is so low, that the
acceptable variance under the stability
criteria above is often less than 2 feet
per minute, which falls below the
required accuracies for airflow sensors
that is stated in section 3.2 of the Final
Rule. The measured velocity at this
point also falls below the calibrated
ranges of our two models of airflow
sensors, (∼30¥1969 fpm) and (∼30¥196
fpm), which are in accordance with the
requirements of the DOE test method
and similar to sensors used at other
small-diameter fan test labs. We have
run several different tests and
contracted an independent test lab to
conduct additional testing, and all
testing appears to have the same issue
with stability at very low airspeeds,
even with the use of two sets of sensors
with different calibrated ranges.
An example test for stability we have
conducted is as follows:
DOE TEST METHOD FOR LSSD
[Fans Stability Verification]
Average air velocity (fpm)
Sensor
Average
1a
1 ...........................................
2 ...........................................
3 ...........................................
4 ...........................................
5 ...........................................
6 ...........................................
7 ...........................................
8 ...........................................
9 ...........................................
10 .........................................
BAF1114
BAF1119
BAF1115
BAF1122
BAF1118
BAF1110
BAF1113
BAF1121
BAF1111
BAF1120
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with NOTICES
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:54 Mar 22, 2018
Jkt 244001
1b
13.27
13.29
13.35
13.27
15.42
15.02
13.10
11.17
7.77
16.12
While we are moving forward with
testing on other BAS products not
affected by this issue, the potential for
future innovative fan products with
blade spans under 7ft to become
burdened by this may be substantial.
Big Ass Solutions currently
manufactures a series of affected smalldiameter HVLS fans with a blade spans
of 6ft and markets them as Isis model
Big Ass Fans. The two basic model Big
Ass Fans found below, have physical
and mechanical characteristics that
14.55
14.74
13.44
13.56
15.80
14.01
13.24
14.71
12.52
19.57
13.91
14.02
13.39
13.41
15.61
14.52
13.17
12.94
10.15
17.85
meet the criteria for LSSD ceiling fan
blade thickness and tip speed. Big Ass
Solutions has included data detailing
the exactness of this model’s LSSD
classification eligibility.
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit—4ft, 110–125
Volt/1 Phase; Direct Mount; Plug
Winglets—F–IS2–0401L8S4
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit—4ft, 110–125
Volt/1 Phase—F–IS2–0401L8
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit—4′6″, 110–125
Volt/1 Phase; Plug Winglets—F–IS2–
0401I06L8S4
PO 00000
Stability?
0.95 ≤ (a/b)
≤1.05
a/b
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4725
0.91
0.90
0.99
0.98
0.98
1.07
0.99
0.76
0.62
0.82
Yes ...............
Yes ...............
Yes ...............
Yes ...............
Yes ...............
Yes ...............
Yes ...............
No ................
No ................
No ................
Range (fpm)
1.39
1.40
1.34
1.34
1.56
1.45
1.32
1.29
1.01
1.78
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit—4′6″, 110–125
Volt/1 Phase—F–IS2–0401I06L8
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit—5ft, 110–125
Volt/1 Phase; Plug Winglets—F–IS2–
0501L8S4
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit—5ft, 110–125
Volt/1 Phase—F–IS2–0501L8
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit—6ft, 110–125
Volt/1 Phase; Plug Winglets—F–IS2–
0601S4
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit—6ft, 110–125
Volt/1 Phase—F–IS2–0601
E:\FR\FM\23MRN1.SGM
23MRN1
EN23MR18.014
Sensor position
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 57 / Friday, March 23, 2018 / Notices
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with NOTICES
Other affected parties
This requirement does not affect
large-diameter fans or high speed smalldiameter ceiling fans. Furthermore, this
problem consistently appears only at
our lower operating speeds. Because our
lowest operating speed is designed for
mixing of air, without causing a draft, in
the winter and the typical 3 speed fan
is designed to provide cooling at the
lowest speed, our fan produces a much
lower airspeed on low than the average
fan on the market.
While there is only a small number of
known manufacturers who have had
their comments to the DOE on this
matter published, we expect additional
fan manufacturers with products where
the speed of the air exiting the fan is not
intended to provide cooling are likely to
encounter this issue in their respective
tests. The product class that is most
likely to encounter this issue is the
‘‘LSSD’’ fan class. The manufacturers of
LSSD fans include, but are not limited
to:
Aertron Pty., Ltd.
Air Comfort Products
Air Cool Industrial
American-De Rosa Lamparts DBA
Luminance
Artisan Industrial Company, Ltd. China
Canarm, Ltd.
Casablanca Fan Company
Champ-Ray Industrial Company, Ltd
Chien Luen Industries (Zhongshan), Ltd.
Collins Company, Ltd.
Craftmade
Electric
Emerson Ceiling Fans
Fanim Industries
Fanimation
Generation Brands
Halsey Enterprise Company, Ltd.
Hong Kong China Electric Manufacture
Company, Ltd.
Hunter Fan Company
J & P Manufacturing
Kendal Lighting Inc.
Kichler Lighting
King of Fans
Landmark Enterprise, Inc.
Litex Industries Luminance
Madison Avenue Lighting & Fan
Company
Maxim Lighting International, Inc.
Minka Group
Modern Fan Company
Orient Electric
Pacific Coast Lighting, Inc.
Pan Air Electric Company, Ltd.
Progress Lighting
Quorum International
Regency Ceiling Fans
Royal Pacific
Savoy House Lighting
Shell Electric Manufacturing (H.K.)
Company, Ltd.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:54 Mar 22, 2018
Jkt 244001
Tai-Der Electric Manufacturer Company,
Ltd.
The Modern Fan Company Inc.
Torch Lighting, Ltd.
Vaxcel International
Ventamatic, Ltd.
Westinghouse Lighting
YuYuan, Ltd.
Zhongshan Hongwei Motor
Manufacturing Company
Zhongshan Weihe Electrical Appliances
Company, Ltd.
Zhongshan Zhifa Electrical Appliances
Company, Ltd.
What is the impact on Big Ass
Solutions?
Without a waiver or modification of
the stability requirement for low speed
air movement, the BAS fan models
named above cannot be tested per
federal standards.
Thus, Big Ass Solutions’ current
products are unable to pass the stability
requirements at low speeds and in these
cases, the entirety of the product test
will be considered inadequate under the
DOE rulemaking. Big Ass Solutions
received from DOE a 180 day extension
on Test Procedure compliance, so our
compliance date is July 22, 2017. For
our products unable to satisfy the DOE
test procedures, BAS will not be able to
advertise performance data for these
products into the US market after July
22nd.
Suggested correction/alternative
procedure
Big Ass Solutions recommends
modifying the stability requirement
with a process of comparing the airflow
between two consecutive tests. This
would replace the comparison of
measured air speed on a senor by sensor
basis which is problematic for the
turbulent airflow generated by ceiling
fans.
For example, in two successive tests
Sensor 3 may show a reduction in
airflow whereas Sensor 4 registers an
increase, but the total airflow is the
same between the tests. Instead of
achieving stability based on average air
velocity per each individual sensor
position, Big Ass Solutions recommends
basing the stability criteria on airflow.
For example, on the high speed test the
lower airflow from two consecutive test
runs shall be within 3% of the higher
aiflow.
BAS proposes the aforementioned
basic models be tested according to the
test procedure prescribed by DOE at 10
CFR 430, Subpart B, Appendix U, but
using the following alternative
definition for stability:
‘‘In a successive set of
measurements, the lower recorded
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
12731
value for airflow multiplied by 1.03
is greater than or equal to the
higher recorded value for airflow,
or these airflow measurements vary
less than 15 cfm’’
Alternatively, DOE could maintain
the original methodology and simply
relax the low speed stability
requirement to 10%. However, this
method is not preferred as it could add
significant variability to the calculated
airflow on low speed. An example of the
relaxed low speed stability requirement
is provided below:
‘‘(1) The average air velocity for
all axes for each sensor varies by
less than 5% for high speed and 10%
for low speed compared to the
average air velocity measured for
that same sensor’’
Closing
It is our sincere intent to comply with
the new test requirements, and we
appreciate DOE’s efforts to consider
input from Big Ass Solutions as part of
their stakeholder engagement process.
We also appreciate DOE’s efforts so far
to resolve this isolated but impactful
difficulty in the final rule.
Thank you for your consideration and
we are available to answer any
questions you may have.
Sincerely,
Taylor Sawyer
Government Affairs Director
Big Ass Solutions
Big Ass Solutions
2348 Innovation Drive
Lexington, KY 40511
Contact: Taylor Sawyer. (859) 629–
6203/tsawyer@bigasssolutions.com
June 14, 2017
Via Electronic Mail
Submitted To:
Mr. John Cymbalsky
Ms. Ashley Armstrong
Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy
Building Technologies Program
EE–2J U.S. Department of Energy
1000 Independence Avenue SW
Washington, DC, 20585
AS_Waiver_Requests@ee.doe.gov
Submitted by:
Big Ass Solutions
2348 Innovation Drive
Lexington, KY 40511
Contact: Taylor Sawyer. (859) 629–
6203/tsawyer@bigasssolutions.com
Re: Petition to waive select provisions
under Test Procedures for Ceiling Fans
Dear Mr. Cymbalsky and Ms.
Armstrong,
Big Ass Solutions respectfully
requests an interim waiver of one
E:\FR\FM\23MRN1.SGM
23MRN1
12732
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 57 / Friday, March 23, 2018 / Notices
element in the Test Procedures for
Ceiling Fans, finalized by DOE on July
25, 2016. The compliance date for
representations made with respect to the
energy use or efficiency of ceiling fans
under this final rule was January 23,
2017. The docket number is EERE-2013BT-TP-0050.
It has come to our attention that the
stability requirements contained in the
final test procedure, when tested at low
speed for certain small-diameter ceiling
fan models, may cause Big Ass
Solutions undue hardship in meeting
the requirements of the test procedure.
Therefore, we request an interim waiver
so that product testing can proceed and
regular operations can continue as DOE
considers our application for the
permanent waiver.
Details
The final rule includes a specification
for the stability criteria of the sensors
used on small-diameter ceiling fans to
evaluate airflow and power
consumption:
Airflow and power consumption
measurements are considered stable
if: (1) the average air velocity for all
axes for each sensor varies by less
than 5% compared to the average
air velocity measured for that same
sensor in a successive set of air
velocity measurements, and (2)
average power consumption varies
by less than 1% in a successive set
of power consumption
measurements.
When Big Ass Solutions initiated
testing, we discovered that we are
unable to meet this stability requirement
at the lower operating speeds of a
certain fan containing design
characteristics that prevent testing per
the current DOE test procedures. The
average air speed is so low, that the
acceptable variance under the stability
criteria above is often less than 2 feet
per minute, which falls below the
required accuracies for airflow sensors
that is stated in section 3.2 of the Final
Rule. The measured velocity at this
point also falls below the calibrated
ranges of our two models of airflow
sensors, (∼30—1969 fpm) and (∼30—196
fpm), which are in accordance with the
requirements of the DOE test method
and similar to sensors used at other
small-diameter fan test labs. We have
run several different tests and
contracted an independent test lab to
conduct additional testing, and all
testing appears to have the same issue
with stability at very low airspeeds,
even with the use of two sets of sensors
with different calibrated ranges.
An example test for stability we have
conducted is as follows:
DOE TEST METHOD FOR LSSD
[Fans Stability Verification]
Average air velocity (fpm)
Sensor position
Sensor
Average
1a
1 ...................................
2 ...................................
3 ...................................
4 ...................................
5 ...................................
6 ...................................
7 ...................................
8 ...................................
9 ...................................
10 .................................
.
BAF1114
BAF1119
BAF1115
BAF1122
BAF1118
BAF1110
BAF1113
BAF1121
BAF1111
BAF1120
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with NOTICES
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:54 Mar 22, 2018
Jkt 244001
1b
13.27
13.29
13.35
13.27
15.42
15.02
13.10
11.17
7.77
16.12
While we are moving forward with
testing on other BAS products not
affected by this issue, the potential for
future innovative fan products with
blade spans under 7ft to become
burdened by this may be substantial.
Big Ass Solutions currently
manufactures a series of affected smalldiameter HVLS fans with a blade spans
of 6ft and markets them as Isis model
Big Ass Fans. The two basic model Big
Ass Fans found below, have physical
and mechanical characteristics that
14.55
14.74
13.44
13.56
15.80
14.01
13.24
14.71
12.52
19.57
13.91
14.02
13.39
13.41
15.61
14.52
13.17
12.94
10.15
17.85
meet the criteria for LSSD ceiling fan
blade thickness and tip speed. Big Ass
Solutions has included data detailing
the exactness of this model’s LSSD
classification eligibility.
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit—4ft, 110–125
Volt/1 Phase; Direct Mount; Plug
Winglets—F–IS2–0401L8S4
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit—4ft, 110–125
Volt/1 Phase—F–IS2–0401L8
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit—4’6’’, 110–
125 Volt/1 Phase; Plug Winglets—F–
IS2–0401I06L8S4
PO 00000
Stability?
0.95≤ (a/b)
≤1.05
a/b
Frm 00019
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
0.91
0.90
0.99
0.98
0.98
1.07
0.99
0.76
0.62
0.82
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Range
(fpm)
1.39
1.40
1.34
1.34
1.56
1.45
1.32
1.29
1.01
1.78
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit—4’6’’, 110–
125 Volt/1 Phase—F–IS2–0401I06L8
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit—5ft, 110–125
Volt/1 Phase; Plug Winglets—F–IS2–
0501L8S4
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit—5ft, 110–125
Volt/1 Phase—F–IS2–0501L8
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit—6ft, 110–125
Volt/1 Phase; Plug Winglets—F–IS2–
0601S4
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit—6ft, 110–125
Volt/1 Phase—F–IS2–0601
E:\FR\FM\23MRN1.SGM
23MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 57 / Friday, March 23, 2018 / Notices
This requirement does not affect
large-diameter fans or high speed smalldiameter ceiling fans. Furthermore, this
problem consistently appears only at
our lower operating speeds. Because our
lowest operating speed is designed for
mixing of air, without causing a draft, in
the winter and the typical 3 speed fan
is designed to provide cooling at the
lowest speed, our fan produces a much
lower airspeed on low than the average
fan on the market.
While there is only a small number of
known manufacturers who have had
their comments to the DOE on this
matter published, we expect additional
fan manufacturers with products where
the speed of the air exiting the fan is not
intended to provide cooling are likely to
encounter this issue in their respective
tests. The product class that is most
likely to encounter this issue is the
‘‘LSSD’’ fan class. The manufacturers of
LSSD fans include, but are not limited
to:
Aertron Pty., Ltd.
Air Comfort Products
Air Cool Industrial
American-De Rosa Lamparts DBA
Luminance
Artisan Industrial Company, Ltd. China
Canarm, Ltd.
Casablanca Fan Company
Champ-Ray Industrial Company, Ltd
Chien Luen Industries (Zhongshan), Ltd.
Collins Company, Ltd.
Craftmade
Electric
Emerson Ceiling Fans
Fanim Industries
Fanimation
Generation Brands
Halsey Enterprise Company, Ltd.
Hong Kong China Electric Manufacture
Company, Ltd.
Hunter Fan Company
J & P Manufacturing
Kendal Lighting Inc.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:54 Mar 22, 2018
Jkt 244001
Kichler Lighting
King of Fans
Landmark Enterprise, Inc.
Litex Industries Luminance
Madison Avenue Lighting & Fan
Company
Maxim Lighting International, Inc.
Minka Group
Modern Fan Company
Orient Electric
Pacific Coast Lighting, Inc.
Pan Air Electric Company, Ltd.
Progress Lighting
Quorum International
Regency Ceiling Fans
Royal Pacific
Savoy House Lighting
Shell Electric Manufacturing (H.K.)
Company, Ltd.
Tai-Der Electric Manufacturer Company,
Ltd.
The Modern Fan Company Inc.
Torch Lighting, Ltd.
Vaxcel International
Ventamatic, Ltd.
Westinghouse Lighting
YuYuan, Ltd.
Zhongshan Hongwei Motor
Manufacturing Company
Zhongshan Weihe Electrical Appliances
Company, Ltd.
Zhongshan Zhifa Electrical Appliances
Company, Ltd.
What is the impact on Big Ass
Solutions?
Without an interim waiver or
modification of the stability requirement
for low speed air movement, the BAS
fan models named above cannot be
tested per federal standards.
Thus, Big Ass Solutions’ current
products are unable to pass the stability
requirements at low speeds and in these
cases, the entirety of the product test
will be considered inadequate under the
DOE rulemaking. Big Ass Solutions
received from DOE a 180 day extension
on Test Procedure compliance, so our
compliance date is July 22, 2017. For
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
our products unable to satisfy the DOE
test procedures, BAS will not be able to
advertise performance data for these
products into the US market after July
22nd.
Suggested correction/alternative
procedure
Big Ass Solutions recommends
modifying the stability requirement
with a process of comparing the airflow
between two consecutive tests. This
would replace the comparison of
measured air speed on a senor by sensor
basis which is problematic for the
turbulent airflow generated by ceiling
fans.
For example, in two successive tests
Sensor 3 may show a reduction in
airflow whereas Sensor 4 registers an
increase, but the total airflow is the
same between the tests. Instead of
achieving stability based on average air
velocity per each individual sensor
position, Big Ass Solutions recommends
basing the stability criteria on airflow.
For example, on the high speed test the
lower airflow from two consecutive test
runs shall be within 3% of the higher
aiflow.
BAS proposes the aforementioned
basic models be tested according to the
test procedure prescribed by DOE at 10
CFR 430, Subpart B, Appendix U, but
using the following alternative
definition for stability:
‘‘In a successive set of
measurements, the lower recorded
value for airflow multiplied by 1.03
is greater than or equal to the
higher recorded value for airflow,
or these airflow measurements vary
less than 15 cfm’’
Alternatively, DOE could maintain
the original methodology and simply
relax the low speed stability
requirement to 10%. However, this
method is not preferred as it could add
significant variability to the calculated
airflow on low speed. An example of the
E:\FR\FM\23MRN1.SGM
23MRN1
EN23MR18.015
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with NOTICES
Other affected parties
12733
12734
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 57 / Friday, March 23, 2018 / Notices
relaxed low speed stability requirement
is provided below:
‘‘(1) The average air velocity for
all axes for each sensor varies by
less than 5% for high speed and 10%
for low speed compared to the
average air velocity measured for
that same sensor’’
Closing
It is our sincere intent to comply with
the new test requirements, and we
appreciate DOE’s efforts to consider
input from Big Ass Solutions as part of
their stakeholder engagement process.
We also appreciate DOE’s efforts so far
to resolve this isolated but impactful
difficulty in the final rule.
Thank you for your consideration and
we are available to answer any
questions you may have.
Sincerely,
Taylor Sawyer
Government Affairs Director
Big Ass Solutions
[FR Doc. 2018–05932 Filed 3–22–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
Office of Fossil Energy,
Department of Energy.
ACTION: Notice of orders.
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
AGENCY:
Notice of Orders Issued Under Section
3 of the Natural Gas Act During
February 2018
SUMMARY:
FE Docket Nos.
JORDAN COVE ENERGY
PROJECT, L.P.
SHELL NA LNG .................
EXCELERATE ENERGY
L.P.
SUMAS DRY KILNS INC ..
PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY.
CENTRAL VALLE
HERMOSO, S.A. DE
C.V.
CENTRAL LOMAS DE
REAL, S.A. DE C.V.
NORTHWEST NATURAL
GAS COMPANY.
CARGILL INCORPORATED.
IRVING OIL COMMERCIAL GP & IRVING OIL
TERMINALS OPERATIONS LLC.
SHELL ENERGY NORTH
AMERICA (US), L.P.
UPSTREAM PETROLEUM
INC.
WHITE EAGLE TRADING,
LLC.
BROOKFIELD ENERGY
MARKETING LP.
12–32–LNG
18–14–LNG
18–12–LNG
18–13–NG
17–166–NG
18–11–NG
18–10–NG
18–22–NG
17–08–NG
15–165–NG
18–17–NG
18–21–NG
18–20–NG
18–18–NG
The Office of Fossil Energy
(FE) of the Department of Energy gives
notice that during February 2018, it
issued orders granting or vacating
authority to import and export natural
gas, and to import and export liquefied
natural gas (LNG). These orders are
summarized in the attached appendix
and may be found on the FE website at
https://www.energy.gov/fe/downloads/
listing-doefe-authorizationsordersissued-2018-1. They are also available
for inspection and copying in the U.S.
Department of Energy (FE–34), Division
of Natural Gas Regulation, Office of
Regulation and International
Engagement, Office of Fossil Energy,
Docket Room 3E–033, Forrestal
Building, 1000 Independence Avenue
SW, Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586–
9478. The Docket Room is open between
the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
Issued in Washington, DC, on March 20,
2018.
Robert J. Smith,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Oil and
Natural Gas (Acting).
APPENDIX
DOE/FE ORDERS GRANTING IMPORT/EXPORT AUTHORIZATIONS
02/01/18
12–32–LNG ......
Jordan Cove Energy
Project, L.P.
4151 ..................
02/08/18
18–14–LNG ......
Shell NA LNG ...........
4152 ..................
02/08/18
18–12–LNG ......
4153 ..................
02/08/18
18–13–NG ........
Excelerate Energy
L.P.
Sumas Dry Kilns Inc
4154 ..................
02/12/18
17–166–NG ......
4155 ..................
02/15/18
18–11–NG ........
4156 ..................
02/15/18
18–10–NG ........
4157 ..................
02/28/18
18–22–NG ........
3989–A .............
02/28/18
17–08–NG ........
3765–B .............
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with NOTICES
Unnumbered .....
02/28/18
15–165–NG ......
4158 ..................
02/28/18
18–17–NG ........
4159 ..................
02/28/18
18–21–NG ........
4160 ..................
02/28/18
18–20–NG ........
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:54 Mar 22, 2018
Jkt 244001
PO 00000
Pacific Gas & Electric
Company.
Central Valle
Hermoso, S.A. de
C.V.
Central Lomas de
Real, S.A. de C.V.
Northwest Natural
Gas Company.
Cargill Incorporated ..
Irving Oil Commercial
GP & Irving Oil
Terminals Operations LLC.
Shell Energy North
America (US), L.P.
Upstream Petroleum
Inc.
White Eagle Trading,
LLC.
Frm 00021
Fmt 4703
Order Dismissing Supplemental Comments Dismissing Request
for Extension of Time, and Dismissing Motion to File Partial
Answer.
Order 4151 granting blanket authority to import LNG from various international sources by vessel.
Order 4152 granting blanket authority to import LNG from various international sources by vessel.
Order 4153 granting blanket authority to import natural gas from
Canada.
Order 4154 granting blanket authority to import natural gas from
Canada.
Order 4155 granting blanket authority to import/export natural
gas from/to Mexico.
Order 4156 granting blanket authority to import/export natural
gas from/to Mexico.
Order 4157 granting blanket authority to import/export natural
gas from/to Canada.
Order 3989–A vacating blanket authority to import/export natural
gas from/to Canada/Mexico, and to import LNG from various
international sources by vessel.
Order 3765–B granting Request to Amend long-term authority to
import/export natural gas from/to Canada.
Order 4158 granting blanket authority to import/export
gas from/to Canada/Mexico, and to import LNG from
international sources by vessel.
Order 4159 granting blanket authority to import/export
gas from/to Canada/Mexico.
Order 4160 granting blanket authority to import/export
gas from/to Mexico.
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\23MRN1.SGM
23MRN1
natural
various
natural
natural
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 57 (Friday, March 23, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12726-12734]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-05932]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Case No. 2017-011]
Notice of Petition for Waiver of Big Ass Solutions (BAS) From the
Department of Energy Ceiling Fan Test Procedure, and Grating of Interim
Waiver
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Notice of petition for waiver, notice of grant of an interim
waiver, and request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice announces receipt of and publishes a petition for
waiver from Big Ass Solutions (BAS) seeking an exemption from specified
portions of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) test procedure for
determining the efficiency of ceiling fans under appendix U (appendix
U). BAS seeks to use an alternate test procedure to address issues
involved in testing certain basic models identified in its petition.
According to BAS, testing at low speed for the low-speed small-diameter
ceiling fan basic models identified in the petition, may cause BAS
undue hardship in meeting the stability requirements contained in
[[Page 12727]]
appendix U. Consequently, BAS recommended relaxing the low speed
stability criteria from DOE's requirement of 5 percent to 10 percent.
This notice also grants BAS an interim waiver from the DOE's ceiling
fan test procedure for its specified basic models, subject to use of
the alternative test procedure as set forth in this notice. DOE
solicits comments, data, and information concerning BAS's petition and
its suggested alternate test procedure.
DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, and information with respect to
the BAS petition until April 23, 2018.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by case number ``2017-
011'', and Docket number ``EERE-2017-BT-WAV-0049,'' by any of the
following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Email: [email protected]. Include the case
number [Case No. 2017-011] in the subject line of the message. 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. Lucy deButts, U.S. Department of Energy,
Building Technologies Office, Mailstop EE-5B, Petition for Waiver Case
No. 2017-011, 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.
Hand Delivery/Courier: Appliance and Equipment Standards
Program, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, 950
L'Enfant Plaza SW, Room 6055, Washington, DC 20024. Please submit one
signed original paper copy.
Docket: The docket, which includes Federal Register notices,
comments, and other supporting documents/materials, is available for
review at https://www.regulations.gov. All documents in the docket are
listed in the https://www.regulations.gov index. However, some documents
listed in the index, such as those containing information that is
exempt from public disclosure, may not be publicly available.
The docket Web page can be found at https://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=EERE-2017-BT-WAV-0049. The docket Web page will
contain simple instruction on how to access all documents, including
public comments, in the docket.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Lucy deButts, U.S. Department of
Energy, Building Technologies Office, Mailstop EE-5B, 1000 Independence
Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. Email:
[email protected].
Elizabeth Kohl, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General
Counsel, Mail Stop GC-33, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue
SW, Washington, DC 20585-0103. E-mail: [email protected].
Telephone 202-586-7796.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background and Authority
Title III, Part B \1\ of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of
1975 (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 that includes ceiling fans that are the
subject of this notice.\2\ 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 measuring
energy efficiency, energy use, or estimated operating costs during a
representative average use cycle or period of use, and that are not
unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) The test procedure
for ceiling fans is contained in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix U
(referred to in this notice as ``appendix U'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code,
Part B was re-designated Part A.
\2\ All references to EPCA in this document refer to the statute
as amended through the Energy Efficiency Improvement Act of 2015
(EEIA), Public Law 114-11 (April 30, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE's regulations set forth at 10 CFR 430.27 contain provisions
that allow a person to seek a waiver from the test procedure
requirements for a particular basic model of a type of covered product
when: The basic model for which the petition for waiver was submitted
contains one or more design characteristics that (1) prevent testing
according to the prescribed test procedure, or (2) cause the prescribed
test procedure to 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(a)(1). A
petitioner must include in its petition any alternate test procedures
known to the petitioner to evaluate the basic model in a manner
representative of its energy consumption characteristics. 10 CFR
430.27(b)(1)(iii).
DOE may grant a waiver subject to conditions, including adherence
to alternate test procedures. 10 CFR 430.27(f)(2). As soon as
practicable after the granting of any waiver, DOE will publish in the
Federal Register a notice of proposed rulemaking to amend its
regulations so as to eliminate any need for the continuation of such
waiver. As soon thereafter as practicable, DOE will publish in the
Federal Register a final rule. 10 CFR 430.27(l).
The waiver process also allows DOE to grant an interim waiver if it
appears likely that the petition for waiver will be granted and/or if
DOE determines that it would be desirable for public policy reasons to
grant immediate relief pending a determination on the petition for
waiver. 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 and Application for Interim
Waiver
On June 14, 2017, BAS filed a petition for waiver and an
application for interim waiver from the test procedure applicable to
ceiling fans set forth in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix U.
According to BAS, testing at low speed for the basic models listed in
the petition,\3\ may cause BAS undue hardship in meeting the
requirements of the stability requirements contained in appendix U.
Consequently, in its petition, BAS offered two alternate test
procedures for determining the stability criteria for testing low-speed
small-diameter ceiling fans at low speed: (1) BAS's preferred method,
which would require BAS to employ a stability criteria using airflow
instead of air velocity measurements, and (2) BAS's alternate method,
which would require relaxing the low speed stability criteria from
DOE's requirement of 5 percent to 10 percent. BAS initially stated that
this second method is not preferred because it could add significant
variability to the
[[Page 12728]]
calculated airflow on low speed. BAS also requests an interim waiver
from the existing DOE test procedure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The specific basic models for which the petition applies are
ceiling fan basic models Isis F-IS2-0601S4 and Isis F-IS2-0601.
These basic model names were provided by BAS in its June 2017
petition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, by email dated December 6, 2017, BAS withdrew their
preferred method for modifying the stability criteria from
consideration. Instead, BAS requested that DOE consider their
alternative method as their recommendation for the alternate test
procedure.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ A copy of the email is available at regulations.gov, under
docket number EERE-2017-BT-WAV-0049.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE understands that the basic models identified in BAS's petition
cannot be tested under the DOE test procedure because at the lower
operating speeds for these fans, air speed is so low that the
acceptable variance under the stability criteria (often less than 2
feet per minute) falls below the required accuracies for air velocity
sensors in section 3.2 of the DOE test procedure. DOE also understands
that absent an interim waiver, BAS's products cannot be tested and
rated according to the DOE test procedure, and BAS is unable to
advertise performance data for these models. DOE has reviewed the
alternate procedure suggested by BAS and concludes that relaxing the
stability criteria for low speed will allow for the accurate
measurement of efficiency of these products, while alleviating the
testing problems associated with BAS's implementation of ceiling fan
testing for the basic models specified in its petition. Further
discussion on DOE's review of the alternate test procedure are provided
in section IV of this notice. Consequently, DOE has determined that
BAS's petition for waiver will likely be granted. Furthermore, DOE has
determined that it is desirable for public policy reasons to grant BAS
immediate relief pending a determination of the petition for waiver.
III. Summary of Grant of an Interim Waiver
DOE has reviewed the manufacturer specifications and test data
provided by BAS and agrees that it demonstrates that the basic models
specified in the petition cannot be tested under the DOE test procedure
because, when testing the basic models at low speed, the air speed is
so low that the acceptable variance under the stability criteria (often
less than 2 feet per minute) falls below the required accuracies for
air velocity sensors in section 3.2 of the DOE test procedure. DOE
compared BAS's test data to DOE's own test data from previous
rulemakings and observed that the air velocities at low speed for the
new BAS basic models are much lower than the test data previously
evaluated. DOE's understanding is that the primary purpose of low speed
for the basic models included in BAS's petition is to mix air in the
room. Achieving the desired mixing effect requires much lower airflow
that creates highly variable airflow patterns in the room. These
atypically variable airflow patterns make it hard for the ceiling fan
to achieve the stability criteria required by the DOE test procedure.
For the reasons stated above, DOE is granting BAS's application for
interim waiver from testing for its specified ceiling fan basic models.
The substance of DOE's Interim Waiver Order is summarized.
BAS is required to use the alternate test procedure set forth in
this notice to test and rate the ceiling fan basic models listed in the
petition (Isis F-IS2-0601S4, Isis F-IS2-0601, Isis F-IS2-0401L8S4, Isis
F-IS2-0401L8, Isis F-IS2-0401I06L8S4, Isis F-IS2-0401I06L8, Isis F-IS2-
0501L8S4 and Isis F-IS2-0501L8). BAS is permitted to make
representations about the ceiling fan efficiency of these basic models
for compliance, marketing, or other purposes to the extent that such
products have been tested in accordance with the provisions set forth
in the alternate test procedure and such representations fairly
disclose the results of such testing in accordance with 10 CFR 429.32.
DOE makes decisions on waivers and interim waivers for only those
basic models specifically set out in the petition, not future models
that may be manufactured by the petitioner. BAS may request that DOE
extend the scope of a waiver or an interim waiver to include additional
basic models employing the same technology as the basic model(s) set
forth in the original petition consistent with 10 CFR 430.27(g). 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. See also 10 CFR 430.27(a) and (i).
The interim waiver shall remain in effect consistent with the
provisions of 10 CFR 430.27(h). Furthermore, this interim waiver is
conditioned upon the presumed validity of statements, representations,
and documents provided by the petitioner. DOE may rescind or modify a
waiver or interim waiver at any time upon a determination that the
factual basis underlying the petition for waiver or interim waiver is
incorrect, or upon a determination that the results from the alternate
test procedure are unrepresentative of the basic model's true energy
consumption characteristics. See 10 CFR 430.27(k)(1). Similarly, BAS
may request that DOE rescind or modify a waiver or interim waiver if
BAS discovers an error or determines that the waiver is no longer
necessary or for other appropriate reasons. 10 CFR 430.27(k)(2).
IV. Alternate Test Procedure
Under EPCA, manufacturers may not make representations with respect
to the energy use or efficiency of a covered product unless the basic
model has been tested in accordance with the applicable DOE test
procedure and the representation fairly discloses the results of such
testing. (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 the
regulations applicable to waivers from applicable test procedures at 10
CFR 430.27, DOE will consider setting an alternate test procedure for
BAS in a subsequent Decision and Order.
In its petition, BAS proposes that the basic models listed in the
petition be tested according to the test procedure for ceiling fans
prescribed by DOE at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix U, except
that the stability criteria at low speed for low-speed small-diameter
ceiling fans be modified to either of the recommended alternate test
procedures as follows:
(1) Replace the stability criteria to allow a percentage variation
around airflow, instead of average air velocity, between two
consecutive tests. Therefore, the suggested test procedure should
instead state: ``In a successive set of measurements, the lower
recorded value for airflow multiplied by 1.03 is greater than or equal
to the higher recorded value for airflow, or these airflow measurements
vary less than 15 cfm'' (preferred), OR
(2) Relax the current low speed stability criteria tolerances such
that the average air velocity measurements for each sensor varies by
less than 10 percent, instead of 5 percent, compared to the average air
velocity measured for the same sensor in a successive set of air
velocity measurements (alternative).
However, by email dated December 6, 2017, BAS withdrew their
preferred method for modifying the stability criteria. Instead, BAS
requested that DOE consider their alternative method as their
recommendation for the alternate test procedure.
[[Page 12729]]
DOE reviewed both alternate test procedures and preliminarily
concluded that the BAS alternate test procedure of applying stability
criteria to airflow instead of air velocity could allow a greater
variation in airflow and efficiency results between multiple tests of
the same fan. Under the current DOE test procedure, air velocity is
measured at each sensor along the sensor arm, and airflow is calculated
based on these measurements. The air velocity measurements indicate
both the amount and location of air provided by the fan within the
effective area (i.e., the air profile). DOE found that large variations
in air profile often indicate test room instability (e.g., localized
temperature gradients that effect airflow). Applying stability criteria
to the air velocity measurements ensures that successive sets of
measurements result in similar air profiles, which is indicative of
test room stability. On the other hand, DOE observed that stability
criteria applied only to airflow could be met with large variations in
air profile (i.e., at unstable test room conditions). This allows for
airflow, and in turn fan efficiency, to vary significantly between
multiple tests of the same fan because stable airflow can be achieved
at varied test room conditions.
DOE also evaluated whether increased tolerances for the air
velocity stability criteria for low speed tests could be used to reduce
test burden without materially affecting the results of the test
procedure. Specifically, DOE used test data from the previous
rulemaking to compare the airflow and efficiency results using the
current test procedure and the alternate test procedure. DOE found that
increasing the stability criteria to 10 percent for low speed would
allow more fans to meet the stability criteria and reduce the number of
successive measurements needed to do so without materially changing the
efficiency results of the test procedure. Under this approach, the
section of the test procedure would read as follows:
3.3.2 Airflow and Power Consumption Testing Procedure
Measure the airflow (CFM) and power consumption (W) for HSSD
ceiling fans until stable measurements are achieved, measuring at high
speed only. Measure the airflow and power consumption for LSSD ceiling
fans until stable measurements are achieved, measuring first at low
speed and then at high speed. Airflow and power consumption
measurements are considered stable for high speed if:
(1) The average air velocity for all axes for each sensor varies by
less than 5% compared to the average air velocity measured for that
same sensor in a successive set of air velocity measurements, and
(2) Average power consumption varies by less than 1% in a
successive set of power consumption measurements.
Airflow and power consumption measurements are considered stable
for low speed if:
(1) The average air velocity for all axes for each sensor varies by
less than 10% compared to the average air velocity measured for that
same sensor in a successive set of air velocity measurements, and
(2) Average power consumption varies by less than 1% in a
successive set of power consumption measurements.
V. Summary and Request for Comments
Through this notice, DOE announces receipt of BAS's petition for
waiver from the DOE test procedure for certain basic models of BAS
ceiling fans, and grants BAS an interim waiver from the test procedure
for the ceiling fan basic models listed in BAS's petition. DOE is
publishing BAS's petition for waiver pursuant to 10 CFR
439.27(b)(1)(iv). BAS provided confidential performance information
that is not included in this notice.
DOE solicits comments from interested parties on all aspects of the
petition, including the alternate test procedures offered by the
petitioner. DOE seeks comment on whether either of BAS' alternative
test procedures would more accurately or fully comply with the EPCA
test procedure requirements that a test procedure measure the energy
use or energy efficiency of ceiling fans during a representative use
cycle or period of use, and not be unduly burdensome to conduct. DOE
seeks comment on whether the alternate test procedure of applying
stability criteria to airflow instead of air velocity a greater
variation in airflow and efficiency results between multiple tests of
the same fan. DOE also seeks comment on whether use of the test method
specified in this interim waiver would result in variability in the
calculated airflow, and if so, to what extent.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 430.27(d), 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 Taylor Sawyer
<[email protected]>, Big Ass Solutions, 2348 Innovation
Drive, Lexington, KY 40511. All comment submissions to DOE must include
the Case Number 2017-011 for this proceeding. Submit electronic
comments in 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).
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 two copies: One copy of the document including
all the information believed to be confidential, and one copy of the
document with the information believed to be confidential deleted. DOE
will make its own determination about the confidential status of the
information and treat it according to its determination.
Issued in Washington, DC, on March 16, 2018.
Kathleen B. Hogan,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy.
Big Ass Solutions
2348 Innovation Drive
Lexington, KY 40511
Contact: Taylor Sawyer. (859) [email protected]">629-6203/[email protected]
June 14, 2017
Via Electronic Mail
Submitted To:
Mr. John Cymbalsky
Ms. Ashley Armstrong
Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
Building Technologies Program
EE-2J U.S. Department of Energy
1000 Independence Avenue SW
Washington, DC, 20585
[email protected]
Submitted by:
Big Ass Solutions
2348 Innovation Drive
Lexington, KY 40511
Contact: Taylor Sawyer. (859) [email protected]">629-6203/[email protected]
Re: Petition to waive select provisions under Test Procedures for
Ceiling Fans
Dear Mr. Cymbalsky and Ms. Armstrong,
Big Ass Solutions respectfully requests a waiver of one element in
the Test Procedures for Ceiling Fans, finalized by DOE on July 25,
2016. The compliance date for representations made with respect to the
energy use or efficiency of ceiling fans under this final rule was
January 23, 2017. The docket number is EERE-2013-BT-TP-0050.
It has come to our attention that the stability requirements
contained in the
[[Page 12730]]
final test procedure, when tested at low speed for certain small-
diameter ceiling fan models, may cause Big Ass Solutions undue hardship
in meeting the requirements of the test procedure.
Details
The final rule includes a specification for the stability criteria
of the sensors used on small-diameter ceiling fans to evaluate airflow
and power consumption:
Airflow and power consumption measurements are considered stable
if: (1) the average air velocity for all axes for each sensor varies by
less than 5% compared to the average air velocity measured for that
same sensor in a successive set of air velocity measurements, and (2)
average power consumption varies by less than 1% in a successive set of
power consumption measurements.
When Big Ass Solutions initiated testing, we discovered that we are
unable to meet this stability requirement at the lower operating speeds
of a certain fan containing design characteristics that prevent testing
per the current DOE test procedures. The average air speed is so low,
that the acceptable variance under the stability criteria above is
often less than 2 feet per minute, which falls below the required
accuracies for airflow sensors that is stated in section 3.2 of the
Final Rule. The measured velocity at this point also falls below the
calibrated ranges of our two models of airflow sensors, (~30-1969 fpm)
and (~30-196 fpm), which are in accordance with the requirements of the
DOE test method and similar to sensors used at other small-diameter fan
test labs. We have run several different tests and contracted an
independent test lab to conduct additional testing, and all testing
appears to have the same issue with stability at very low airspeeds,
even with the use of two sets of sensors with different calibrated
ranges.
An example test for stability we have conducted is as follows:
DOE Test Method for LSSD
[Fans Stability Verification]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average air velocity (fpm)
Sensor position Sensor -------------------------------- Average a/b Stability? 0.95 <= Range (fpm)
1a 1b (a/b) <=1.05
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1............................... BAF1114 13.27 14.55 13.91 0.91 Yes................ 1.39
2............................... BAF1119 13.29 14.74 14.02 0.90 Yes................ 1.40
3............................... BAF1115 13.35 13.44 13.39 0.99 Yes................ 1.34
4............................... BAF1122 13.27 13.56 13.41 0.98 Yes................ 1.34
5............................... BAF1118 15.42 15.80 15.61 0.98 Yes................ 1.56
6............................... BAF1110 15.02 14.01 14.52 1.07 Yes................ 1.45
7............................... BAF1113 13.10 13.24 13.17 0.99 Yes................ 1.32
8............................... BAF1121 11.17 14.71 12.94 0.76 No................. 1.29
9............................... BAF1111 7.77 12.52 10.15 0.62 No................. 1.01
10.............................. BAF1120 16.12 19.57 17.85 0.82 No................. 1.78
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
While we are moving forward with testing on other BAS products not
affected by this issue, the potential for future innovative fan
products with blade spans under 7ft to become burdened by this may be
substantial.
Big Ass Solutions currently manufactures a series of affected
small-diameter HVLS fans with a blade spans of 6ft and markets them as
Isis model Big Ass Fans. The two basic model Big Ass Fans found below,
have physical and mechanical characteristics that meet the criteria for
LSSD ceiling fan blade thickness and tip speed. Big Ass Solutions has
included data detailing the exactness of this model's LSSD
classification eligibility.
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit--4ft, 110-125 Volt/1 Phase; Direct Mount; Plug
Winglets--F-IS2-0401L8S4
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit--4ft, 110-125 Volt/1 Phase--F-IS2-0401L8
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit--4'6'', 110-125 Volt/1 Phase; Plug Winglets--
F-IS2-0401I06L8S4
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit--4'6'', 110-125 Volt/1 Phase--F-IS2-0401I06L8
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit--5ft, 110-125 Volt/1 Phase; Plug Winglets--F-
IS2-0501L8S4
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit--5ft, 110-125 Volt/1 Phase--F-IS2-0501L8
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit--6ft, 110-125 Volt/1 Phase; Plug Winglets--F-
IS2-0601S4
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit--6ft, 110-125 Volt/1 Phase--F-IS2-0601
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN23MR18.014
[[Page 12731]]
Other affected parties
This requirement does not affect large-diameter fans or high speed
small-diameter ceiling fans. Furthermore, this problem consistently
appears only at our lower operating speeds. Because our lowest
operating speed is designed for mixing of air, without causing a draft,
in the winter and the typical 3 speed fan is designed to provide
cooling at the lowest speed, our fan produces a much lower airspeed on
low than the average fan on the market.
While there is only a small number of known manufacturers who have
had their comments to the DOE on this matter published, we expect
additional fan manufacturers with products where the speed of the air
exiting the fan is not intended to provide cooling are likely to
encounter this issue in their respective tests. The product class that
is most likely to encounter this issue is the ``LSSD'' fan class. The
manufacturers of LSSD fans include, but are not limited to:
Aertron Pty., Ltd.
Air Comfort Products
Air Cool Industrial
American-De Rosa Lamparts DBA Luminance
Artisan Industrial Company, Ltd. China
Canarm, Ltd.
Casablanca Fan Company
Champ-Ray Industrial Company, Ltd
Chien Luen Industries (Zhongshan), Ltd.
Collins Company, Ltd.
Craftmade
Electric
Emerson Ceiling Fans
Fanim Industries
Fanimation
Generation Brands
Halsey Enterprise Company, Ltd.
Hong Kong China Electric Manufacture Company, Ltd.
Hunter Fan Company
J & P Manufacturing
Kendal Lighting Inc.
Kichler Lighting
King of Fans
Landmark Enterprise, Inc.
Litex Industries Luminance
Madison Avenue Lighting & Fan Company
Maxim Lighting International, Inc.
Minka Group
Modern Fan Company
Orient Electric
Pacific Coast Lighting, Inc.
Pan Air Electric Company, Ltd.
Progress Lighting
Quorum International
Regency Ceiling Fans
Royal Pacific
Savoy House Lighting
Shell Electric Manufacturing (H.K.) Company, Ltd.
Tai-Der Electric Manufacturer Company, Ltd.
The Modern Fan Company Inc.
Torch Lighting, Ltd.
Vaxcel International
Ventamatic, Ltd.
Westinghouse Lighting
YuYuan, Ltd.
Zhongshan Hongwei Motor Manufacturing Company
Zhongshan Weihe Electrical Appliances Company, Ltd.
Zhongshan Zhifa Electrical Appliances Company, Ltd.
What is the impact on Big Ass Solutions?
Without a waiver or modification of the stability requirement for
low speed air movement, the BAS fan models named above cannot be tested
per federal standards.
Thus, Big Ass Solutions' current products are unable to pass the
stability requirements at low speeds and in these cases, the entirety
of the product test will be considered inadequate under the DOE
rulemaking. Big Ass Solutions received from DOE a 180 day extension on
Test Procedure compliance, so our compliance date is July 22, 2017. For
our products unable to satisfy the DOE test procedures, BAS will not be
able to advertise performance data for these products into the US
market after July 22nd.
Suggested correction/alternative procedure
Big Ass Solutions recommends modifying the stability requirement
with a process of comparing the airflow between two consecutive tests.
This would replace the comparison of measured air speed on a senor by
sensor basis which is problematic for the turbulent airflow generated
by ceiling fans.
For example, in two successive tests Sensor 3 may show a reduction
in airflow whereas Sensor 4 registers an increase, but the total
airflow is the same between the tests. Instead of achieving stability
based on average air velocity per each individual sensor position, Big
Ass Solutions recommends basing the stability criteria on airflow. For
example, on the high speed test the lower airflow from two consecutive
test runs shall be within 3% of the higher aiflow.
BAS proposes the aforementioned basic models be tested according to
the test procedure prescribed by DOE at 10 CFR 430, Subpart B, Appendix
U, but using the following alternative definition for stability:
``In a successive set of measurements, the lower recorded value for
airflow multiplied by 1.03 is greater than or equal to the higher
recorded value for airflow, or these airflow measurements vary less
than 15 cfm''
Alternatively, DOE could maintain the original methodology and
simply relax the low speed stability requirement to 10%. However, this
method is not preferred as it could add significant variability to the
calculated airflow on low speed. An example of the relaxed low speed
stability requirement is provided below:
``(1) The average air velocity for all axes for each sensor varies
by less than 5% for high speed and 10% for low speed compared to the
average air velocity measured for that same sensor''
Closing
It is our sincere intent to comply with the new test requirements,
and we appreciate DOE's efforts to consider input from Big Ass
Solutions as part of their stakeholder engagement process. We also
appreciate DOE's efforts so far to resolve this isolated but impactful
difficulty in the final rule.
Thank you for your consideration and we are available to answer any
questions you may have.
Sincerely,
Taylor Sawyer
Government Affairs Director
Big Ass Solutions
Big Ass Solutions
2348 Innovation Drive
Lexington, KY 40511
Contact: Taylor Sawyer. (859) [email protected]">629-6203/[email protected]
June 14, 2017
Via Electronic Mail
Submitted To:
Mr. John Cymbalsky
Ms. Ashley Armstrong
Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
Building Technologies Program
EE-2J U.S. Department of Energy
1000 Independence Avenue SW
Washington, DC, 20585
[email protected]
Submitted by:
Big Ass Solutions
2348 Innovation Drive
Lexington, KY 40511
Contact: Taylor Sawyer. (859) [email protected]">629-6203/[email protected]
Re: Petition to waive select provisions under Test Procedures for
Ceiling Fans
Dear Mr. Cymbalsky and Ms. Armstrong,
Big Ass Solutions respectfully requests an interim waiver of one
[[Page 12732]]
element in the Test Procedures for Ceiling Fans, finalized by DOE on
July 25, 2016. The compliance date for representations made with
respect to the energy use or efficiency of ceiling fans under this
final rule was January 23, 2017. The docket number is EERE-2013-BT-TP-
0050.
It has come to our attention that the stability requirements
contained in the final test procedure, when tested at low speed for
certain small-diameter ceiling fan models, may cause Big Ass Solutions
undue hardship in meeting the requirements of the test procedure.
Therefore, we request an interim waiver so that product testing can
proceed and regular operations can continue as DOE considers our
application for the permanent waiver.
Details
The final rule includes a specification for the stability criteria
of the sensors used on small-diameter ceiling fans to evaluate airflow
and power consumption:
Airflow and power consumption measurements are considered stable
if: (1) the average air velocity for all axes for each sensor varies by
less than 5% compared to the average air velocity measured for that
same sensor in a successive set of air velocity measurements, and (2)
average power consumption varies by less than 1% in a successive set of
power consumption measurements.
When Big Ass Solutions initiated testing, we discovered that we are
unable to meet this stability requirement at the lower operating speeds
of a certain fan containing design characteristics that prevent testing
per the current DOE test procedures. The average air speed is so low,
that the acceptable variance under the stability criteria above is
often less than 2 feet per minute, which falls below the required
accuracies for airflow sensors that is stated in section 3.2 of the
Final Rule. The measured velocity at this point also falls below the
calibrated ranges of our two models of airflow sensors, (~30--1969 fpm)
and (~30--196 fpm), which are in accordance with the requirements of
the DOE test method and similar to sensors used at other small-diameter
fan test labs. We have run several different tests and contracted an
independent test lab to conduct additional testing, and all testing
appears to have the same issue with stability at very low airspeeds,
even with the use of two sets of sensors with different calibrated
ranges.
An example test for stability we have conducted is as follows:
Doe Test Method for LSSD
[Fans Stability Verification]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average air velocity (fpm) Stability?
Sensor position Sensor -------------------------------- Average a/b 0.95<= (a/b) Range (fpm)
1a 1b <=1.05
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1....................................... BAF1114 13.27 14.55 13.91 0.91 Yes 1.39
2....................................... BAF1119 13.29 14.74 14.02 0.90 Yes 1.40
3....................................... BAF1115 13.35 13.44 13.39 0.99 Yes 1.34
4....................................... BAF1122 13.27 13.56 13.41 0.98 Yes 1.34
5....................................... BAF1118 15.42 15.80 15.61 0.98 Yes 1.56
6....................................... BAF1110 15.02 14.01 14.52 1.07 Yes 1.45
7....................................... BAF1113 13.10 13.24 13.17 0.99 Yes 1.32
8....................................... BAF1121 11.17 14.71 12.94 0.76 No 1.29
9....................................... BAF1111 7.77 12.52 10.15 0.62 No 1.01
10...................................... BAF1120 16.12 19.57 17.85 0.82 No 1.78
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
While we are moving forward with testing on other BAS products not
affected by this issue, the potential for future innovative fan
products with blade spans under 7ft to become burdened by this may be
substantial.
Big Ass Solutions currently manufactures a series of affected
small-diameter HVLS fans with a blade spans of 6ft and markets them as
Isis model Big Ass Fans. The two basic model Big Ass Fans found below,
have physical and mechanical characteristics that meet the criteria for
LSSD ceiling fan blade thickness and tip speed. Big Ass Solutions has
included data detailing the exactness of this model's LSSD
classification eligibility.
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit--4ft, 110-125 Volt/1 Phase; Direct Mount; Plug
Winglets--F-IS2-0401L8S4
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit--4ft, 110-125 Volt/1 Phase--F-IS2-0401L8
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit--4'6'', 110-125 Volt/1 Phase; Plug Winglets--
F-IS2-0401I06L8S4
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit--4'6'', 110-125 Volt/1 Phase--F-IS2-0401I06L8
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit--5ft, 110-125 Volt/1 Phase; Plug Winglets--F-
IS2-0501L8S4
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit--5ft, 110-125 Volt/1 Phase--F-IS2-0501L8
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit--6ft, 110-125 Volt/1 Phase; Plug Winglets--F-
IS2-0601S4
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit--6ft, 110-125 Volt/1 Phase--F-IS2-0601
[[Page 12733]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN23MR18.015
Other affected parties
This requirement does not affect large-diameter fans or high speed
small-diameter ceiling fans. Furthermore, this problem consistently
appears only at our lower operating speeds. Because our lowest
operating speed is designed for mixing of air, without causing a draft,
in the winter and the typical 3 speed fan is designed to provide
cooling at the lowest speed, our fan produces a much lower airspeed on
low than the average fan on the market.
While there is only a small number of known manufacturers who have
had their comments to the DOE on this matter published, we expect
additional fan manufacturers with products where the speed of the air
exiting the fan is not intended to provide cooling are likely to
encounter this issue in their respective tests. The product class that
is most likely to encounter this issue is the ``LSSD'' fan class. The
manufacturers of LSSD fans include, but are not limited to:
Aertron Pty., Ltd.
Air Comfort Products
Air Cool Industrial
American-De Rosa Lamparts DBA Luminance
Artisan Industrial Company, Ltd. China
Canarm, Ltd.
Casablanca Fan Company
Champ-Ray Industrial Company, Ltd
Chien Luen Industries (Zhongshan), Ltd.
Collins Company, Ltd.
Craftmade
Electric
Emerson Ceiling Fans
Fanim Industries
Fanimation
Generation Brands
Halsey Enterprise Company, Ltd.
Hong Kong China Electric Manufacture Company, Ltd.
Hunter Fan Company
J & P Manufacturing
Kendal Lighting Inc.
Kichler Lighting
King of Fans
Landmark Enterprise, Inc.
Litex Industries Luminance
Madison Avenue Lighting & Fan Company
Maxim Lighting International, Inc.
Minka Group
Modern Fan Company
Orient Electric
Pacific Coast Lighting, Inc.
Pan Air Electric Company, Ltd.
Progress Lighting
Quorum International
Regency Ceiling Fans
Royal Pacific
Savoy House Lighting
Shell Electric Manufacturing (H.K.) Company, Ltd.
Tai-Der Electric Manufacturer Company, Ltd.
The Modern Fan Company Inc.
Torch Lighting, Ltd.
Vaxcel International
Ventamatic, Ltd.
Westinghouse Lighting
YuYuan, Ltd.
Zhongshan Hongwei Motor Manufacturing Company
Zhongshan Weihe Electrical Appliances Company, Ltd.
Zhongshan Zhifa Electrical Appliances Company, Ltd.
What is the impact on Big Ass Solutions?
Without an interim waiver or modification of the stability
requirement for low speed air movement, the BAS fan models named above
cannot be tested per federal standards.
Thus, Big Ass Solutions' current products are unable to pass the
stability requirements at low speeds and in these cases, the entirety
of the product test will be considered inadequate under the DOE
rulemaking. Big Ass Solutions received from DOE a 180 day extension on
Test Procedure compliance, so our compliance date is July 22, 2017. For
our products unable to satisfy the DOE test procedures, BAS will not be
able to advertise performance data for these products into the US
market after July 22nd.
Suggested correction/alternative procedure
Big Ass Solutions recommends modifying the stability requirement
with a process of comparing the airflow between two consecutive tests.
This would replace the comparison of measured air speed on a senor by
sensor basis which is problematic for the turbulent airflow generated
by ceiling fans.
For example, in two successive tests Sensor 3 may show a reduction
in airflow whereas Sensor 4 registers an increase, but the total
airflow is the same between the tests. Instead of achieving stability
based on average air velocity per each individual sensor position, Big
Ass Solutions recommends basing the stability criteria on airflow. For
example, on the high speed test the lower airflow from two consecutive
test runs shall be within 3% of the higher aiflow.
BAS proposes the aforementioned basic models be tested according to
the test procedure prescribed by DOE at 10 CFR 430, Subpart B, Appendix
U, but using the following alternative definition for stability:
``In a successive set of measurements, the lower recorded value for
airflow multiplied by 1.03 is greater than or equal to the higher
recorded value for airflow, or these airflow measurements vary less
than 15 cfm''
Alternatively, DOE could maintain the original methodology and
simply relax the low speed stability requirement to 10%. However, this
method is not preferred as it could add significant variability to the
calculated airflow on low speed. An example of the
[[Page 12734]]
relaxed low speed stability requirement is provided below:
``(1) The average air velocity for all axes for each sensor varies
by less than 5% for high speed and 10% for low speed compared to the
average air velocity measured for that same sensor''
Closing
It is our sincere intent to comply with the new test requirements,
and we appreciate DOE's efforts to consider input from Big Ass
Solutions as part of their stakeholder engagement process. We also
appreciate DOE's efforts so far to resolve this isolated but impactful
difficulty in the final rule.
Thank you for your consideration and we are available to answer any
questions you may have.
Sincerely,
Taylor Sawyer
Government Affairs Director
Big Ass Solutions
[FR Doc. 2018-05932 Filed 3-22-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P