Energy Conservation Program: Decision and Order Granting a Waiver to LG Electronics USA, Inc. From the Department of Energy Portable Air Conditioner Test Procedure, 33643-33655 [2020-11765]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
33643
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 2, 2020 / Notices
SAMPLE FIRST-YEAR MONTHLY REPAYMENT AMOUNTS FOR A MARRIED OR HEAD-OF-HOUSEHOLD BORROWER—
Continued
Family size = 3
AGI
Plan
100,000
PAYE ....................
REPAYE ...............
10-Year Standard
ICR .......................
IBR ........................
PAYE ....................
REPAYE ...............
10-Year Standard
[FR Doc. 2020–11818 Filed 6–1–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
[Docket No.: ED–2020–SCC–0080]
Agency Information Collection
Activities; Submission to the Office of
Management and Budget for Review
and Approval; Comment Request;
Native American Language (NAL@ED)
Application Package
Office of Elementary and
Secondary Education (OESE),
Department of Education (ED).
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, ED is
proposing a reinstatement of a
previously approved information
collection.
DATES: Interested persons are invited to
submit comments on or before July 2,
2020.
ADDRESSES: Written comments and
recommendations for proposed
information collection requests should
be sent within 30 days of publication of
this notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/
do/PRAMain. Find this particular
information collection request by
selecting ‘‘Department of Education’’
under ‘‘Currently Under Review,’’ then
check ‘‘Only Show ICR for Public
Comment’’ checkbox.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
specific questions related to collection
activities, please contact Donna SabisBurns, 202–453–7077.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Department of Education (ED), in
accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general
public and Federal agencies with an
opportunity to comment on proposed,
revised, and continuing collections of
information. This helps the Department
assess the impact of its information
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:46 Jun 01, 2020
$20,000
Jkt 250001
$40,000
0
0
888
0
0
0
0
1,110
62
62
888
305
93
62
62
1,110
collection requirements and minimize
the public’s reporting burden. It also
helps the public understand the
Department’s information collection
requirements and provide the requested
data in the desired format. ED is
soliciting comments on the proposed
information collection request (ICR) that
is described below. The Department of
Education is especially interested in
public comment addressing the
following issues: (1) Is this collection
necessary to the proper functions of the
Department; (2) will this information be
processed and used in a timely manner;
(3) is the estimate of burden accurate;
(4) how might the Department enhance
the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (5) how
might the Department minimize the
burden of this collection on the
respondents, including through the use
of information technology. Please note
that written comments received in
response to this notice will be
considered public records.
Title of Collection: Native American
Language (NAL@ED) Application
Package.
OMB Control Number: 1810–0731.
Type of Review: A reinstatement of a
previously approved information
collection.
Respondents/Affected Public: State,
Local, and Tribal Governments.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Responses: 50.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Burden Hours: 1,500.
Abstract: On February 27, 2020
Department of Education (Department)
published in the Federal Register a
Notice of Proposed Priorities for the
Native American Language Program
(NAL@ED) (Vol. 85, No. 39, pages
11322–11329). The priorities,
requirements, definitions, and selection
criteria are proposed to foster the
development, improvement, expansion,
or maintenance of programs that
support elementary or secondary
schools in using Native American and
Alaska Native languages as the primary
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
$60,000
$80,000
229
229
888
638
343
229
229
1,110
$100,000
395
395
888
971
593
395
395
1,110
562
562
888
1,120
843
562
562
1,110
language of instruction. At the time the
notice of proposed priorities was
published, no Information Collection
Request was submitted. We are
publishing a separate 30-day Federal
Register notice to solicit public
comment on the paperwork burden
now. This is a request for a
reinstatement with change of a
previously approved information
collection request. The previous
application was used to implement the
first NAL@ED competition under the
statutory changes made to the
Elementary and Secondary Education
Act by the Every Student Succeeds Act,
under a wavier of rulemaking (section
437(d)(1) of the General Education
Provisions Act).
Dated: May 28, 2020.
Kate Mullan,
PRA Coordinator, Strategic Collections and
Clearance Governance and Strategy Division,
Office of Chief Data Officer.
[FR Doc. 2020–11884 Filed 6–1–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Case Number 2018–004; EERE–2018–BT–
WAV–0007]
Energy Conservation Program:
Decision and Order Granting a Waiver
to LG Electronics USA, Inc. From the
Department of Energy Portable Air
Conditioner Test Procedure
Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Notice of decision and order.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Department of
Energy (‘‘DOE’’) gives notice of a
Decision and Order (Case Number
2018–004) that grants LG Electronics
USA, Inc. (‘‘LG’’) a waiver from
specified portions of the DOE test
procedure for determining the energy
efficiency of listed portable air
conditioner basic models. Under the
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\02JNN1.SGM
02JNN1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
33644
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 2, 2020 / Notices
Decision and Order, LG is required to
test and rate the listed basic models of
its portable air conditioners in
accordance with the alternate test
procedure specified in the Decision and
Order.
DATES: The Decision and Order is
effective on June 2, 2020. The Decision
and Order will terminate upon the
compliance date of any future
amendment to the test procedure for
portable air conditioners located in 10
CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix CC
that addresses the issues presented in
this waiver. At that time, LG must use
the relevant test procedure for this
product for any testing to demonstrate
compliance with standards and any
representations of energy use.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ms. Lucy deButts, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Building
Technologies Office, EE–5B, 1000
Independence Avenue SW, Washington,
DC, 20585–0121. Email: AS_Waiver_
Requests@ee.doe.gov.
Ms. Sarah Butler, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of the General Counsel,
GC–33, Forrestal Building, 1000
Independence Avenue SW, Washington,
DC 20585–0103. Telephone: (202) 586–
1777. Email: Sarah.Butler@hq.doe.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In
accordance with Title 10 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (‘‘CFR’’) (10 CFR
430.27(f)(2)), DOE gives notice of the
issuance of its Decision and Order as set
forth below. The Decision and Order
grants LG a waiver from the applicable
test procedure in 10 CFR part 430,
subpart B, appendix CC (‘‘Appendix
CC’’) for listed basic models of portable
air conditioners, if LG tests and rates
those portable air conditioners using the
alternate test procedure specified in the
Decision and Order. LG’s
representations concerning the energy
efficiency of the listed basic models
must be based on testing according to
the provisions and restrictions in the
alternate test procedure set forth in the
Decision and Order, and the
representations must fairly disclose the
test results. Distributors, retailers, and
private labelers also must comply with
the same requirements when making
representations regarding the energy
efficiency of these products. (42 U.S.C.
6293(c))
Consistent with 10 CFR 430.27(j), not
later than August 3, 2020, any
manufacturer currently distributing in
commerce in the United States a
product employing a technology or
characteristic that results in the same
need for a waiver from the applicable
test procedure must submit a petition
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:46 Jun 01, 2020
Jkt 250001
for waiver. Manufacturers not currently
distributing such products in commerce
in the United States must petition for
and be granted a waiver prior to the
distribution in commerce of those
products in the United States.
Manufacturers may also submit a
request for interim waiver pursuant to
the requirements of 10 CFR 430.27.
Signing Authority
This document of the Department of
Energy was signed on May 8, 2020, by
Alexander N. Fitzsimmons, Deputy
Assistant Secretary for Energy
Efficiency, pursuant to delegated
authority from the Secretary of Energy.
That document with the original
signature and date is maintained by
DOE. For administrative purposes only,
and in compliance with requirements of
the Office of the Federal Register, the
undersigned DOE Federal Register
Liaison Officer has been authorized to
sign and submit the document in
electronic format for publication, as an
official document of the Department of
Energy. This administrative process in
no way alters the legal effect of this
document upon publication in the
Federal Register.
Signed in Washington, DC, on May 8, 2020.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S.
Department of Energy.
Case #2018–004
Decision and Order
I. Background and Authority
The Energy Policy and Conservation
Act (‘‘EPCA’’),1 authorizes the U.S.
Department of Energy (‘‘DOE’’) to
regulate the energy efficiency of a
number of consumer products and
certain industrial equipment. (42 U.S.C.
6291–6317) Title III, Part B 2 of EPCA
established the Energy Conservation
Program for Consumer Products Other
Than Automobiles, which sets forth a
variety of provisions designed to
improve energy efficiency for certain
types of consumer products. In addition
to specifying a list of covered products
and industrial equipment, EPCA
contains provisions that enable the
Secretary of Energy to classify
additional types of consumer products
as covered products. (42 U.S.C.
6292(a)(20)) In a final determination of
coverage published in the Federal
Register on April 18, 2016, DOE
classified portable air conditioners as
1 All references to EPCA in this document refer
to the statute as amended through America’s Water
Infrastructure Act of 2018, Public Law 115–270
(October 23, 2018).
2 For editorial reasons, upon codification in the
U.S. Code, Part B was redesignated as Part A.
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
covered products under EPCA. 81 FR
22514.
The energy conservation program
under EPCA consists essentially of four
parts: (1) Testing, (2) labeling, (3)
Federal energy conservation standards,
and (4) certification and enforcement
procedures. Relevant provisions of
EPCA include definitions (42 U.S.C.
6291), test procedures (42 U.S.C. 6293),
labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6294),
energy conservation standards (42
U.S.C. 6295), and the authority to
require information and reports from
manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6296).
The Federal testing requirements
consist of test procedures that
manufacturers of covered products must
use as the basis for: (1) Certifying to
DOE that their products comply with
the applicable energy conservation
standards adopted pursuant to EPCA (42
U.S.C. 6295(s)), and (2) making other
representations about the efficiency of
that product (42 U.S.C. 6293(c)).
Similarly, DOE must use these test
procedures to determine whether the
product complies with relevant
standards promulgated under EPCA. (42
U.S.C. 6295(s))
Under 42 U.S.C. 6293, EPCA sets forth
the criteria and procedures DOE is
required to follow when prescribing or
amending test procedures for covered
products. EPCA requires that any test
procedures prescribed or amended
under this section must be reasonably
designed to produce test results which
reflect energy efficiency, energy use or
estimated annual operating cost of a
covered product during a representative
average use cycle or period of use and
requires that test procedures not be
unduly burdensome to conduct. (42
U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) The test procedure for
portable air conditioners is contained in
the Code of Federal Regulations (‘‘CFR’’)
at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix
CC, Uniform Test Method for Measuring
the Energy Consumption of Portable Air
Conditioners (‘‘Appendix CC’’).
Any interested person may submit a
petition for waiver from DOE’s test
procedure requirements. 10 CFR
430.27(a)(1). DOE will grant a waiver
from the test procedure requirements if
DOE determines either that the basic
model for which the waiver was
requested contains a design
characteristic that prevents testing of the
basic model according to the prescribed
test procedures, or that the prescribed
test procedures evaluate the basic model
in a manner so unrepresentative of its
true energy consumption characteristics
as to provide materially inaccurate
comparative data. 10 CFR 430.27(f)(2).
DOE may grant the waiver subject to
E:\FR\FM\02JNN1.SGM
02JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 2, 2020 / Notices
conditions, including adherence to an
alternate test procedure. Id.
II. LG’s Petition for Waiver: Assertions
and Determinations
By letter dated May 15, 2018, LG
submitted a petition for waiver and
application for an interim waiver from
the portable air conditioner test
procedure set forth in Appendix CC.3
The portable air conditioner test
procedure in Appendix CC provides test
instructions for two configurations of
portable air conditioners: dual-duct and
single-duct. Dual-duct units use two
parallel airflow paths: With the first
airflow path, air from the conditioned
space (i.e., indoors) is drawn into the
unit, passes over a cold heat exchanger
(i.e., the evaporator), and is discharged
back into the room. With the second
airflow path, air from outdoors is drawn
into the unit, passes over a hot heat
exchanger (i.e., the condenser), and is
discharged back outdoors. In this type of
system, the heat that is removed from
the indoor airflow path is essentially
transferred to the outdoor airflow path
and discharged outdoors. The
temperature of the air flowing across the
condenser significantly affects a
portable air conditioner’s cooling
capacity. Because the air passing across
the condenser is drawn from outdoors,
and outdoor air temperatures vary
during portable air conditioner use, the
cooling capacity of a dual-duct unit is
significantly affected by changes in
outdoor air temperatures. Therefore, to
produce representative test results,
Appendix CC requires dual-duct units
to be tested at two different ‘‘test
conditions’’ in the test chamber that
supplies the condenser inlet air,
representing two different outdoor
temperatures: 95 degrees Fahrenheit (°F)
and 83 °F. Under both test conditions,
the test chamber in which the unit is
installed is maintained at a temperature
of 80 °F, which is a representative
indoor temperature, and the unit is
operated at full load.4
Single-duct units also use two parallel
airflow paths; however, in contrast to
dual-duct units, the condenser airflow
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
3 LG’s
petition for a waiver and petition for an
interim waiver is provided in the docket located at:
https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE2018-BT-WAV-00007-0001.
4 The requirement in section 3.1.2 of Appendix
CC to set the controls on the unit to the lowest
available temperature setpoint applies to both the
95 °F and 83 °F tests. The lowest available setpoint
on any portable air conditioner is significantly less
than the indoor air temperature of 80 °F, which is
maintained by external reconditioning equipment
throughout the duration of the test. Therefore, since
the indoor temperature setpoint remains lower than
the indoor air temperature throughout the duration
of the test, the unit operates at full load throughout
the duration of both tests.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:46 Jun 01, 2020
Jkt 250001
path draws air from inside the
conditioned space rather than from
outside. This air is drawn into the unit
through air grates in the unit’s chassis,
passes over the condenser, and is
discharged to the outdoors through the
single duct. During the test, the indoor
air temperature remains steady, and
thus the condenser always sees the same
temperature at its inlet. Therefore,
Appendix CC requires only one test
condition for single-duct portable air
conditioners, 80 °F in the test chamber
in which the unit is installed
(corresponding to the specified indoor
air temperature). As with the dual-duct
unit tests, the single-duct unit is
operated at full load throughout the
duration of the test.
The cooling capacity of both dualduct and single-duct portable air
conditioners is reduced by the
infiltration of hotter outside air (i.e.,
‘‘infiltration air’’) into the conditioned
space due to any indoor air being
exhausted outside the conditioned
space through the condenser duct.5
Appendix CC accounts for infiltration
air at the two different outdoor
temperature operating conditions (95 °F
and 83 °F) for both single-duct and dualduct portable air conditioners. The
infiltration air heat transfer is calculated
(as opposed to being directly measured)
using a set of equations provided in
section 4.1.2 of Appendix CC. Finally,
the cooling capacity of both dual-duct
and single-duct portable air
conditioners is also reduced by the heat
transferred from the duct surface(s) to
the conditioned space; i.e., ‘‘duct heat
transfer.’’ Duct heat transfer is
accounted for in section 4.1.1 of
Appendix CC based on measurements of
the surface temperature of the duct(s)
and the total surface area of the duct(s).
LG requested a waiver for the
following portable air conditioner basic
models: LP1419IVSM, LP1419HVSM,
LP1219IVSM, LP1019IVSM, and
LP0819IVSM, all of which are singleduct models.6 LG noted that the current
DOE test procedure for portable air
conditioners has different requirements
5 ‘‘Infiltration air’’ refers to air that infiltrates from
outside the conditioned space (e.g., from outdoors,
attic, adjacent rooms) to inside the conditioned
space as a result of negative air pressure induced
as the outlet air is exhausted outside the
conditioned space. This effect is particularly
pronounced for single-duct units because singleduct units draw all of the air in the condenser
airflow path from within the conditioned space and
discharge that air outdoors. However, dual-duct
units also typically draw a portion of their inlet air
from the conditioned space (inadvertently), which
creates a slight negative pressure in the conditioned
space and results in some infiltration air for dualduct units as well.
6 LG provided these basic model numbers in an
appendix to its May 15, 2018 petition.
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
33645
for dual-duct and single-duct products.
For dual-duct products, testing must
occur under two test conditions, (i.e., at
a high-temperature test condition and a
lower-temperature test condition). For
single-duct products, the test procedure
requires testing at only a single full-load
test condition. LG asserted that the
current DOE test procedure for singleduct portable air conditioners does not
take into account the specific
performance and efficiency benefits
associated with single-duct variablespeed portable air conditioners under
part-load conditions.
LG stated that single-duct variablespeed portable air conditioners use
frequency controls to constantly adjust
the compressor rotation speed to
maintain the desired temperature in the
home without turning the motor on and
off; that the compressor responds
automatically to surrounding conditions
to operate in the most efficient possible
manner; and that this results in both
significant energy savings and faster
cooling compared to a portable air
conditioner without a variable-speed
compressor. LG asserted that, because
the DOE test procedure does not
account for the general part-load
performance benefits of single-duct
variable-speed portable air conditioners
or properly account for the favorable
difference in ‘‘cycling losses’’ 7 for
single-duct variable-speed portable air
conditioners resulting from use of
variable-speed technology, the results of
the test procedure are not representative
of the actual energy consumption of
single-duct variable-speed portable air
conditioners.
In its petition, LG requested an
alternate test procedure, which would
provide for testing the listed basic
models according to Appendix CC,
except that units of the listed singleduct variable-speed basic models would
be tested at the two test conditions
defined for dual-duct units, at two
different fixed compressor speeds;
specifically, at the high-temperature
(95 °F) outdoor air test condition with
the compressor speed set to maximum;
and at the lower-temperature (83 °F)
outdoor air test condition with the
compressor speed set to minimum. As
7 When the cooling load of the space is less than
the full cooling power of the compressor, a singlespeed compressor cycles on and off. This cycling
behavior introduces inefficiencies, i.e., ‘‘cycling
losses,’’ due to the surge in power draw at the
beginning of each ‘‘on’’ cycle, before the compressor
reaches steady-state performance. As described
above, the current DOE test procedure measures the
performance of a portable air conditioner while
operating under a full cooling load; i.e., the
compressor is operated continuously in its ‘‘on’’
state. As a result, Appendix CC does not capture
any inefficiencies due to compressor cycling.
E:\FR\FM\02JNN1.SGM
02JNN1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
33646
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 2, 2020 / Notices
discussed, the current single-duct
portable air conditioner test procedure
in Appendix CC relies on a single test
condition. LG’s suggested alternate
approach for single-duct variable-speed
portable air conditioners would involve
measuring performance at two different
outdoor temperature conditions, with
two compressor speeds, which would
reflect how a single-duct variable-speed
portable air conditioner would reduce
its compressor speed under reduced
load conditions accompanying lower
outdoor temperature operating
conditions.
Under the requested alternate test
procedure, a single-duct variable-speed
portable air conditioner unit’s final
combined energy efficiency ratio
(‘‘CEER’’) metric would be calculated by
multiplying a ‘‘performance adjustment
factor’’ by the unit’s measured weighted
CEER value (as measured according to
the existing procedure for a dual-duct
portable air conditioner at two
representative outdoor temperature test
conditions). The performance
adjustment factor would reflect the
average performance improvement,
relative to a theoretical comparable
single-duct single-speed unit, resulting
from the variable-speed unit avoiding
cycling losses associated with the lowertemperature test condition currently
used for testing dual-duct portable air
conditioners. Determining a unit’s
performance adjustment factor would
require calculating two CEER values for
a theoretical comparable single-duct
single-speed portable air conditioner
(i.e., a unit that has the same
performance as the variable-speed test
unit when operating at the full
compressor speed). The two CEER
values would reflect the unit’s
efficiency with and without efficiency
losses due to compressor cycling. The
performance adjustment factor would be
calculated as the percent change of the
weighted CEER value of the theoretical
comparable single-duct single-speed
portable air conditioner with accounting
for cycling losses compared to the
weighted CEER value of the theoretical
comparable single-duct single-speed
portable air conditioner without
accounting for cycling losses. The
performance adjustment factor
represents the difference in real-world
performance between the variable-speed
unit and an actual comparable singlespeed unit.
The requested alternate test procedure
implements a performance adjustment
factor because use of a performance
adjustment factor allows for an
appropriate comparison between a
single-duct variable-speed portable air
conditioner tested at two different
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:46 Jun 01, 2020
Jkt 250001
compressor speeds and a single-duct
single-speed portable air conditioner
tested at a single speed. The
performance adjustment factor
represents the relative benefit under the
conditions represented by the test of a
variable-speed unit’s avoidance of
compressor cycling that would
otherwise occur in a comparable singlespeed unit. Applying it to the measured
single-duct variable-speed portable air
conditioner weighted CEER accounts for
the avoidance of efficiency losses due to
cycling and provides a more appropriate
comparison to the existing CEER metric
for single-duct single-speed portable air
conditioners.
On August 9, 2019, DOE published a
notice that announced its receipt of the
petition for waiver and granted LG an
interim waiver (‘‘August 2019 Notice of
Petition for Waiver’’). 84 FR 39274. In
the August 2019 Notice of Petition for
Waiver, DOE presented LG’s claim that
the results of the test procedure in
Appendix CC are not representative of
the actual energy consumption of the
variable-speed single-duct portable air
conditioner basic models listed in LG’s
petition for waiver and LG’s requested
alternate test procedure described
above.
In the August 2019 Notice of Petition
for Waiver, DOE specified an alternate
test procedure as suggested by LG with
certain modifications and additional
requirements. First, the alternate test
procedure specified in the interim
waiver provides compressor speed
nomenclature and definitions that are
derived from those in an industry
standard for testing consumer central air
conditioning products with variablespeed compressors. DOE clarified the
low compressor speed definition to
ensure the test unit provides adequate
cooling capacity under reduced loads,
based on the expected load at those
conditions.8 Second, LG must maintain
8 The
compressor speed nomenclature and
definition clarifications are derived from Air
Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute
Standard (AHRI) 210/240–2017, ‘‘Performance
Rating of Unitary Air-conditioning & Air source
Heat Pump Equipment,’’ and adapted to apply to
portable air conditioners. Equation 11.60 in AHRI
210/240–2017 relates the building load to an AC’s
full-load cooling capacity and outdoor temperature,
and assumes full-load operation at 98 °F outdoor
temperature. DOE adjusted (i.e. normalized) this
equation to reflect full-load operation at 95 °F
outdoor temperature, to provide consistency with
the full-load test condition for portable air
conditioners. Using the adjusted equation suggests
that the representative cooling load at the 83 °F
rating condition would be 60 percent of the fullload cooling capacity for portable air conditioners.
DOE recognizes that variable-speed portable air
conditioners may use compressors that vary their
speed in discrete steps and may not be able to
operate at a speed that provides exactly 60-percent
cooling capacity; therefore, the defined cooling
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
the compressor speed required for each
test condition in accordance with the
instructions LG submitted to DOE on
July 8, 2019.9 DOE did not include
measuring performance at two different
outdoor temperature conditions, each at
a different compressor speed, as
suggested by LG. Given that the
condenser airflow path on a single-duct
unit draws air from inside the
conditioned space rather than from
outside, and the indoor air temperature
is held constant during testing, changing
the outdoor temperature conditions
between each test would add
unnecessary test burden with no impact
on test results. Therefore, DOE specified
a single temperature for only the
condenser inlet air for the two test
conditions, one at each compressor
speed, and not the outdoor air test
conditions in August 2019 Notice of
Petition for Waiver.
For the reasons explained here and in
the August 2019 Notice of Petition for
Waiver, without a waiver, the five
portable air conditioner basic models
identified in the interim waiver, to
which this Order applies, contain a
design characteristic—variable-speed
compressors—that yields test results
unrepresentative of their true energy
consumption, and thus efficiency. Thus,
DOE is requiring LG to test and rate the
five portable air conditioner basic
models identified in this Order
according to the alternate test procedure
in this Order. The alternate test
procedure in this Order is a modified
version of the procedure in the interim
waiver.
In the August 2019 Notice of Petition
for Waiver, DOE also solicited
comments from interested parties on all
aspects of the petition. Id. DOE received
comments from the Appliance
Standards Awareness Project and the
Natural Resources Defense Council,
capacity associated with the low compressor speed
is presented as a 10-percent range rather than a
single value. A 60-percent cooling load is the upper
bound of the 10-percent range defining the cooling
capacity associated with the lower compressor
speed (i.e., the range is defined as 50 to 60 percent).
This ensures that the variable-speed portable air
conditioner is capable of matching the
representative cooling load (60 percent of the
maximum) at the 83 °F rating condition, while
providing the performance benefits associated with
variable-speed operation. In contrast, if the 10percent range were to be defined as, for example,
55 to 65 percent (with 60 percent as the midpoint),
a variable-speed portable air conditioner could be
tested at 63 percent, for example, without
demonstrating that the unit is capable of
maintaining variable-speed performance down to 60
percent.
9 The instructions provided by LG were marked
as confidential and, as such, the instructions will
be treated as confidential. The document is located
in the docket at https://www.regulations.gov/
document?D=EERE-2018-BT-WAV-0007.
E:\FR\FM\02JNN1.SGM
02JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 2, 2020 / Notices
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
jointly (hereinafter the ‘‘Joint
Advocates’’); the Pacific Gas and
Electric Company, San Diego Gas and
Electric, and Southern California
Edison, commenting jointly as the
California Investor Owned Utilities
(hereinafter the ‘‘California IOUs’’); GE
Appliances, a Haier Company (‘‘GEA’’),
and the Midea America Research Center
(‘‘Midea’’). On September 27, 2019, LG
subsequently submitted a rebuttal
statement (pursuant to 10 CFR
430.27(d)(3)) in response to these
comments.10
Commenters generally agreed that the
current test procedure for portable air
conditions does not produce results
representative of the actual performance
of single-duct variable speed portable
air conditions. GEA generally supported
the need for a test procedure waiver for
portable air conditioners with variablespeed compressors, asserting that the
current test procedure is not
representative of the actual performance
of single-duct variable-speed units.
(GEA, No. 7 at p. 1) 11 Midea stated that
it fully supports granting a final waiver
to LG, subject to minor revisions that are
discussed in the following paragraphs.
(Midea, No. 8 at p. 3) The Joint
Advocates stated that they share LG’s
concern that the current test procedure
for portable air conditioners does not
capture the potential benefits of
variable-speed technology. (Joint
Advocates, No. 5 at p. 1) The California
IOUs stated that an alternate test
procedure is warranted to demonstrate
the benefits of variable-speed
compressor technology, whose primary
benefit in improving energy efficiency is
the reduction of cyclic losses.
(California IOUs, No. 6 at pp. 1–2)
The California IOUs urged DOE to
make various changes. First, they asked
DOE to ensure the test procedure was
representative of real-world use,
consistent with previously developed
concepts, and justified with data.
Second, they asked DOE to ensure the
alternate test procedure results are
comparable with existing single-speed
units, assumptions are clearly justified,
and methods are representative and
reproducible. They also asked DOE to
address a number of additional issues
10 Comments submitted by the Joint Advocates,
California IOUs, GEA, and Midea, and the rebuttal
statement submitted by LG can be accessed at:
https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EERE-2018BT-WAV-0007.
11 A notation in the form ‘‘GEA, No. 7 at p. 1’’
identifies a written comment: (1) Made by GE
Appliances, a Haier Company; (2) recorded in
document number 7 that is filed in the docket of
this waiver (Docket No. EERE–2018–BT–WAV–
0007) and available for review at https://
www.regulations.gov; and (3) which appears on
page 1 of document number 7.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:46 Jun 01, 2020
Jkt 250001
prior to granting the waiver. (California
IOUs, No. 6 at pp. 1–2)
The Joint Advocates argued that,
instead of granting a test procedure
waiver to LG to address single-duct
portable air conditioners with variablespeed compressors, DOE should instead
investigate a load-based test procedure
for all portable air conditioners to
capture part-load operation for all unit
configurations. Because the current test
procedure is a fixed-conditions test,
they argued it is not representative of
how either single-speed or variablespeed units perform in the field.
Specifically, variable-speed units are
not allowed to adjust to reduced loads,
and single-speed units do not cycle
under the current fixed-conditions test.
(Joint Advocates, No. 5 at p. 1)
In its rebuttal statement, LG stated
that granting this test procedure waiver
does not preclude DOE from
investigating a load-based test
procedure in a future portable air
conditioner test procedure rulemaking
that DOE must conduct after granting a
test procedure waiver. LG stated that the
current DOE test procedure
misrepresents the actual energy
consumption of LG’s portable air
conditioners that use variable-speed
compressors, and that denying this test
procedure waiver for these units would,
contrary to statutory requirements,
mislead consumers about the energy
efficiency of variable-speed portable air
conditioners until DOE completes a test
procedure rulemaking. LG asserted that,
because it has met all the criteria for a
test procedure waiver, DOE must grant
the waiver. (LG, No. 9, at pp. 3–4)
DOE has determined that the alternate
test procedure in the August 2019
Notice of Petition for Waiver, as
modified in this order, produces
efficiency results for variable-speed
portable air conditioners which are
comparable with the results for singlespeed units. The alternate test
procedure accomplishes this by
adjusting the efficiency rating of the
variable-speed portable air conditioner
by the amount the variable-speed unit
would outperform a theoretical
comparable single-speed unit in a
representative period of use. The
alternate test procedure is based on
industry-accepted test procedures.
Values used for the cycling loss factor
at the 83 °F test condition are based on
Air-Conditioning, Heating, and
Refrigeration Institute (‘‘AHRI’’)
Standard 210/240, ‘‘Performance Rating
of Unitary Air-conditioning & Airsource Heat Pump Equipment’’ (‘‘AHRI
Standard 210/240’’), as discussed below.
The building load calculation is widely
accepted by industry, used in AHRI
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
33647
Standard 210/240, and is constructed to
be broadly applicable to a number of
building cooling configurations. It also
specifies that the compressor speed
must be fixed at each test condition. LG
has provided DOE instructions for fixing
the compressor, to ensure that the
alternate test procedure is repeatable
and reproducible.
Portable air conditioners are tested in
psychometric chambers 12 that are
designed to maintain specific constant
temperature conditions throughout the
duration of the test (i.e., a constanttemperature test). DOE agrees that the
concept of a load-based test may be
more representative of typical portable
air conditioner operation, where the
conditions within a room vary and the
portable air conditioner operates to
maintain the room conditions based on
the set point and monitored conditions.
However, implementing a load-based
test for portable air conditioners would
present a number of significant
challenges.13 First, implementing a partload test condition would require first
determining the full cooling capacity of
a portable air conditioner unit, which is
most easily and repeatably achieved
with a constant-temperature test. In
practice, this would result in the need
for chambers to accommodate both
constant-temperature and constant-load
operation, which could require
significant chamber redesigns associated
with new or upgraded chamber
reconditioning equipment and software
adjustments. Second, the external
reconditioning equipment in existing
psychometric chambers is controlled
using software with feedback control to
maintain constant temperature
conditions. Operating the chamber to
provide a constant load—and thus
allowing the temperature to vary—
would require continuous manual
override of the software controls, thus
requiring more technician involvement,
and resulting expense, throughout the
test. Alternatively, the software controls
could be redesigned to accommodate
constant-load operation; however, this
would require significant financial and
time investments by test laboratories.
Third, the current test procedure does
not provide any requirements for the
type of instrumentation, hardware, or
other equipment that can occupy
12 A psychometric chamber uses ducts installed
on the evaporator and condenser exhausts to
measure the air-enthalpy and calculate cooling
capacity.
13 DOE found that the same challenges applied to
load-based testing for room air conditioners in
calorimeter chambers in the notice of decision and
order published on May 8, 2019, in which DOE
granted a waiver to LG for variable-speed room air
conditioners. 84 FR 20111, 20114.
E:\FR\FM\02JNN1.SGM
02JNN1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
33648
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 2, 2020 / Notices
existing chambers. The thermal mass of
such equipment inside the chamber can
affect the variation in chamber
temperature as a function of the cooling
load, and therefore could affect the test
results under a constant-load test in
which the temperature is allowed to
change. Ensuring the reproducibility of
the test would require closely specifying
every aspect of the test chamber,
including instrumentation, hardware,
and other equipment inside the test
chamber, which would increase test
burden by adding complexities to the
test method beyond what is already
specified, although DOE is unable to
exactly quantify this test burden
increase at this time, particularly given
the variability in existing test chamber
designs. Further, DOE is unable to
quantify the potential benefits of
requiring a load-based test procedure at
this time. For these reasons, DOE is not
specifying a load-based test for variablespeed portable air conditioners in this
Decision and Order. This does not
preclude DOE from considering such
testing in a future rulemaking,
particularly if industry and third-party
test laboratories were to implement
load-based testing capabilities into
psychrometric chambers, which are the
type of test chamber typically used for
portable air conditioner testing.
In addition to preferring a load-based
test, the Joint Advocates expressed
concern that the alternate test procedure
in the interim waiver does not reflect
real-world performance of variablespeed portable air conditioners, because
the compressor speeds are fixed for each
of the two test conditions (full speed at
the 95 °F condition and low speed at the
83 °F condition). The Joint Advocates
prefer capturing how the programmed
control strategies change speeds in
response to load changes and thus affect
overall efficiency. (Joint Advocates, No.
5 at pp. 1–2)
DOE agrees that variable-speed
portable air conditioners in the field are
likely to adjust their compressor speed
in real time in response to variations in
the cooling load. However, as DOE
discussed for variable-speed room air
conditioners in the May 2019 RAC
Decision and Order, because of the large
variation in cooling loads, both for
rooms within a house, and among
different housing types and
geographical areas, identifying a single
or multiple representative cooling loads
would not be feasible. (84 FR 20111,
20115) Furthermore, DOE determined in
the May RAC 2019 Decision and Order
that load-based testing would impose
undue cost and burden on
manufacturers and test laboratories due
to the unique construction and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:46 Jun 01, 2020
Jkt 250001
capabilities of existing calorimeter
chambers and unit response variability
during load-based testing. Id. DOE
concludes that the same burdens would
be imposed by load-based testing of
variable-speed portable air conditioners
in psychrometric chambers, but the
approach suggested by LG to measure
performance for a representative range
of variable-speed operation (i.e., at low
and full compressor speed under
relevant outdoor temperature operating
conditions), as modified in this order,
provides a sufficient determination of
variable-speed portable air conditioner
performance.
The Joint Advocates stated that,
according to LG, these variable-speed
portable air conditioners can operate
over a range of compressor speeds, and
if a variable-speed unit provides
sustained cooling at the high
compressor speed (i.e., at a higher
compressor speed than a comparable
single-speed unit at full-load operating
conditions), the faster cooling would
come at the expense of higher energy
consumption, an effect that would not
be captured by the waiver test
procedure. (Joint Advocates, No. 5 at
p. 2)
In its rebuttal statement, LG explained
that its variable-speed portable air
conditioners only cool the room at boost
compressor speed (i.e., a speed faster
than full speed—the speed at full-load
testing conditions) for less than 10
minutes when they begin cooling the
room, making the energy consumption
of this phase of cooling ‘‘very small’’
compared to the energy consumed
during the remainder of cooling mode
operation. LG noted that AHRI Standard
210/240 describes this operation as
‘‘boost compressor speed,’’ and that
boost compressor speed is standard at
start-up in all air conditioners with
variable-speed compressors. (LG, No. 9
at pp. 5–6)
DOE has observed that a variablespeed room air conditioner operates at
boost compressor speed to provide
initial cooling to the conditioned space
during testing. DOE expects its
experience with boost compressor speed
for variable-speed room air conditioners
to be analogous to boost compressor
speed operation in variable-speed
portable air conditioners; this
experience indicates that the amount of
energy consumed in this operation is
insignificant compared to the energy
consumed during the remainder of
cooling mode operation. As a result, the
potential improvements in test
procedure representativeness do not
warrant the additional test burden
associated with measuring variablespeed portable air conditioner
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
performance at the boost compressor
speed.
The Joint Advocates questioned what
they stated is LG’s apparent claim that
the performance of dual-duct units, but
not single-duct units, under reduced
load conditions is accounted for in the
DOE test procedure by testing at two test
conditions. The Joint Advocates,
however, assert that both dual-duct test
conditions are full-load tests, and that
Seasonally Adjusted Cooling Capacity
(‘‘SACC’’) and Combined Energy
Efficiency Ratio (‘‘CEER’’) are calculated
to provide a direct comparison between
dual-duct and single-duct units. (Joint
Advocates, No. 5 at pp. 2–3)
DOE agrees that the portable air
conditioner test procedure for dual-duct
units at Appendix CC does not measure
part-load performance. Instead, it
requires full-load tests at each test
condition, and as a result does not
account for single-speed unit cycling
under part-load conditions or variablespeed compressor speed adjustments to
match part-load conditions. However,
LG’s claims regarding the test
conditions and procedure for dual-duct
portable air conditioners are not directly
relevant to the August 2019 Notice of
Petition for Waiver and this Decision
and Order, which only address the
single-duct variable-speed portable air
conditioners listed in the LG petition for
waiver submitted on May 15, 2018.
The Joint Advocates and the
California IOUs stated that the portable
air conditioner test procedure is only
conducted at one outdoor temperature
test condition for single-duct units
because such portable air conditioners
draw condenser inlet air from the
conditioned space, so the indoor and
outdoor temperature for each test
condition should always be equal. (Joint
Advocates, No. 5 at p. 3; California
IOUs, No. 6 at p. 2) The Joint Advocates
questioned why the alternate test
procedure in the interim waiver
provides for testing single-duct variablespeed portable air conditioners at two
different condenser inlet test conditions.
(Joint Advocates, No. 5 at p. 3) The
California IOUs recommended that
these units be tested at only the single
test condition required by Appendix CC,
but with varying compressor speeds.
(California IOUs, No. 6 at p. 2)
In response to comments pertaining to
the two test conditions listed in the
August 2019 Notice of Petition for
Waiver, LG stated that while outdoor air
temperature minimally affects the
cooling capacity test measurement, it
does affect the calculation of CEER and
SACC due to the influence of infiltration
air. The outdoor air temperature affects
the magnitude of the infiltration air
E:\FR\FM\02JNN1.SGM
02JNN1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 2, 2020 / Notices
impact on portable air conditioners,
and, therefore, it is necessary to
calculate infiltration at two different test
conditions.
DOE agrees with the Joint
Commenters and the California IOUs
that the specification for condenser inlet
air found in Table 1 of the alternate test
procedure in the interim waiver should
be the same as the indoor temperature
for single-duct portable air conditioners
because the condenser inlet air for a
single-duct unit is drawn from indoors.
DOE notes that the alternate test
procedure in the interim waiver
included a note specifying that, for the
purposes of this cooling mode test
procedure, condenser inlet air is
considered the ‘‘outdoor air’’ outside of
the conditioned space. 84 FR 39274,
39277. As such, the outdoor air
temperatures of 95 °F and 83 °F shown
in Table 1 represent the outdoor
temperature operating conditions, rather
than the actual condenser inlet air test
conditions, as the column heading
would imply.14 To alleviate any
potential confusion about the
distinction between outdoor air
temperature and condenser inlet air
temperature, in this Decision and Order
DOE specifies in Table 1 of the alternate
test procedure that variable-speed
single-duct portable air conditioners
must be tested at the same condenser
inlet temperature as the indoor-side air
temperature for both test conditions
(i.e., 80 °F).
The California IOUs and Midea
suggested that the alternate calculation
for infiltration air mass flowrate is
incorrect because condenser inlet air for
a single-duct portable air conditioner is
drawn from the indoors, thus making
the infiltration air associated with
single-duct units independent of
condenser inlet air. These commenters
urged DOE to require that the mass flow
rate of infiltration air for all single-duct
portable air conditioners, including
variable-speed units, be calculated using
the existing formula in the DOE test
procedure at Appendix CC, thus
removing the terms in the mass flow
rate of infiltration air accounting for
condenser inlet air flow in the alternate
test procedure. (California IOUs, No. 6
at p. 3; Midea, No. 8 at pp. 2–3)
LG responded that the alternate
calculation in section 4.1.2 of the
interim waiver test procedure provides
the correct value for infiltration air mass
14 DOE further notes that, for a single-duct
portable air conditioner, because both the
evaporator air and condenser air are drawn from the
conditioned space through air grates that are
integral to the unit itself, the evaporator and
condenser inlet air temperature test conditions are
necessarily the same.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:46 Jun 01, 2020
Jkt 250001
flow. Because, for single-duct units, the
average volumetric flow rate of the
condenser inlet duct air is zero, the
second term of the equation, referring to
the condenser inlet duct air, is reduced
to zero. (LG, No. 9, at pp. 2, 7)
DOE agrees that the equation for
infiltration air mass flow from the
interim waiver alternate test procedure
produces the correct results when the
average volumetric flow rate of the
condenser inlet duct air is appropriately
set to zero, given that single-duct
portable air conditioners do not have a
condenser inlet duct. However, DOE
recognizes that including the condenser
inlet air term for single-duct units may
lead to confusion. To reduce the
possibility of such confusion, the
equation in the alternate test procedure
specified in this Decision and Order to
calculate the mass flow rate of
infiltration air for variable-speed singleduct portable air conditioners is based
on only the condenser exhaust air mass
flow, like the current equation for
single-speed single-duct portable air
conditioners. Because the value of the
condenser inlet air term is zero, as
explained above, this revision does not
change any values calculated using the
interim waiver alternate test procedure.
The California IOUs suggested that
DOE correct an error in the equation for
adjusted cooling capacity at the higher
outdoor temperature condition in
section 5.1 of the alternate test
procedure specified in the August 2019
Notice of Petition for Waiver. They
noted that the two adjusted cooling
capacity equations erroneously used
two different equations to calculate the
same Adjusted Cooling Capacity
(‘‘ACC’’) value (i.e., ACC83), which the
California IOUs stated should be two
different values representing the two
outdoor temperature conditions. The
California IOUs further recommended
subscripts for these two values based on
compressor speed rather than outdoor
temperature. (California IOUs, No. 6 at
p. 4)
DOE acknowledges there was a
typographical error in August 2019
Notice of Petition of Waiver. The two
equations identified by the California
IOUs calculate different adjusted
cooling capacity values (i.e., ACC95 and
ACC83), but were both labeled as
calculating ACC83. In this Decision and
Order, DOE has corrected this
typographical error and provides
additional clarification of the alternate
test procedure by implementing ‘‘Full’’
and ‘‘Low’’ subscripts to represent the
compressor speed setting for each
calculation. DOE also has standardized
subscripts accordingly throughout the
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
33649
alternate test procedure to be consistent
with this approach.
The California IOUs requested
clarification on the use of the 83 °F
outdoor temperature condition rather
than the 95 °F condition in the equation
when calculating the theoretical singlespeed unit capacity at 83 °F. The
California IOUs commented that both
conditions hold true, because capacity
is independent of the outdoor air
temperature. The California IOU’s had
similar concerns about the mass flow of
infiltration air equation, requesting
clarification as to why the mass flow
equation for the theoretical single-speed
unit at 83 °F uses the volumetric air flow
rate measured at 95 °F. (California IOUs,
No. 6 at p. 5)
As noted above, DOE recognizes that,
unlike for a dual-duct unit, for a singleduct unit, the outdoor air temperature
has no direct bearing on the cooling
capacity, because the condenser inlet air
for a single-duct unit is drawn from
within the conditioned space. DOE
notes that section 5.5.1 of the alternate
test procedure explicitly defines the
theoretical comparable single-speed
portable air conditioner capacity at the
83 °F outdoor temperature operating
condition as equal to the full-load
capacity of the variable-speed portable
air conditioner at the 95 °F outdoor
temperature operating condition
because the theoretical comparable
single-speed unit is based upon the full
compressor speed of the variable-speed
unit. DOE recognizes the confusion that
may arise from these equations. This
Decision and Order revises the
nomenclature of the two variable-speed
unit tests to refer to the compressor
speed (e.g., CapacityFull) instead of the
‘‘outdoor temperature test condition’’.
Further, in contrast to the alternate test
procedure granted in the interim waiver,
this Decision and Order specifies a
condenser inlet air temperature of
80 °F—consistent with the 80 °F
evaporator inlet air temperature—rather
than specifying condenser inlet air
temperatures of 83 °F and 95 °F for the
two test conditions. DOE maintains the
distinction between theoretical
comparable single-speed unit capacity
at 83 °F and 95 °F because the respective
adjusted cooling capacities at each of
these conditions reflect the impact of
infiltration air at these two
temperatures. While the infiltration air
mass flow rate for the theoretical
comparable single-speed unit remains
constant, the heat entering the room due
to infiltration air will differ based on the
outdoor temperature. Therefore, DOE
has provided equations for calculating
the infiltration air mass flow rates at
both temperatures for a theoretical
E:\FR\FM\02JNN1.SGM
02JNN1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
33650
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 2, 2020 / Notices
comparable single-speed portable air
conditioner.
The California IOUs requested that
the manufacturer justify the cyclic loss
factor proposed by citing references or
providing data, although they stated that
the value appears reasonable. (California
IOUs, No. 6 at p. 5)
In response to this comment, LG
noted that the cycling loss factor it
suggested in the alternate test procedure
was the value DOE provided based on
DOE’s research. (LG, No. 9, at pp. 7–8)
The cycling loss factor in the alternate
test procedure is based on the default
cycling loss factors in Section 11.2 of
AHRI Standard 210/240, an industryaccepted test procedure. The cycling
loss factor at the 83 °F condition for a
theoretical comparable single-speed
single-duct portable air conditioner is
calculated using the default cooling
degradation coefficient of 0.25, which
corresponds to a part-load (cycling loss)
factor of 0.875, as determined in Section
11.2 of AHRI Standard 210/240.
GEA commented that LG’s proposed
alternate test procedure calculates a
weighted efficiency for a unit with a
variable-speed compressor that reflects
only decreased energy use but not
reduced cooling capacity when the unit
runs at a lower speed. GEA suggested
the test procedure account for both the
reduced energy usage and the reduced
cooling capacity of a variable-speed
compressor by incorporating the
reduced cooling capacity in the SACC
calculation equations. (GEA, No. 7 at
p. 1)
GEA’s suggestion that the alternate
test procedure does not reflect
decreased cooling capacity is incorrect.
The reduced cooling capacity at the low
compressor speed is used when
calculating the adjusted cooling
capacity at the lower outdoor
temperature operating condition, ACC83,
in section 5.1 of the alternate test
procedure. This lower adjusted cooling
capacity is included in the weightedaverage overall adjusted cooling
capacity calculated in section 5.3 of the
alternate test procedure. By calculating
the adjusted cooling capacity based on
performance at both outdoor
temperature operating conditions and
compressor speeds, the alternate test
procedure accounts for not only the
reduced energy usage of the variablespeed portable air conditioner but also
the reduced cooling capacity from
operation at the low compressor speed.
For the reasons explained here and in
the August 2019 Notice of Petition for
Waiver, the basic models identified by
LG in its petition cannot be tested and
rated for energy consumption on a basis
representative of their true energy
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:46 Jun 01, 2020
Jkt 250001
consumption characteristics using
Appendix CC. DOE has reviewed the
procedure suggested by LG and
concludes that, subject to the
modifications discussed in this Decision
and Order, the test procedure in this
Decision and Order will allow for the
accurate measurement of the energy
consumption of the listed models, while
alleviating the problems associated with
testing these models following DOE’s
portable air conditioner test procedure.
LG must test and rate the five listed
portable air conditioner basic models
according to the alternate test procedure
specified in the Decision and Order.
This alternate test procedure is
substantively consistent with the
interim waiver’s alternate test procedure
but includes clarifying modifications.
Based on further review of the
alternate test procedure required under
the interim waiver order and the
comments received, the alternate test
procedure required under today’s
Decision and Order: (1) Corrects a
typographical error in the Adjusted
Cooling Capacity equations; (2) changes
certain calculated value subscripts to
refer to the compressor speed for which
the value is being calculated, rather than
the outdoor temperature test condition;
(3) specifies in Table 1 of the alternate
test procedure that single-duct portable
air conditioners are only tested at one
condenser inlet air temperature (i.e., the
indoor air temperature), although two
different outdoor temperatures are
represented by the two tests required by
the alternate test procedure, and makes
corresponding changes to references to
Table 1 throughout the text; and (4)
removes a term describing condenser
inlet air from the air infiltration mass
flow equation. DOE has determined that
these changes ensure better repeatability
and reproducibility of the alternate test
procedure, improving the
representativeness of the results. The
changes will not affect the performance
of single-duct variable-speed portable
air conditioners as measured under the
alternate test procedure specified in the
interim waiver. Below is a more detailed
discussion of each change.
DOE is changing a subscript to correct
a typographical error in the two
Adjusted Cooling Capacity equations in
section 5.1, Adjusted Cooling Capacity.
The interim waiver erroneously labeled
both calculations for the adjusted
cooling capacity at each test condition
as ACC83. This Order changes the label
in the first calculation to ACC95.
DOE is changing subscripts
throughout the alternate test procedure
to refer to specified compressor speed
instead of the outdoor temperature test
condition represented by the
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
compressor speed setting (i.e., instead of
‘‘95’’ and ‘‘83,’’ the subscripts now read
‘‘Full’’ and ‘‘Low’’). DOE made this
change to clarify the compressor speed
setting required.
DOE is revising Table 1 in the
alternate test procedure to specify that
the alternate test procedure only
requires one condenser inlet air
temperature for both tests. The
condenser inlet air temperature is the
same as the indoor air temperature
because single-duct units draw air from
the indoor room. While the outdoor
temperature test condition represented
by each test is different, it does not
directly impact the performance of a test
unit.
DOE is simplifying the equation to
calculate the mass flow rate of
infiltration air for variable-speed singleduct portable air conditioners using
only the condenser exhaust air mass
flow, reflecting the current approach for
single-speed single-duct portable air
conditioners in Appendix CC. This
revision removes a second term that
accounted for infiltration air due to
condenser inlet air, which does not
impact the mass flow rate of infiltration
air for single-duct units, because singleduct units intake condenser inlet air
from indoors, unlike dual-duct portable
air conditioners, which intake
condenser inlet air from the outdoors.
DOE further requires in this Decision
and Order, testing of the listed basic
models in accordance with the
instructions submitted by LG on July 8,
2019, regarding the compressor
frequencies and control settings used at
each test condition for each basic
model.15
This Decision and Order applies only
to the five basic models listed in the
Order and does not extend to any other
basic models. DOE evaluates and grants
waivers for only those basic models
specifically set out in the petition, not
future models that may be manufactured
by the petitioner. LG may request that
DOE extend the scope of this waiver to
include additional basic models that
employ the same technology as those
listed in the Order. 10 CFR 430.27(g).
LG may also submit another petition for
waiver from the test procedure for
additional basic models that employ a
different technology and meet the
criteria for test procedure waivers. 10
CFR 430.27(a)(1).
DOE notes that it may modify or
rescind the waiver at any time upon a
determination that the factual basis
15 The instructions provided by LG were marked
as confidential and, as such, the instructions will
be treated as confidential. The document is located
in the docket at https://www.regulations.gov/
document?D=EERE-2018-BT-WAV-0007-0002.
E:\FR\FM\02JNN1.SGM
02JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 2, 2020 / Notices
underlying the petition for waiver is
incorrect, or that the results from the
alternate test procedure are
unrepresentative of the basic models’
true energy consumption characteristics.
10 CFR 430.27(k)(1). Likewise, LG may
request that DOE rescind or modify the
waiver if the company discovers an
error in the information provided to
DOE as part of its petition, determines
that the waiver is no longer needed, or
for other appropriate reasons. 10 CFR
430.27(k)(2).
As set forth above, the test procedure
specified in this Decision and Order is
not the same as the test procedure
offered by LG. If LG believes that the
alternate test method it suggested
provides representative results and is
less burdensome than the test method
required by this Decision and Order, LG
may submit a request for modification
under 10 CFR 430.27(k)(2) that
addresses the concerns that DOE has
articulated about the procedure LG
suggested. LG may also submit another
less burdensome alternative test
procedure not expressly considered in
this notice under the same provision.
III. Consultations With Other Agencies
In accordance with 10 CFR
430.27(f)(2), DOE consulted with the
Federal Trade Commission staff
concerning the LG petition for waiver.
IV. Order
After careful consideration of all the
material that LG and commenters
submitted in this matter, it is Ordered
that:
(1) LG must, as of the date of
publication of this Order in the Federal
Register, test and rate the following
portable air conditioner basic models
with the alternate test procedure as set
forth in paragraph (2):
Brand
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
LG
LG
LG
LG
LG
Electronics
Electronics
Electronics
Electronics
Electronics
USA,
USA,
USA,
USA,
USA,
Basic model
Inc
Inc
Inc
Inc
Inc
......
......
......
......
......
LP1419IVSM
LP1419HVSM
LP1219IVSM
LP1019IVSM
LP0819IVSM
(2) The alternate test procedure for the
LG basic models listed in paragraph (1)
of this Order is the test procedure for
portable air conditioners prescribed by
DOE at appendix CC to subpart B of 10
CFR part 430 (‘‘Appendix CC’’) and 10
CFR 430.23(dd), except: (i) Determine
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:46 Jun 01, 2020
Jkt 250001
the combined energy efficiency ratio
(‘‘CEER’’) as detailed below, and (ii)
calculate the estimated annual operating
cost in 10 CFR 430.23(dd)(2) as detailed
below. In addition, for each basic model
listed in paragraph (1), maintain
compressor speeds at each test
condition and set control settings for the
variable components according to the
instructions LG submitted to DOE
(Docket No. EERE–2018–BT–WAV–
0007–0002). Upon the compliance date
of any new energy conservation
standards for portable air conditioners,
LG must report product-specific
information pursuant to 10 CFR
429.12(b)(13) and 10 CFR 429.62(b). All
other requirements of Appendix CC and
DOE’s other relevant regulations remain
applicable.
In 10 CFR 430.23, in paragraph (dd)
revise paragraph (2) to read as follows:
(2) Determine the estimated annual
operating cost for a single-duct variablespeed portable air conditioner,
expressed in dollars per year, by
multiplying the following two factors:
(i) The sum of AEC95 multiplied by
0.2, AEC83 multiplied by 0.8, and AECT
as measured in accordance with section
5.3 of appendix CC of this subpart; and
(ii) A representative average unit cost
of electrical energy in dollars per
kilowatt-hour as provided by the
Secretary.
(iii) Round the resulting product to
the nearest dollar per year.
In Appendix CC:
Add in Section 2, Definitions:
2.11 Single-speed means a type of
portable air conditioner that cannot
automatically adjust the compressor
speed based on detected conditions.
2.12 Variable-speed means a type of
portable air conditioner that can
automatically adjust the compressor
speed based on detected conditions.
2.13 Full compressor speed (full)
means the compressor speed specified
by LG (Docket No. EERE–2018–BT–
WAV–0007–0002) at which the unit
operates at full load testing conditions.
2.14 Low compressor speed (low)
means the compressor speed specified
by LG (Docket No. EERE–2018–BT–
WAV–0007–0002), at which the unit
operates at low load test conditions,
such that CapacityLow, the measured
cooling capacity at this speed at the test
condition in Table 1 of this appendix,
is no less than 50 percent and no greater
than 60 percent of CapacityFull, the
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
33651
measured cooling capacity with the full
compressor speed at the test condition
in Table 1 of this appendix.
2.15 Theoretical comparable singlespeed portable air conditioner means a
theoretical single-speed portable air
conditioner with the same cooling
capacity and electrical power input as
the single-duct variable-speed portable
air conditioner under test, with no
cycling losses considered, when
operating with the full compressor
speed and at the test conditions in Table
1 of this appendix.
Add to the end of Section 3.1.2,
Control settings:
Set the compressor speed during
cooling mode testing as described in
section 4.1 of this appendix, as
amended by this Order.
Replace Section 4.1, Cooling mode
with the following:
Cooling mode. Instead of the test
conditions in Table 3 of ANSI/AHAM
PAC–1–2015, establish the test
conditions presented in Table 1 of this
appendix. Test each sample unit twice,
once at each test condition in Table 1.
For each test condition, measure the
sample unit’s indoor room cooling
capacity and overall power input in
cooling mode in accordance with
Section 7.1.b and 7.1.c of ANSI/AHAM
PAC–1–2015 (incorporated by reference;
see § 430.3), respectively, and
determine the test duration in
accordance with Section 8.7 of ASHRAE
Standard 37–2009 (incorporated by
reference; § 430.3). Conduct the first test
in accordance with ambient conditions
for Test Condition 1 in Table 1 of this
appendix, with the compressor speed
set to full, for the duration of cooling
mode testing (CapacityFull, PFull), which
represents an outdoor temperature
operating condition of 95 °F dry-bulb
and 67 °F wet-bulb temperatures.
Conduct the second test in accordance
with the ambient conditions for Test
Condition 2, in Table 1 of this appendix,
with the compressor speed set to low,
for the duration of cooling mode testing
(CapacityLow, PLow), which represents an
outdoor temperature operating
condition of 83 °F dry-bulb and 67.5 °F
wet-bulb temperatures. Set the
compressor speed required for each test
condition in accordance with the
instructions LG submitted to DOE
(Docket No. EERE–2018–BT–WAV–
0007–0002).
E:\FR\FM\02JNN1.SGM
02JNN1
33652
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 2, 2020 / Notices
TABLE 1—EVAPORATOR AND CONDENSER (INDOOR) INLET TEST CONDITIONS
Evaporator and condenser inlet
air °F (°C)
Test condition
Dry bulb
Test Condition 1 ..........................................................................................................................
Test Condition 2 ..........................................................................................................................
Replace the provisions in Section
4.1.1, Duct Heat Transfer that follow ‘‘j
represents the condenser exhaust duct
and, for dual-duct units, the condenser
exhaust duct and the condenser inlet
duct.’’ to read as follows:
Calculate the total heat transferred
from the surface of the condenser
exhaust duct to the indoor conditioned
space while operating in cooling mode
at each test condition in Table 1 of this
appendix, as follows:
Qduct_Full = 3 × Aduct × (Tduct_Full¥Tei)
Qduct_Low = 3 × Aduct × (Tduct_Low¥Tei)
Where:
Qduct_Full and Qduct_Low = the total heat
transferred from the condenser exhaust
duct to the indoor conditioned space in
cooling mode, in Btu/h, when tested at
Test Condition 1 and Test Condition 2 in
Table 1 of this appendix, respectively.
3 = convection coefficient in Btu/h per
square foot per °F.
Aduct = surface area of the condenser exhaust
duct, in square feet.
Tduct_Full and Tduct_Low = average surface
temperature for the condenser exhaust
duct, as measured at Test Condition 1
and Test Condition 2 in Table 1 of this
appendix, respectively, as required in
section 4.1 of this appendix.
Tei = average evaporator inlet air dry-bulb
temperature, as measured in this section,
in °F.
Replace Section 4.1.2, Infiltration Air
Heat Transfer with the following:
Infiltration Air Heat Transfer.
Calculate the sample unit’s heat
contribution from infiltration air into
the conditioned space for both cooling
mode tests, which represent the 95 °F
and the 83 °F dry-bulb outdoor
temperature operating conditions, as
described in this section. Calculate the
dry air mass flow rate of infiltration air
according to the following equations:
Where:
˙ 95 and m
˙ 83 = dry air mass flow rate of
m
infiltration air, as calculated for Test
Condition 1 and Test Condition 2 in
Table 1 of this appendix, representative
of the 95 °F and 83 °F dry-bulb outdoor
temperature operating conditions,
respectively, in pounds per minute (lb/
m).
Vco_Full and Vco_Low = average volumetric
flow rate of the condenser outlet air as
determined in section 4.1 of this
appendix, during cooling mode testing
for Test Condition 1 and Test Condition
2 in Table 1 of this appendix,
respectively, in cubic feet per minute
(cfm).
rco_Full and rco_Low = average density of the
condenser outlet air as determined in
section 4.1 of this appendix, during
cooling mode testing at Test Condition 1
and Test Condition 2 in Table 1 of this
appendix, respectively, in pounds mass
per cubic foot (lbm/ft3).
wco_Full and wco_Low = average humidity ratio
of condenser outlet air as determined in
section 4.1 of this appendix, during
cooling mode testing at Test Condition 1
and Test Condition 2 in Table 1 of this
appendix, respectively, in pounds mass
of water vapor per pounds mass of dry
Compressor
speed
Wet bulb
80 (26.7)
80 (26.7)
67 (19.4)
67 (19.4)
Full.
Low.
air (lbw/lbda).
Replace Section 5.1, Adjusted Cooling
Capacity with the following:
Adjusted Cooling Capacity. Calculate
the adjusted cooling capacity at each
outdoor temperature operating
condition, ACC95 and ACC83, expressed
in Btu/h, according to the following
equations:
ACC95 =
CapacityFull¥Qduct_Full¥Qinfiltration_95
ACC83 =
CapacityLow¥Qduct_Low¥Qinfiltration_83
Where:
CapacityFull and CapacityLow = cooling
capacity, as measured in section 4.1 of
this appendix, at Test Condition 1 and
Test Condition 2 in Table 1 of this
appendix, respectively, in Btu/h.
Qduct_Full and Qduct_Low = duct heat transfer
while operating in cooling mode as
calculated in section 4.1.1 of this
appendix.
Qinfiltration_95 and Qinfiltration_83 = total
infiltration air heat transfer in cooling
mode as calculated in section 4.1.2 of
this appendix, representative of the 95 °F
and 83 °F dry-bulb outdoor temperature
operating conditions, respectively, in
Btu/h.
Replace Section 5.3, Annual Energy
Consumption with the following:
Annual Energy Consumption.
Calculate the sample unit’s annual
energy consumption in each operating
mode according to the equation below.
Use the following annual hours of
operation and equation for each
operating mode:
Operating mode
Subscript
Cooling Mode, Full 1 ................................................................................................................................................
Cooling Mode, Low 1 ...............................................................................................................................................
Off-Cycle ..................................................................................................................................................................
Inactive or Off ..........................................................................................................................................................
full ..................
low .................
oc ...................
ia or om .........
Annual operating hours
750
750
880
1,355
AECm = Pm × tm × 0.001
Where:
AECm = annual energy consumption in each
operating mode, in kWh/year.
Pm = average power in each operating mode,
in watts.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:46 Jun 01, 2020
Jkt 250001
m represents the operating mode (‘‘Full’’ and
‘‘Low’’ cooling mode compressor speeds
that represent operation at 95 °F and 83
°F dry-bulb outdoor temperature
operating conditions, respectively, ‘‘oc’’
off-cycle, and ‘‘ia’’ inactive or ‘‘om’’ off
mode).
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
tm = number of annual operating time in each
operating mode, in hours.
0.001 kWh/Wh = conversion factor from
watt-hours to kilowatt-hours.
Calculate the sample unit’s total
annual energy consumption in off cycle
E:\FR\FM\02JNN1.SGM
02JNN1
EN02JN20.015</GPH>
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
1 These operating mode hours are for the purposes of calculating annual energy consumption under different ambient conditions and are not a
division of the total cooling mode operating hours. The total cooling mode operating hours are 750 hours.
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 2, 2020 / Notices
Replace Section 5.4, Combined Energy
Efficiency Ratio with the following:
Unadjusted Combined Energy
Efficiency Ratio. Using the annual
Where:
CEERUA = unadjusted combined energy
efficiency ratio for the sample unit, in
Btu/Wh.
ACC95 and ACC83 = adjusted cooling
capacity, tested at Test Condition 1 and
Test Condition 2 in Table 1 of this
appendix, respectively, that are
representative of operation at the 95 °F
and 83 °F dry-bulb outdoor temperature
operating conditions, respectively, as
calculated in section 5.1 of this
appendix, in Btu/h.
AECFull and AECLow = annual energy
consumption for cooling mode operation
at Test Condition 1 and Test Condition
2 in Table 1 in this appendix that
represent operation at 95 °F and 83 °F
dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating
conditions, respectively, as calculated in
section 5.3 of this appendix, in kWh/
year.
AECT = total annual energy consumption
attributed to off cycle mode and inactive
or off mode, in kWh/year, calculated in
section 5.3 of this appendix.
750 = number of cooling mode hours per
year.
0.001 kWh/Wh = conversion factor for watthours to kilowatt-hours.
0.2 = weighting factor for the 95 °F dry-bulb
outdoor temperature operating
condition.
0.8 = weighting factor for the 83 °F dry-bulb
outdoor temperature operating
condition.
Capacity83_SS_CLF = CapacityFull × 0.875
P83_SS = PFull
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Add after Section 5.4, Combined
Energy Efficiency Ratio:
5.5 Adjustment of the Combined
Energy Efficiency Ratio. Adjust the
sample unit’s combined energy
efficiency ratio as follows.
5.5.1 Theoretical Comparable
Single-Speed Portable Air Conditioner
Cooling Capacity and Power at the
Lower Outdoor Temperature Operating
Condition. Calculate the cooling
capacity and cooling capacity with
cycling losses, expressed in British
thermal units per hour (Btu/h), and
electrical power input, expressed in
watts, for a theoretical comparable
single-speed portable air conditioner at
the 83 °F dry-bulb outdoor temperature
operating condition.
Capacity83_SS = CapacityFull
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:46 Jun 01, 2020
Jkt 250001
Where:
Capacity83_SS = theoretical comparable
single-speed portable air conditioner
cooling capacity, in Btu/h, calculated for
the 83 °F dry-bulb outdoor temperature
operating condition.
Capacity83_SS_CLF = theoretical comparable
single-speed portable air conditioner
cooling capacity with cycling losses, in
Btu/h, calculated for the 83 °F dry-bulb
outdoor temperature operating
condition.
CapacityFull = cooling capacity, in Btu/h,
measured in section 4.1 of this appendix
at Test Condition 1 in Table 1 of this
appendix.
P83_SS = theoretical comparable single-speed
portable air conditioner electrical power
input, in watts, calculated for the 83 °F
dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating
condition.
PFull = electrical power input, in watts,
measured in section 4.1 of this appendix
at Test Condition 1 in Table 1 of this
appendix.
0.875 = cycling loss factor for the 83 °F drybulb outdoor temperature operating
condition.
5.5.2 Duct Heat Transfer for a
Theoretical Comparable Single-Speed
Portable Air Conditioner at the Lower
Outdoor Temperature Operating
Condition. Calculate the condenser
exhaust duct heat transfer to the
conditioned space for a theoretical
comparable single-speed portable air
conditioner at the 83 °F dry-bulb
outdoor temperature operating
condition, as follows:
Qduct_83_SS = 3 × Aduct × (Tduct_Full¥Tei)
Where:
Qduct_83_SS = total heat transferred from the
condenser exhaust duct to the indoor
conditioned space in cooling mode, for
a theoretical comparable single-speed
portable air conditioner at the 83 °F drybulb outdoor temperature operating
condition, in Btu/h.
3 = convection coefficient, in Btu/h per
square foot per °F.
Aduct = surface area of the condenser exhaust
duct, as calculated in section 4.1.1 of this
appendix, in square feet.
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Tduct_Full = average surface temperature for
the condenser exhaust duct, as measured
in section 4.1.1 of this appendix at Test
Condition 1 in Table 1 of this appendix,
in °F.
Tei = average evaporator inlet air dry-bulb
temperature, measured in section 4.1.1 of
this appendix, in °F.
5.5.3 Infiltration Air Heat Transfer
for a Theoretical Comparable SingleSpeed Portable Air Conditioner at the
Lower Outdoor Temperature Operating
Condition. Calculate the heat
contribution from infiltration air for a
theoretical comparable single-speed
portable air conditioner at the 83 °F drybulb outdoor temperature operating
condition, as described in this section.
Calculate the dry air mass flow rate of
infiltration air according to the
following equation:
Where:
˙ 83_SS = dry air mass flow rate of infiltration
m
air for a theoretical comparable singlespeed portable air conditioner at the 83
°F dry-bulb outdoor temperature
operating condition, in lb/m.
Vco_Full = actual average volumetric flow rate
of the condenser outlet air, as
determined in section 4.1 of this
appendix during cooling mode testing
with the full compressor speed at Test
Condition 1 in Table 1 of this appendix,
in cfm.
rco_Full = actual average density of the
condenser outlet air, as determined in
section 4.1 of this appendix during
cooling mode at Test Condition 1 in
Table 1 of this appendix, in lbm/ft3.
wco_Full = average humidity ratio of condenser
outlet air, as determined in section 4.1 of
this appendix during cooling mode
testing at Test Condition 1 in Table 1 of
this appendix, in pounds mass of water
vapor per pounds mass of dry air (lbw/
lbda).
Calculate the sensible component of
infiltration air heat contribution for a
theoretical comparable single-speed
portable air conditioner at the 83 °F dry-
E:\FR\FM\02JNN1.SGM
02JNN1
EN02JN20.017</GPH>
Where:
AECT = total annual energy consumption
attributed to off cycle mode and inactive
or off mode, in kWh/year;
operating hours, as outlined in section
5.3 of this appendix, calculate the
sample unit’s unadjusted combined
energy efficiency ratio, CEERUA,
expressed in Btu/Wh, according to the
following equation:
EN02JN20.016</GPH>
AECT = SmAECm
AECm = total annual energy consumption in
each operating mode, in kWh/year.
m represents the operating modes, off cycle
mode and inactive or off mode.
mode and inactive or off mode
according to the equation below:
33653
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 2, 2020 / Notices
bulb outdoor temperature operating
condition as follows:
˙ 83_SS × 60 × [(0.24 ×
Qs_83_SS = m
(Tia_83¥80)) + (0.444 × (0.01086 × Tia_
83¥0.0112 × 80))]
Where:
Qs_83_SS = sensible heat added to the room
by infiltration air for a theoretical
comparable single-speed portable air
conditioner, at the 83 °F dry-bulb
outdoor temperature operating
condition, in Btu/h.
0.24 Btu/lbm¥°F = specific heat of dry air.
0.444 Btu/lbm¥°F = specific heat of water
vapor.
80 = indoor chamber dry-bulb temperature,
in °F.
Tia_95 and Tia_83 = infiltration air dry-bulb
temperatures for the 95 °F and the 83 °F
dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating
conditions, 95 °F and 83 °F, respectively.
0.01086 = wia_83 = humidity ratio of the
infiltration air for the 83 °F dry-bulb
outdoor temperature operating
condition, in lbw/lbda.
0.0112 = humidity ratio of the indoor
chamber air at Test Condition 1 in Table
1 of this appendix, in lbw/lbda.
60 = conversion factor from minutes to hours.
˙ 83_SS as previously calculated in this
m
section.
Calculate the latent component of
infiltration air heat contribution for a
theoretical comparable single-speed
portable air conditioner at the 83 °F drybulb outdoor temperature operating
condition as follows:
˙ 83_SS × 63660 ×
Ql_83_SS = m
(wia_83¥0.0112)
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Where:
Ql_83_SS = latent heat added to the room by
infiltration air for a theoretical
comparable single-speed portable air
conditioner, at the 83 °F dry-bulb
outdoor temperature operating
condition, in Btu/h.
63660 Btu¥m/lbm¥h = latent heat of
vaporization for water vapor, 1060 Btu/
lbm, multiplied by the conversion factor
from minutes to hours, 60 m/h.
0.0112 lbw/lbda = humidity ratio of the indoor
chamber air.
˙ 83_SS and wia_83 as previously calculated
m
and defined, respectively, in this section.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:46 Jun 01, 2020
Jkt 250001
Calculate the total heat contribution
of the infiltration air for a theoretical
comparable single-speed portable air
conditioner at the 83 °F dry-bulb
outdoor temperature operating
condition according to the following
equation:
Qinfiltration_83_SS = Qs_83_SS + Ql_83_SS
Where:
Qinfiltration_83_SS = total infiltration air heat in
cooling mode for a theoretical
comparable single-speed portable air
conditioner at the 83 °F dry-bulb outdoor
temperature operating condition, in Btu/
h.
Qs_83_SS, Ql_83_SS as previously calculated in
this section
5.5.4 Adjusted Cooling Capacity for
a Theoretical Comparable Single-Speed
Portable Air Conditioner at the Lower
Outdoor Temperature Operating
Condition. Calculate the adjusted
cooling capacity for a theoretical
comparable single-speed portable air
conditioner at the 83 °F dry-bulb
outdoor temperature operating
condition without cycling losses,
ACC83_SS, and with cycling losses,
ACC83_SS_CLF, in Btu/h, according to the
following equations:
ACC83_SS = Capacity83_SS¥Qduct_83_
SS¥Qinfiltration_83_SS
ACC83_SS_CLF = Capacity83_SS_
CLF¥Qduct_83_SS¥Qinfiltration_83_SS
Where:
ACC83_SS and ACC83_SS_CLF = adjusted
cooling capacity for a theoretical
comparable single-speed portable air
conditioner at the 83 °F dry-bulb outdoor
temperature operating condition without
and with cycling losses, respectively, in
Btu/h.
Capacity83_SS and Capacity83_SS_CLF =
theoretical comparable single-speed
portable air conditioner cooling capacity
without and with cycling losses,
respectively, in Btu/h, at the 83 °F drybulb outdoor temperature operating
condition, calculated in section 5.5.1 of
this appendix.
Qduct_83_SS = total heat transferred from the
ducts to the indoor conditioned space in
cooling mode for a theoretical
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4725
comparable single-speed portable air
conditioner at the 83 °F dry-bulb outdoor
temperature operating condition, in Btu/
h, calculated in section 5.5.2 of this
appendix.
Qinfiltration_83_SS = total infiltration air heat in
cooling mode for a theoretical
comparable single-speed portable air
conditioner at the 83 °F dry-bulb outdoor
temperature operating condition, in Btu/
h, calculated in section 5.5.3 of this
appendix.
5.5.5 Annual Energy Consumption
in Cooling Mode for a Theoretical
Comparable Single-Speed Portable Air
Conditioner at the Lower Outdoor
Temperature Operating Condition.
Calculate the annual energy
consumption in cooling mode for a
theoretical comparable single-speed
portable air conditioner at the 83 °F drybulb outdoor temperature operating
condition, in kWh/year, according to the
following equation:
AEC83_SS = P83_SS × 750 × 0.001
Where:
AEC83_SS = annual energy consumption for a
theoretical comparable single-speed
portable air conditioner in cooling mode
at the 83 °F dry-bulb outdoor
temperature operating condition, in
kWh/year.
P83_SS = electrical power input for a
theoretical comparable single-speed
portable air conditioner at the 83 °F drybulb outdoor temperature operating
condition as calculated in section 5.5.1
of this appendix, in watts.
750 = number of cooling mode hours per
year, as defined in section 5.3 of this
appendix.
0.001 kWh/Wh = conversion factor from
watt-hours to kilowatt-hours.
5.5.6 Combined Energy Efficiency
Ratio for a Theoretical Comparable
Single-Speed Portable Air Conditioner.
Calculate the combined energy
efficiency ratio for a theoretical
comparable single-speed portable air
conditioner without cycling losses,
CEERSS, and with cycling losses,
CEERSS_CLF, in Btu/Wh, according to the
following equations:
E:\FR\FM\02JNN1.SGM
02JNN1
EN02JN20.018</GPH>
33654
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 2, 2020 / Notices
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
5.5.7 Single-Duct Variable-Speed
Portable Air Conditioner Performance
Adjustment Factor. Calculate the sample
unit’s performance adjustment factor,
Fp, according to the following equation:
Where:
CEERSS and CEERSS_CLF = combined energy
efficiency ratio for a theoretical
comparable single-speed portable air
conditioner without and with cycling
losses considered, respectively,
calculated in section 5.5.6 of this
appendix, in Btu/Wh.
5.5.8 Single-Duct Variable-Speed
Portable Air Conditioner Combined
Energy Efficiency Ratio. Calculate the
sample unit’s final combined energy
efficiency ratio, CEER, in Btu/Wh,
according to the following equation:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:46 Jun 01, 2020
Jkt 250001
CEER = CEERUA × (1 + Fp)
ACTION:
Where:
CEER = combined energy efficiency ratio for
the sample unit, in Btu/Wh.
CEERUA = unadjusted combined energy
efficiency ratio for the sample unit,
calculated in section 5.4 of this
appendix, in Btu/Wh.
Fp = sample unit’s performance adjustment
factor, determined in section 5.5.7 of this
appendix.’’
SUMMARY:
(3) Representations. LG may not make
representations about the efficiency of
any basic model listed in paragraph (1)
of this Order for any purpose, including
compliance and marketing, unless the
basic model has been tested in
accordance with the provisions set forth
above and such representations fairly
disclose the results of such testing.
(4) This waiver shall remain in effect
according to the provisions of 10 CFR
430.27.
(5) DOE issues this waiver on the
condition that the statements,
representations, and information
provided by LG are valid. If LG makes
any modifications to the controls or
configurations of a basic model subject
to this waiver, such modifications will
render the waiver invalid with respect
to that basic model, and LG will either
be required to use the current Federal
test procedure or submit a new
application for a test procedure waiver.
DOE may rescind or modify this waiver
at any time if it determines the factual
basis underlying the petition for waiver
is incorrect, or the results from the
alternate test procedure are
unrepresentative of a basic model’s true
energy consumption characteristics. 10
CFR 430.27(k)(1). Likewise, LG may
request that DOE rescind or modify the
waiver if LG discovers an error in the
information provided to DOE as part of
its petition, determines that the waiver
is no longer needed, or for other
appropriate reasons. 10 CFR
430.27(k)(2).
(6) LG remains obligated to fulfill the
certification requirements set forth at 10
CFR part 429.
Signed in Washington, DC, on May 8, 2020.
Alexander N. Fitzsimmons,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy
Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy.
[FR Doc. 2020–11765 Filed 6–1–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory
Committee
Office of Science, Department
of Energy.
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Notice of open meeting.
This notice announces a
meeting of the Fusion Energy Sciences
Advisory Committee (FESAC). The
Federal Advisory Committee Act
requires that public notice of these
meetings be announced in the Federal
Register.
DATES: Tuesday, June 23, 2020 11:00
a.m. to 5:30 p.m. EDT
Wednesday, June 24, 2020 11:00 a.m.
to 1:30 p.m. EDT
Location: This meeting will be held
digitally via webcast using Zoom.
Instructions for Zoom, as well as any
updates to meeting times or meeting
agenda, can be found on the FESAC
meeting website at: https://
science.osti.gov/fes/fesac/Meetings.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.
Samuel J. Barish, Acting Designated
Federal Officer, Office of Fusion Energy
Sciences (FES); U.S. Department of
Energy; Office of Science; 1000
Independence Avenue SW; Washington,
DC 20585; Telephone: (301) 903–2917;
Email address: sam.barish@
science.doe.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Purpose of the Board: The purpose of
the Board is to provide advice on a
continuing basis to the Director, Office
of Science of the Department of Energy,
on the many complex scientific and
technical issues that arise in the
development and implementation of the
fusion energy sciences program.
Tentative Agenda Items:
• News from the Office of Science
• FES Perspective
• Update on the FESAC Subcommittee
to Develop a Long-Range Plan for the
FES Program
• 2020 NAS Report—Plasma Science:
Enabling Technology, Sustainability,
Security, and Exploration
• Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
Initiatives in the Office of Science
• Public Comment
• Adjourn
Public Participation: The meeting is
open to the public. If you would like to
file a written statement with the
Committee, you may do so either before
or after the meeting. If you would like
to make an oral statement regarding any
of the items on the agenda, you should
contact Dr. Barish at sam.barish@
science.doe.gov (Email). Reasonable
provision will be made to include the
scheduled oral statements during the
Public Comment time on the agenda.
The Chairperson of the Committee will
conduct the meeting to facilitate the
orderly conduct of business. Public
comment will follow the 10-minute
rule.
E:\FR\FM\02JNN1.SGM
02JNN1
EN02JN20.019</GPH>
Where:
CEERSS and CEERSS_CLF = combined energy
efficiency ratio for a theoretical
comparable single-speed portable air
conditioner without and with cycling
losses considered, respectively, in Btu/
Wh.
ACC95 = adjusted cooling capacity for the
sample unit, as calculated in section 5.1
of this appendix, when tested at Test
Condition 1 in Table 1 of this appendix
that is representative of operation at the
95 °F dry-bulb outdoor temperature
operating condition, in Btu/h.
ACC83_SS and ACC83_SS_CLF = adjusted
cooling capacity for a theoretical
comparable single-speed portable air
conditioner at the 83 °F dry-bulb outdoor
temperature operating condition without
and with cycling losses, respectively, as
calculated in section 5.5.4 of this
appendix, in Btu/h.
AECFull = annual energy consumption for the
sample unit, as calculated in section 5.3
of this appendix, for cooling mode
operation at Test Condition 1 in Table 1
of this appendix that represents
operation at a 95 °F dry-bulb outdoor
temperature operating condition, in
kWh/year.
AEC83_SS = annual energy consumption for a
theoretical comparable single-speed
portable air conditioner in cooling mode
at the 83 °F dry-bulb outdoor
temperature operating condition,
calculated in section 5.5.5 of this
appendix, in kWh/year.
AECT = total annual energy consumption
attributed to all operating modes except
cooling for the sample unit, calculated in
section 5.3 of this appendix, in kWh/
year.
750 and 0.001 as defined previously in this
section.
0.2 = weighting factor for the 95 °F dry-bulb
outdoor temperature operating
condition.
0.8 = weighting factor for the 83 °F dry-bulb
outdoor temperature operating
condition.
33655
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 106 (Tuesday, June 2, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33643-33655]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-11765]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Case Number 2018-004; EERE-2018-BT-WAV-0007]
Energy Conservation Program: Decision and Order Granting a Waiver
to LG Electronics USA, Inc. From the Department of Energy Portable Air
Conditioner Test Procedure
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Notice of decision and order.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (``DOE'') gives notice of a
Decision and Order (Case Number 2018-004) that grants LG Electronics
USA, Inc. (``LG'') a waiver from specified portions of the DOE test
procedure for determining the energy efficiency of listed portable air
conditioner basic models. Under the
[[Page 33644]]
Decision and Order, LG is required to test and rate the listed basic
models of its portable air conditioners in accordance with the
alternate test procedure specified in the Decision and Order.
DATES: The Decision and Order is effective on June 2, 2020. The
Decision and Order will terminate upon the compliance date of any
future amendment to the test procedure for portable air conditioners
located in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix CC that addresses the
issues presented in this waiver. At that time, LG must use the relevant
test procedure for this product for any testing to demonstrate
compliance with standards and any representations of energy use.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ms. Lucy deButts, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Office, EE-5B,
1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC, 20585-0121. Email:
[email protected].
Ms. Sarah Butler, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General
Counsel, GC-33, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue SW,
Washington, DC 20585-0103. Telephone: (202) 586-1777. Email:
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with Title 10 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (``CFR'') (10 CFR 430.27(f)(2)), DOE gives notice
of the issuance of its Decision and Order as set forth below. The
Decision and Order grants LG a waiver from the applicable test
procedure in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix CC (``Appendix CC'')
for listed basic models of portable air conditioners, if LG tests and
rates those portable air conditioners using the alternate test
procedure specified in the Decision and Order. LG's representations
concerning the energy efficiency of the listed basic models must be
based on testing according to the provisions and restrictions in the
alternate test procedure set forth in the Decision and Order, and the
representations must fairly disclose the test results. Distributors,
retailers, and private labelers also must comply with the same
requirements when making representations regarding the energy
efficiency of these products. (42 U.S.C. 6293(c))
Consistent with 10 CFR 430.27(j), not later than August 3, 2020,
any manufacturer currently distributing in commerce in the United
States a product employing a technology or characteristic that results
in the same need for a waiver from the applicable test procedure must
submit a petition for waiver. Manufacturers not currently distributing
such products in commerce in the United States must petition for and be
granted a waiver prior to the distribution in commerce of those
products in the United States. Manufacturers may also submit a request
for interim waiver pursuant to the requirements of 10 CFR 430.27.
Signing Authority
This document of the Department of Energy was signed on May 8,
2020, by Alexander N. Fitzsimmons, Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Energy Efficiency, pursuant to delegated authority from the Secretary
of Energy. That document with the original signature and date is
maintained by DOE. For administrative purposes only, and in compliance
with requirements of the Office of the Federal Register, the
undersigned DOE Federal Register Liaison Officer has been authorized to
sign and submit the document in electronic format for publication, as
an official document of the Department of Energy. This administrative
process in no way alters the legal effect of this document upon
publication in the Federal Register.
Signed in Washington, DC, on May 8, 2020.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy.
Case #2018-004
Decision and Order
I. Background and Authority
The Energy Policy and Conservation Act (``EPCA''),\1\ authorizes
the U.S. Department of Energy (``DOE'') to regulate the energy
efficiency of a number of consumer products and certain industrial
equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6291-6317) Title III, Part B \2\ of EPCA
established the Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products Other
Than Automobiles, which sets forth a variety of provisions designed to
improve energy efficiency for certain types of consumer products. In
addition to specifying a list of covered products and industrial
equipment, EPCA contains provisions that enable the Secretary of Energy
to classify additional types of consumer products as covered products.
(42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(20)) In a final determination of coverage published
in the Federal Register on April 18, 2016, DOE classified portable air
conditioners as covered products under EPCA. 81 FR 22514.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ All references to EPCA in this document refer to the statute
as amended through America's Water Infrastructure Act of 2018,
Public Law 115-270 (October 23, 2018).
\2\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code,
Part B was redesignated as Part A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The energy conservation program under EPCA consists essentially of
four parts: (1) Testing, (2) labeling, (3) Federal energy conservation
standards, and (4) certification and enforcement procedures. Relevant
provisions of EPCA include definitions (42 U.S.C. 6291), test
procedures (42 U.S.C. 6293), labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6294),
energy conservation standards (42 U.S.C. 6295), and the authority to
require information and reports from manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6296).
The Federal testing requirements consist of test procedures that
manufacturers of covered products must use as the basis for: (1)
Certifying to DOE that their products comply with the applicable energy
conservation standards adopted pursuant to EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6295(s)),
and (2) making other representations about the efficiency of that
product (42 U.S.C. 6293(c)). Similarly, DOE must use these test
procedures to determine whether the product complies with relevant
standards promulgated under EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6295(s))
Under 42 U.S.C. 6293, EPCA sets forth the criteria and procedures
DOE is required to follow when prescribing or amending test procedures
for covered products. EPCA requires that any test procedures prescribed
or amended under this section must be reasonably designed to produce
test results which reflect energy efficiency, energy use or estimated
annual operating cost of a covered product during a representative
average use cycle or period of use and requires that test procedures
not be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) The test
procedure for portable air conditioners is contained in the Code of
Federal Regulations (``CFR'') at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix
CC, Uniform Test Method for Measuring the Energy Consumption of
Portable Air Conditioners (``Appendix CC'').
Any interested person may submit a petition for waiver from DOE's
test procedure requirements. 10 CFR 430.27(a)(1). DOE will grant a
waiver from the test procedure requirements if DOE determines either
that the basic model for which the waiver was requested contains a
design characteristic that prevents testing of the basic model
according to the prescribed test procedures, or that the prescribed
test procedures evaluate the basic model in a manner so
unrepresentative of its true energy consumption characteristics as to
provide materially inaccurate comparative data. 10 CFR 430.27(f)(2).
DOE may grant the waiver subject to
[[Page 33645]]
conditions, including adherence to an alternate test procedure. Id.
II. LG's Petition for Waiver: Assertions and Determinations
By letter dated May 15, 2018, LG submitted a petition for waiver
and application for an interim waiver from the portable air conditioner
test procedure set forth in Appendix CC.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ LG's petition for a waiver and petition for an interim
waiver is provided in the docket located at: https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2018-BT-WAV-00007-0001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The portable air conditioner test procedure in Appendix CC provides
test instructions for two configurations of portable air conditioners:
dual-duct and single-duct. Dual-duct units use two parallel airflow
paths: With the first airflow path, air from the conditioned space
(i.e., indoors) is drawn into the unit, passes over a cold heat
exchanger (i.e., the evaporator), and is discharged back into the room.
With the second airflow path, air from outdoors is drawn into the unit,
passes over a hot heat exchanger (i.e., the condenser), and is
discharged back outdoors. In this type of system, the heat that is
removed from the indoor airflow path is essentially transferred to the
outdoor airflow path and discharged outdoors. The temperature of the
air flowing across the condenser significantly affects a portable air
conditioner's cooling capacity. Because the air passing across the
condenser is drawn from outdoors, and outdoor air temperatures vary
during portable air conditioner use, the cooling capacity of a dual-
duct unit is significantly affected by changes in outdoor air
temperatures. Therefore, to produce representative test results,
Appendix CC requires dual-duct units to be tested at two different
``test conditions'' in the test chamber that supplies the condenser
inlet air, representing two different outdoor temperatures: 95 degrees
Fahrenheit ([deg]F) and 83 [deg]F. Under both test conditions, the test
chamber in which the unit is installed is maintained at a temperature
of 80 [deg]F, which is a representative indoor temperature, and the
unit is operated at full load.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The requirement in section 3.1.2 of Appendix CC to set the
controls on the unit to the lowest available temperature setpoint
applies to both the 95 [deg]F and 83 [deg]F tests. The lowest
available setpoint on any portable air conditioner is significantly
less than the indoor air temperature of 80 [deg]F, which is
maintained by external reconditioning equipment throughout the
duration of the test. Therefore, since the indoor temperature
setpoint remains lower than the indoor air temperature throughout
the duration of the test, the unit operates at full load throughout
the duration of both tests.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Single-duct units also use two parallel airflow paths; however, in
contrast to dual-duct units, the condenser airflow path draws air from
inside the conditioned space rather than from outside. This air is
drawn into the unit through air grates in the unit's chassis, passes
over the condenser, and is discharged to the outdoors through the
single duct. During the test, the indoor air temperature remains
steady, and thus the condenser always sees the same temperature at its
inlet. Therefore, Appendix CC requires only one test condition for
single-duct portable air conditioners, 80 [deg]F in the test chamber in
which the unit is installed (corresponding to the specified indoor air
temperature). As with the dual-duct unit tests, the single-duct unit is
operated at full load throughout the duration of the test.
The cooling capacity of both dual-duct and single-duct portable air
conditioners is reduced by the infiltration of hotter outside air
(i.e., ``infiltration air'') into the conditioned space due to any
indoor air being exhausted outside the conditioned space through the
condenser duct.\5\ Appendix CC accounts for infiltration air at the two
different outdoor temperature operating conditions (95 [deg]F and 83
[deg]F) for both single-duct and dual-duct portable air conditioners.
The infiltration air heat transfer is calculated (as opposed to being
directly measured) using a set of equations provided in section 4.1.2
of Appendix CC. Finally, the cooling capacity of both dual-duct and
single-duct portable air conditioners is also reduced by the heat
transferred from the duct surface(s) to the conditioned space; i.e.,
``duct heat transfer.'' Duct heat transfer is accounted for in section
4.1.1 of Appendix CC based on measurements of the surface temperature
of the duct(s) and the total surface area of the duct(s).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ ``Infiltration air'' refers to air that infiltrates from
outside the conditioned space (e.g., from outdoors, attic, adjacent
rooms) to inside the conditioned space as a result of negative air
pressure induced as the outlet air is exhausted outside the
conditioned space. This effect is particularly pronounced for
single-duct units because single-duct units draw all of the air in
the condenser airflow path from within the conditioned space and
discharge that air outdoors. However, dual-duct units also typically
draw a portion of their inlet air from the conditioned space
(inadvertently), which creates a slight negative pressure in the
conditioned space and results in some infiltration air for dual-duct
units as well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LG requested a waiver for the following portable air conditioner
basic models: LP1419IVSM, LP1419HVSM, LP1219IVSM, LP1019IVSM, and
LP0819IVSM, all of which are single-duct models.\6\ LG noted that the
current DOE test procedure for portable air conditioners has different
requirements for dual-duct and single-duct products. For dual-duct
products, testing must occur under two test conditions, (i.e., at a
high-temperature test condition and a lower-temperature test
condition). For single-duct products, the test procedure requires
testing at only a single full-load test condition. LG asserted that the
current DOE test procedure for single-duct portable air conditioners
does not take into account the specific performance and efficiency
benefits associated with single-duct variable-speed portable air
conditioners under part-load conditions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ LG provided these basic model numbers in an appendix to its
May 15, 2018 petition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LG stated that single-duct variable-speed portable air conditioners
use frequency controls to constantly adjust the compressor rotation
speed to maintain the desired temperature in the home without turning
the motor on and off; that the compressor responds automatically to
surrounding conditions to operate in the most efficient possible
manner; and that this results in both significant energy savings and
faster cooling compared to a portable air conditioner without a
variable-speed compressor. LG asserted that, because the DOE test
procedure does not account for the general part-load performance
benefits of single-duct variable-speed portable air conditioners or
properly account for the favorable difference in ``cycling losses'' \7\
for single-duct variable-speed portable air conditioners resulting from
use of variable-speed technology, the results of the test procedure are
not representative of the actual energy consumption of single-duct
variable-speed portable air conditioners.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ When the cooling load of the space is less than the full
cooling power of the compressor, a single-speed compressor cycles on
and off. This cycling behavior introduces inefficiencies, i.e.,
``cycling losses,'' due to the surge in power draw at the beginning
of each ``on'' cycle, before the compressor reaches steady-state
performance. As described above, the current DOE test procedure
measures the performance of a portable air conditioner while
operating under a full cooling load; i.e., the compressor is
operated continuously in its ``on'' state. As a result, Appendix CC
does not capture any inefficiencies due to compressor cycling.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its petition, LG requested an alternate test procedure, which
would provide for testing the listed basic models according to Appendix
CC, except that units of the listed single-duct variable-speed basic
models would be tested at the two test conditions defined for dual-duct
units, at two different fixed compressor speeds; specifically, at the
high-temperature (95 [deg]F) outdoor air test condition with the
compressor speed set to maximum; and at the lower-temperature (83
[deg]F) outdoor air test condition with the compressor speed set to
minimum. As
[[Page 33646]]
discussed, the current single-duct portable air conditioner test
procedure in Appendix CC relies on a single test condition. LG's
suggested alternate approach for single-duct variable-speed portable
air conditioners would involve measuring performance at two different
outdoor temperature conditions, with two compressor speeds, which would
reflect how a single-duct variable-speed portable air conditioner would
reduce its compressor speed under reduced load conditions accompanying
lower outdoor temperature operating conditions.
Under the requested alternate test procedure, a single-duct
variable-speed portable air conditioner unit's final combined energy
efficiency ratio (``CEER'') metric would be calculated by multiplying a
``performance adjustment factor'' by the unit's measured weighted CEER
value (as measured according to the existing procedure for a dual-duct
portable air conditioner at two representative outdoor temperature test
conditions). The performance adjustment factor would reflect the
average performance improvement, relative to a theoretical comparable
single-duct single-speed unit, resulting from the variable-speed unit
avoiding cycling losses associated with the lower-temperature test
condition currently used for testing dual-duct portable air
conditioners. Determining a unit's performance adjustment factor would
require calculating two CEER values for a theoretical comparable
single-duct single-speed portable air conditioner (i.e., a unit that
has the same performance as the variable-speed test unit when operating
at the full compressor speed). The two CEER values would reflect the
unit's efficiency with and without efficiency losses due to compressor
cycling. The performance adjustment factor would be calculated as the
percent change of the weighted CEER value of the theoretical comparable
single-duct single-speed portable air conditioner with accounting for
cycling losses compared to the weighted CEER value of the theoretical
comparable single-duct single-speed portable air conditioner without
accounting for cycling losses. The performance adjustment factor
represents the difference in real-world performance between the
variable-speed unit and an actual comparable single-speed unit.
The requested alternate test procedure implements a performance
adjustment factor because use of a performance adjustment factor allows
for an appropriate comparison between a single-duct variable-speed
portable air conditioner tested at two different compressor speeds and
a single-duct single-speed portable air conditioner tested at a single
speed. The performance adjustment factor represents the relative
benefit under the conditions represented by the test of a variable-
speed unit's avoidance of compressor cycling that would otherwise occur
in a comparable single-speed unit. Applying it to the measured single-
duct variable-speed portable air conditioner weighted CEER accounts for
the avoidance of efficiency losses due to cycling and provides a more
appropriate comparison to the existing CEER metric for single-duct
single-speed portable air conditioners.
On August 9, 2019, DOE published a notice that announced its
receipt of the petition for waiver and granted LG an interim waiver
(``August 2019 Notice of Petition for Waiver''). 84 FR 39274. In the
August 2019 Notice of Petition for Waiver, DOE presented LG's claim
that the results of the test procedure in Appendix CC are not
representative of the actual energy consumption of the variable-speed
single-duct portable air conditioner basic models listed in LG's
petition for waiver and LG's requested alternate test procedure
described above.
In the August 2019 Notice of Petition for Waiver, DOE specified an
alternate test procedure as suggested by LG with certain modifications
and additional requirements. First, the alternate test procedure
specified in the interim waiver provides compressor speed nomenclature
and definitions that are derived from those in an industry standard for
testing consumer central air conditioning products with variable-speed
compressors. DOE clarified the low compressor speed definition to
ensure the test unit provides adequate cooling capacity under reduced
loads, based on the expected load at those conditions.\8\ Second, LG
must maintain the compressor speed required for each test condition in
accordance with the instructions LG submitted to DOE on July 8,
2019.\9\ DOE did not include measuring performance at two different
outdoor temperature conditions, each at a different compressor speed,
as suggested by LG. Given that the condenser airflow path on a single-
duct unit draws air from inside the conditioned space rather than from
outside, and the indoor air temperature is held constant during
testing, changing the outdoor temperature conditions between each test
would add unnecessary test burden with no impact on test results.
Therefore, DOE specified a single temperature for only the condenser
inlet air for the two test conditions, one at each compressor speed,
and not the outdoor air test conditions in August 2019 Notice of
Petition for Waiver.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The compressor speed nomenclature and definition
clarifications are derived from Air Conditioning, Heating, and
Refrigeration Institute Standard (AHRI) 210/240-2017, ``Performance
Rating of Unitary Air-conditioning & Air source Heat Pump
Equipment,'' and adapted to apply to portable air conditioners.
Equation 11.60 in AHRI 210/240-2017 relates the building load to an
AC's full-load cooling capacity and outdoor temperature, and assumes
full-load operation at 98 [deg]F outdoor temperature. DOE adjusted
(i.e. normalized) this equation to reflect full-load operation at 95
[deg]F outdoor temperature, to provide consistency with the full-
load test condition for portable air conditioners. Using the
adjusted equation suggests that the representative cooling load at
the 83 [deg]F rating condition would be 60 percent of the full-load
cooling capacity for portable air conditioners. DOE recognizes that
variable-speed portable air conditioners may use compressors that
vary their speed in discrete steps and may not be able to operate at
a speed that provides exactly 60-percent cooling capacity;
therefore, the defined cooling capacity associated with the low
compressor speed is presented as a 10-percent range rather than a
single value. A 60-percent cooling load is the upper bound of the
10-percent range defining the cooling capacity associated with the
lower compressor speed (i.e., the range is defined as 50 to 60
percent). This ensures that the variable-speed portable air
conditioner is capable of matching the representative cooling load
(60 percent of the maximum) at the 83 [deg]F rating condition, while
providing the performance benefits associated with variable-speed
operation. In contrast, if the 10-percent range were to be defined
as, for example, 55 to 65 percent (with 60 percent as the midpoint),
a variable-speed portable air conditioner could be tested at 63
percent, for example, without demonstrating that the unit is capable
of maintaining variable-speed performance down to 60 percent.
\9\ The instructions provided by LG were marked as confidential
and, as such, the instructions will be treated as confidential. The
document is located in the docket at https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2018-BT-WAV-0007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the reasons explained here and in the August 2019 Notice of
Petition for Waiver, without a waiver, the five portable air
conditioner basic models identified in the interim waiver, to which
this Order applies, contain a design characteristic--variable-speed
compressors--that yields test results unrepresentative of their true
energy consumption, and thus efficiency. Thus, DOE is requiring LG to
test and rate the five portable air conditioner basic models identified
in this Order according to the alternate test procedure in this Order.
The alternate test procedure in this Order is a modified version of the
procedure in the interim waiver.
In the August 2019 Notice of Petition for Waiver, DOE also
solicited comments from interested parties on all aspects of the
petition. Id. DOE received comments from the Appliance Standards
Awareness Project and the Natural Resources Defense Council,
[[Page 33647]]
jointly (hereinafter the ``Joint Advocates''); the Pacific Gas and
Electric Company, San Diego Gas and Electric, and Southern California
Edison, commenting jointly as the California Investor Owned Utilities
(hereinafter the ``California IOUs''); GE Appliances, a Haier Company
(``GEA''), and the Midea America Research Center (``Midea''). On
September 27, 2019, LG subsequently submitted a rebuttal statement
(pursuant to 10 CFR 430.27(d)(3)) in response to these comments.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Comments submitted by the Joint Advocates, California IOUs,
GEA, and Midea, and the rebuttal statement submitted by LG can be
accessed at: https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EERE-2018-BT-WAV-0007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commenters generally agreed that the current test procedure for
portable air conditions does not produce results representative of the
actual performance of single-duct variable speed portable air
conditions. GEA generally supported the need for a test procedure
waiver for portable air conditioners with variable-speed compressors,
asserting that the current test procedure is not representative of the
actual performance of single-duct variable-speed units. (GEA, No. 7 at
p. 1) \11\ Midea stated that it fully supports granting a final waiver
to LG, subject to minor revisions that are discussed in the following
paragraphs. (Midea, No. 8 at p. 3) The Joint Advocates stated that they
share LG's concern that the current test procedure for portable air
conditioners does not capture the potential benefits of variable-speed
technology. (Joint Advocates, No. 5 at p. 1) The California IOUs stated
that an alternate test procedure is warranted to demonstrate the
benefits of variable-speed compressor technology, whose primary benefit
in improving energy efficiency is the reduction of cyclic losses.
(California IOUs, No. 6 at pp. 1-2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ A notation in the form ``GEA, No. 7 at p. 1'' identifies a
written comment: (1) Made by GE Appliances, a Haier Company; (2)
recorded in document number 7 that is filed in the docket of this
waiver (Docket No. EERE-2018-BT-WAV-0007) and available for review
at https://www.regulations.gov; and (3) which appears on page 1 of
document number 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The California IOUs urged DOE to make various changes. First, they
asked DOE to ensure the test procedure was representative of real-world
use, consistent with previously developed concepts, and justified with
data. Second, they asked DOE to ensure the alternate test procedure
results are comparable with existing single-speed units, assumptions
are clearly justified, and methods are representative and reproducible.
They also asked DOE to address a number of additional issues prior to
granting the waiver. (California IOUs, No. 6 at pp. 1-2)
The Joint Advocates argued that, instead of granting a test
procedure waiver to LG to address single-duct portable air conditioners
with variable-speed compressors, DOE should instead investigate a load-
based test procedure for all portable air conditioners to capture part-
load operation for all unit configurations. Because the current test
procedure is a fixed-conditions test, they argued it is not
representative of how either single-speed or variable-speed units
perform in the field. Specifically, variable-speed units are not
allowed to adjust to reduced loads, and single-speed units do not cycle
under the current fixed-conditions test. (Joint Advocates, No. 5 at p.
1)
In its rebuttal statement, LG stated that granting this test
procedure waiver does not preclude DOE from investigating a load-based
test procedure in a future portable air conditioner test procedure
rulemaking that DOE must conduct after granting a test procedure
waiver. LG stated that the current DOE test procedure misrepresents the
actual energy consumption of LG's portable air conditioners that use
variable-speed compressors, and that denying this test procedure waiver
for these units would, contrary to statutory requirements, mislead
consumers about the energy efficiency of variable-speed portable air
conditioners until DOE completes a test procedure rulemaking. LG
asserted that, because it has met all the criteria for a test procedure
waiver, DOE must grant the waiver. (LG, No. 9, at pp. 3-4)
DOE has determined that the alternate test procedure in the August
2019 Notice of Petition for Waiver, as modified in this order, produces
efficiency results for variable-speed portable air conditioners which
are comparable with the results for single-speed units. The alternate
test procedure accomplishes this by adjusting the efficiency rating of
the variable-speed portable air conditioner by the amount the variable-
speed unit would outperform a theoretical comparable single-speed unit
in a representative period of use. The alternate test procedure is
based on industry-accepted test procedures. Values used for the cycling
loss factor at the 83 [deg]F test condition are based on Air-
Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (``AHRI'') Standard
210/240, ``Performance Rating of Unitary Air-conditioning & Air-source
Heat Pump Equipment'' (``AHRI Standard 210/240''), as discussed below.
The building load calculation is widely accepted by industry, used in
AHRI Standard 210/240, and is constructed to be broadly applicable to a
number of building cooling configurations. It also specifies that the
compressor speed must be fixed at each test condition. LG has provided
DOE instructions for fixing the compressor, to ensure that the
alternate test procedure is repeatable and reproducible.
Portable air conditioners are tested in psychometric chambers \12\
that are designed to maintain specific constant temperature conditions
throughout the duration of the test (i.e., a constant-temperature
test). DOE agrees that the concept of a load-based test may be more
representative of typical portable air conditioner operation, where the
conditions within a room vary and the portable air conditioner operates
to maintain the room conditions based on the set point and monitored
conditions. However, implementing a load-based test for portable air
conditioners would present a number of significant challenges.\13\
First, implementing a part-load test condition would require first
determining the full cooling capacity of a portable air conditioner
unit, which is most easily and repeatably achieved with a constant-
temperature test. In practice, this would result in the need for
chambers to accommodate both constant-temperature and constant-load
operation, which could require significant chamber redesigns associated
with new or upgraded chamber reconditioning equipment and software
adjustments. Second, the external reconditioning equipment in existing
psychometric chambers is controlled using software with feedback
control to maintain constant temperature conditions. Operating the
chamber to provide a constant load--and thus allowing the temperature
to vary--would require continuous manual override of the software
controls, thus requiring more technician involvement, and resulting
expense, throughout the test. Alternatively, the software controls
could be redesigned to accommodate constant-load operation; however,
this would require significant financial and time investments by test
laboratories. Third, the current test procedure does not provide any
requirements for the type of instrumentation, hardware, or other
equipment that can occupy
[[Page 33648]]
existing chambers. The thermal mass of such equipment inside the
chamber can affect the variation in chamber temperature as a function
of the cooling load, and therefore could affect the test results under
a constant-load test in which the temperature is allowed to change.
Ensuring the reproducibility of the test would require closely
specifying every aspect of the test chamber, including instrumentation,
hardware, and other equipment inside the test chamber, which would
increase test burden by adding complexities to the test method beyond
what is already specified, although DOE is unable to exactly quantify
this test burden increase at this time, particularly given the
variability in existing test chamber designs. Further, DOE is unable to
quantify the potential benefits of requiring a load-based test
procedure at this time. For these reasons, DOE is not specifying a
load-based test for variable-speed portable air conditioners in this
Decision and Order. This does not preclude DOE from considering such
testing in a future rulemaking, particularly if industry and third-
party test laboratories were to implement load-based testing
capabilities into psychrometric chambers, which are the type of test
chamber typically used for portable air conditioner testing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ A psychometric chamber uses ducts installed on the
evaporator and condenser exhausts to measure the air-enthalpy and
calculate cooling capacity.
\13\ DOE found that the same challenges applied to load-based
testing for room air conditioners in calorimeter chambers in the
notice of decision and order published on May 8, 2019, in which DOE
granted a waiver to LG for variable-speed room air conditioners. 84
FR 20111, 20114.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to preferring a load-based test, the Joint Advocates
expressed concern that the alternate test procedure in the interim
waiver does not reflect real-world performance of variable-speed
portable air conditioners, because the compressor speeds are fixed for
each of the two test conditions (full speed at the 95 [deg]F condition
and low speed at the 83 [deg]F condition). The Joint Advocates prefer
capturing how the programmed control strategies change speeds in
response to load changes and thus affect overall efficiency. (Joint
Advocates, No. 5 at pp. 1-2)
DOE agrees that variable-speed portable air conditioners in the
field are likely to adjust their compressor speed in real time in
response to variations in the cooling load. However, as DOE discussed
for variable-speed room air conditioners in the May 2019 RAC Decision
and Order, because of the large variation in cooling loads, both for
rooms within a house, and among different housing types and
geographical areas, identifying a single or multiple representative
cooling loads would not be feasible. (84 FR 20111, 20115) Furthermore,
DOE determined in the May RAC 2019 Decision and Order that load-based
testing would impose undue cost and burden on manufacturers and test
laboratories due to the unique construction and capabilities of
existing calorimeter chambers and unit response variability during
load-based testing. Id. DOE concludes that the same burdens would be
imposed by load-based testing of variable-speed portable air
conditioners in psychrometric chambers, but the approach suggested by
LG to measure performance for a representative range of variable-speed
operation (i.e., at low and full compressor speed under relevant
outdoor temperature operating conditions), as modified in this order,
provides a sufficient determination of variable-speed portable air
conditioner performance.
The Joint Advocates stated that, according to LG, these variable-
speed portable air conditioners can operate over a range of compressor
speeds, and if a variable-speed unit provides sustained cooling at the
high compressor speed (i.e., at a higher compressor speed than a
comparable single-speed unit at full-load operating conditions), the
faster cooling would come at the expense of higher energy consumption,
an effect that would not be captured by the waiver test procedure.
(Joint Advocates, No. 5 at p. 2)
In its rebuttal statement, LG explained that its variable-speed
portable air conditioners only cool the room at boost compressor speed
(i.e., a speed faster than full speed--the speed at full-load testing
conditions) for less than 10 minutes when they begin cooling the room,
making the energy consumption of this phase of cooling ``very small''
compared to the energy consumed during the remainder of cooling mode
operation. LG noted that AHRI Standard 210/240 describes this operation
as ``boost compressor speed,'' and that boost compressor speed is
standard at start-up in all air conditioners with variable-speed
compressors. (LG, No. 9 at pp. 5-6)
DOE has observed that a variable-speed room air conditioner
operates at boost compressor speed to provide initial cooling to the
conditioned space during testing. DOE expects its experience with boost
compressor speed for variable-speed room air conditioners to be
analogous to boost compressor speed operation in variable-speed
portable air conditioners; this experience indicates that the amount of
energy consumed in this operation is insignificant compared to the
energy consumed during the remainder of cooling mode operation. As a
result, the potential improvements in test procedure representativeness
do not warrant the additional test burden associated with measuring
variable-speed portable air conditioner performance at the boost
compressor speed.
The Joint Advocates questioned what they stated is LG's apparent
claim that the performance of dual-duct units, but not single-duct
units, under reduced load conditions is accounted for in the DOE test
procedure by testing at two test conditions. The Joint Advocates,
however, assert that both dual-duct test conditions are full-load
tests, and that Seasonally Adjusted Cooling Capacity (``SACC'') and
Combined Energy Efficiency Ratio (``CEER'') are calculated to provide a
direct comparison between dual-duct and single-duct units. (Joint
Advocates, No. 5 at pp. 2-3)
DOE agrees that the portable air conditioner test procedure for
dual-duct units at Appendix CC does not measure part-load performance.
Instead, it requires full-load tests at each test condition, and as a
result does not account for single-speed unit cycling under part-load
conditions or variable-speed compressor speed adjustments to match
part-load conditions. However, LG's claims regarding the test
conditions and procedure for dual-duct portable air conditioners are
not directly relevant to the August 2019 Notice of Petition for Waiver
and this Decision and Order, which only address the single-duct
variable-speed portable air conditioners listed in the LG petition for
waiver submitted on May 15, 2018.
The Joint Advocates and the California IOUs stated that the
portable air conditioner test procedure is only conducted at one
outdoor temperature test condition for single-duct units because such
portable air conditioners draw condenser inlet air from the conditioned
space, so the indoor and outdoor temperature for each test condition
should always be equal. (Joint Advocates, No. 5 at p. 3; California
IOUs, No. 6 at p. 2) The Joint Advocates questioned why the alternate
test procedure in the interim waiver provides for testing single-duct
variable-speed portable air conditioners at two different condenser
inlet test conditions. (Joint Advocates, No. 5 at p. 3) The California
IOUs recommended that these units be tested at only the single test
condition required by Appendix CC, but with varying compressor speeds.
(California IOUs, No. 6 at p. 2)
In response to comments pertaining to the two test conditions
listed in the August 2019 Notice of Petition for Waiver, LG stated that
while outdoor air temperature minimally affects the cooling capacity
test measurement, it does affect the calculation of CEER and SACC due
to the influence of infiltration air. The outdoor air temperature
affects the magnitude of the infiltration air
[[Page 33649]]
impact on portable air conditioners, and, therefore, it is necessary to
calculate infiltration at two different test conditions.
DOE agrees with the Joint Commenters and the California IOUs that
the specification for condenser inlet air found in Table 1 of the
alternate test procedure in the interim waiver should be the same as
the indoor temperature for single-duct portable air conditioners
because the condenser inlet air for a single-duct unit is drawn from
indoors. DOE notes that the alternate test procedure in the interim
waiver included a note specifying that, for the purposes of this
cooling mode test procedure, condenser inlet air is considered the
``outdoor air'' outside of the conditioned space. 84 FR 39274, 39277.
As such, the outdoor air temperatures of 95 [deg]F and 83 [deg]F shown
in Table 1 represent the outdoor temperature operating conditions,
rather than the actual condenser inlet air test conditions, as the
column heading would imply.\14\ To alleviate any potential confusion
about the distinction between outdoor air temperature and condenser
inlet air temperature, in this Decision and Order DOE specifies in
Table 1 of the alternate test procedure that variable-speed single-duct
portable air conditioners must be tested at the same condenser inlet
temperature as the indoor-side air temperature for both test conditions
(i.e., 80 [deg]F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ DOE further notes that, for a single-duct portable air
conditioner, because both the evaporator air and condenser air are
drawn from the conditioned space through air grates that are
integral to the unit itself, the evaporator and condenser inlet air
temperature test conditions are necessarily the same.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The California IOUs and Midea suggested that the alternate
calculation for infiltration air mass flowrate is incorrect because
condenser inlet air for a single-duct portable air conditioner is drawn
from the indoors, thus making the infiltration air associated with
single-duct units independent of condenser inlet air. These commenters
urged DOE to require that the mass flow rate of infiltration air for
all single-duct portable air conditioners, including variable-speed
units, be calculated using the existing formula in the DOE test
procedure at Appendix CC, thus removing the terms in the mass flow rate
of infiltration air accounting for condenser inlet air flow in the
alternate test procedure. (California IOUs, No. 6 at p. 3; Midea, No. 8
at pp. 2-3)
LG responded that the alternate calculation in section 4.1.2 of the
interim waiver test procedure provides the correct value for
infiltration air mass flow. Because, for single-duct units, the average
volumetric flow rate of the condenser inlet duct air is zero, the
second term of the equation, referring to the condenser inlet duct air,
is reduced to zero. (LG, No. 9, at pp. 2, 7)
DOE agrees that the equation for infiltration air mass flow from
the interim waiver alternate test procedure produces the correct
results when the average volumetric flow rate of the condenser inlet
duct air is appropriately set to zero, given that single-duct portable
air conditioners do not have a condenser inlet duct. However, DOE
recognizes that including the condenser inlet air term for single-duct
units may lead to confusion. To reduce the possibility of such
confusion, the equation in the alternate test procedure specified in
this Decision and Order to calculate the mass flow rate of infiltration
air for variable-speed single-duct portable air conditioners is based
on only the condenser exhaust air mass flow, like the current equation
for single-speed single-duct portable air conditioners. Because the
value of the condenser inlet air term is zero, as explained above, this
revision does not change any values calculated using the interim waiver
alternate test procedure.
The California IOUs suggested that DOE correct an error in the
equation for adjusted cooling capacity at the higher outdoor
temperature condition in section 5.1 of the alternate test procedure
specified in the August 2019 Notice of Petition for Waiver. They noted
that the two adjusted cooling capacity equations erroneously used two
different equations to calculate the same Adjusted Cooling Capacity
(``ACC'') value (i.e., ACC83), which the California IOUs
stated should be two different values representing the two outdoor
temperature conditions. The California IOUs further recommended
subscripts for these two values based on compressor speed rather than
outdoor temperature. (California IOUs, No. 6 at p. 4)
DOE acknowledges there was a typographical error in August 2019
Notice of Petition of Waiver. The two equations identified by the
California IOUs calculate different adjusted cooling capacity values
(i.e., ACC95 and ACC83), but were both labeled as
calculating ACC83. In this Decision and Order, DOE has
corrected this typographical error and provides additional
clarification of the alternate test procedure by implementing ``Full''
and ``Low'' subscripts to represent the compressor speed setting for
each calculation. DOE also has standardized subscripts accordingly
throughout the alternate test procedure to be consistent with this
approach.
The California IOUs requested clarification on the use of the 83
[deg]F outdoor temperature condition rather than the 95 [deg]F
condition in the equation when calculating the theoretical single-speed
unit capacity at 83 [deg]F. The California IOUs commented that both
conditions hold true, because capacity is independent of the outdoor
air temperature. The California IOU's had similar concerns about the
mass flow of infiltration air equation, requesting clarification as to
why the mass flow equation for the theoretical single-speed unit at 83
[deg]F uses the volumetric air flow rate measured at 95 [deg]F.
(California IOUs, No. 6 at p. 5)
As noted above, DOE recognizes that, unlike for a dual-duct unit,
for a single-duct unit, the outdoor air temperature has no direct
bearing on the cooling capacity, because the condenser inlet air for a
single-duct unit is drawn from within the conditioned space. DOE notes
that section 5.5.1 of the alternate test procedure explicitly defines
the theoretical comparable single-speed portable air conditioner
capacity at the 83 [deg]F outdoor temperature operating condition as
equal to the full-load capacity of the variable-speed portable air
conditioner at the 95 [deg]F outdoor temperature operating condition
because the theoretical comparable single-speed unit is based upon the
full compressor speed of the variable-speed unit. DOE recognizes the
confusion that may arise from these equations. This Decision and Order
revises the nomenclature of the two variable-speed unit tests to refer
to the compressor speed (e.g., CapacityFull) instead of the
``outdoor temperature test condition''. Further, in contrast to the
alternate test procedure granted in the interim waiver, this Decision
and Order specifies a condenser inlet air temperature of 80 [deg]F--
consistent with the 80 [deg]F evaporator inlet air temperature--rather
than specifying condenser inlet air temperatures of 83 [deg]F and 95
[deg]F for the two test conditions. DOE maintains the distinction
between theoretical comparable single-speed unit capacity at 83 [deg]F
and 95 [deg]F because the respective adjusted cooling capacities at
each of these conditions reflect the impact of infiltration air at
these two temperatures. While the infiltration air mass flow rate for
the theoretical comparable single-speed unit remains constant, the heat
entering the room due to infiltration air will differ based on the
outdoor temperature. Therefore, DOE has provided equations for
calculating the infiltration air mass flow rates at both temperatures
for a theoretical
[[Page 33650]]
comparable single-speed portable air conditioner.
The California IOUs requested that the manufacturer justify the
cyclic loss factor proposed by citing references or providing data,
although they stated that the value appears reasonable. (California
IOUs, No. 6 at p. 5)
In response to this comment, LG noted that the cycling loss factor
it suggested in the alternate test procedure was the value DOE provided
based on DOE's research. (LG, No. 9, at pp. 7-8)
The cycling loss factor in the alternate test procedure is based on
the default cycling loss factors in Section 11.2 of AHRI Standard 210/
240, an industry-accepted test procedure. The cycling loss factor at
the 83 [deg]F condition for a theoretical comparable single-speed
single-duct portable air conditioner is calculated using the default
cooling degradation coefficient of 0.25, which corresponds to a part-
load (cycling loss) factor of 0.875, as determined in Section 11.2 of
AHRI Standard 210/240.
GEA commented that LG's proposed alternate test procedure
calculates a weighted efficiency for a unit with a variable-speed
compressor that reflects only decreased energy use but not reduced
cooling capacity when the unit runs at a lower speed. GEA suggested the
test procedure account for both the reduced energy usage and the
reduced cooling capacity of a variable-speed compressor by
incorporating the reduced cooling capacity in the SACC calculation
equations. (GEA, No. 7 at p. 1)
GEA's suggestion that the alternate test procedure does not reflect
decreased cooling capacity is incorrect. The reduced cooling capacity
at the low compressor speed is used when calculating the adjusted
cooling capacity at the lower outdoor temperature operating condition,
ACC83, in section 5.1 of the alternate test procedure. This
lower adjusted cooling capacity is included in the weighted-average
overall adjusted cooling capacity calculated in section 5.3 of the
alternate test procedure. By calculating the adjusted cooling capacity
based on performance at both outdoor temperature operating conditions
and compressor speeds, the alternate test procedure accounts for not
only the reduced energy usage of the variable-speed portable air
conditioner but also the reduced cooling capacity from operation at the
low compressor speed.
For the reasons explained here and in the August 2019 Notice of
Petition for Waiver, the basic models identified by LG in its petition
cannot be tested and rated for energy consumption on a basis
representative of their true energy consumption characteristics using
Appendix CC. DOE has reviewed the procedure suggested by LG and
concludes that, subject to the modifications discussed in this Decision
and Order, the test procedure in this Decision and Order will allow for
the accurate measurement of the energy consumption of the listed
models, while alleviating the problems associated with testing these
models following DOE's portable air conditioner test procedure. LG must
test and rate the five listed portable air conditioner basic models
according to the alternate test procedure specified in the Decision and
Order. This alternate test procedure is substantively consistent with
the interim waiver's alternate test procedure but includes clarifying
modifications.
Based on further review of the alternate test procedure required
under the interim waiver order and the comments received, the alternate
test procedure required under today's Decision and Order: (1) Corrects
a typographical error in the Adjusted Cooling Capacity equations; (2)
changes certain calculated value subscripts to refer to the compressor
speed for which the value is being calculated, rather than the outdoor
temperature test condition; (3) specifies in Table 1 of the alternate
test procedure that single-duct portable air conditioners are only
tested at one condenser inlet air temperature (i.e., the indoor air
temperature), although two different outdoor temperatures are
represented by the two tests required by the alternate test procedure,
and makes corresponding changes to references to Table 1 throughout the
text; and (4) removes a term describing condenser inlet air from the
air infiltration mass flow equation. DOE has determined that these
changes ensure better repeatability and reproducibility of the
alternate test procedure, improving the representativeness of the
results. The changes will not affect the performance of single-duct
variable-speed portable air conditioners as measured under the
alternate test procedure specified in the interim waiver. Below is a
more detailed discussion of each change.
DOE is changing a subscript to correct a typographical error in the
two Adjusted Cooling Capacity equations in section 5.1, Adjusted
Cooling Capacity. The interim waiver erroneously labeled both
calculations for the adjusted cooling capacity at each test condition
as ACC83. This Order changes the label in the first
calculation to ACC95.
DOE is changing subscripts throughout the alternate test procedure
to refer to specified compressor speed instead of the outdoor
temperature test condition represented by the compressor speed setting
(i.e., instead of ``95'' and ``83,'' the subscripts now read ``Full''
and ``Low''). DOE made this change to clarify the compressor speed
setting required.
DOE is revising Table 1 in the alternate test procedure to specify
that the alternate test procedure only requires one condenser inlet air
temperature for both tests. The condenser inlet air temperature is the
same as the indoor air temperature because single-duct units draw air
from the indoor room. While the outdoor temperature test condition
represented by each test is different, it does not directly impact the
performance of a test unit.
DOE is simplifying the equation to calculate the mass flow rate of
infiltration air for variable-speed single-duct portable air
conditioners using only the condenser exhaust air mass flow, reflecting
the current approach for single-speed single-duct portable air
conditioners in Appendix CC. This revision removes a second term that
accounted for infiltration air due to condenser inlet air, which does
not impact the mass flow rate of infiltration air for single-duct
units, because single-duct units intake condenser inlet air from
indoors, unlike dual-duct portable air conditioners, which intake
condenser inlet air from the outdoors.
DOE further requires in this Decision and Order, testing of the
listed basic models in accordance with the instructions submitted by LG
on July 8, 2019, regarding the compressor frequencies and control
settings used at each test condition for each basic model.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ The instructions provided by LG were marked as confidential
and, as such, the instructions will be treated as confidential. The
document is located in the docket at https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2018-BT-WAV-0007-0002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This Decision and Order applies only to the five basic models
listed in the Order and does not extend to any other basic models. DOE
evaluates and grants waivers for only those basic models specifically
set out in the petition, not future models that may be manufactured by
the petitioner. LG may request that DOE extend the scope of this waiver
to include additional basic models that employ the same technology as
those listed in the Order. 10 CFR 430.27(g). LG may also submit another
petition for waiver from the test procedure for additional basic models
that employ a different technology and meet the criteria for test
procedure waivers. 10 CFR 430.27(a)(1).
DOE notes that it may modify or rescind the waiver at any time upon
a determination that the factual basis
[[Page 33651]]
underlying the petition for waiver is incorrect, or that the results
from the alternate test procedure are unrepresentative of the basic
models' true energy consumption characteristics. 10 CFR 430.27(k)(1).
Likewise, LG may request that DOE rescind or modify the waiver if the
company discovers an error in the information provided to DOE as part
of its petition, determines that the waiver is no longer needed, or for
other appropriate reasons. 10 CFR 430.27(k)(2).
As set forth above, the test procedure specified in this Decision
and Order is not the same as the test procedure offered by LG. If LG
believes that the alternate test method it suggested provides
representative results and is less burdensome than the test method
required by this Decision and Order, LG may submit a request for
modification under 10 CFR 430.27(k)(2) that addresses the concerns that
DOE has articulated about the procedure LG suggested. LG may also
submit another less burdensome alternative test procedure not expressly
considered in this notice under the same provision.
III. Consultations With Other Agencies
In accordance with 10 CFR 430.27(f)(2), DOE consulted with the
Federal Trade Commission staff concerning the LG petition for waiver.
IV. Order
After careful consideration of all the material that LG and
commenters submitted in this matter, it is Ordered that:
(1) LG must, as of the date of publication of this Order in the
Federal Register, test and rate the following portable air conditioner
basic models with the alternate test procedure as set forth in
paragraph (2):
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brand Basic model
------------------------------------------------------------------------
LG Electronics USA, Inc................. LP1419IVSM
LG Electronics USA, Inc................. LP1419HVSM
LG Electronics USA, Inc................. LP1219IVSM
LG Electronics USA, Inc................. LP1019IVSM
LG Electronics USA, Inc................. LP0819IVSM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) The alternate test procedure for the LG basic models listed in
paragraph (1) of this Order is the test procedure for portable air
conditioners prescribed by DOE at appendix CC to subpart B of 10 CFR
part 430 (``Appendix CC'') and 10 CFR 430.23(dd), except: (i) Determine
the combined energy efficiency ratio (``CEER'') as detailed below, and
(ii) calculate the estimated annual operating cost in 10 CFR
430.23(dd)(2) as detailed below. In addition, for each basic model
listed in paragraph (1), maintain compressor speeds at each test
condition and set control settings for the variable components
according to the instructions LG submitted to DOE (Docket No. EERE-
2018-BT-WAV-0007-0002). Upon the compliance date of any new energy
conservation standards for portable air conditioners, LG must report
product-specific information pursuant to 10 CFR 429.12(b)(13) and 10
CFR 429.62(b). All other requirements of Appendix CC and DOE's other
relevant regulations remain applicable.
In 10 CFR 430.23, in paragraph (dd) revise paragraph (2) to read as
follows:
(2) Determine the estimated annual operating cost for a single-duct
variable-speed portable air conditioner, expressed in dollars per year,
by multiplying the following two factors:
(i) The sum of AEC95 multiplied by 0.2, AEC83
multiplied by 0.8, and AECT as measured in accordance with
section 5.3 of appendix CC of this subpart; and
(ii) A representative average unit cost of electrical energy in
dollars per kilowatt-hour as provided by the Secretary.
(iii) Round the resulting product to the nearest dollar per year.
In Appendix CC:
Add in Section 2, Definitions:
2.11 Single-speed means a type of portable air conditioner that
cannot automatically adjust the compressor speed based on detected
conditions.
2.12 Variable-speed means a type of portable air conditioner that
can automatically adjust the compressor speed based on detected
conditions.
2.13 Full compressor speed (full) means the compressor speed
specified by LG (Docket No. EERE-2018-BT-WAV-0007-0002) at which the
unit operates at full load testing conditions.
2.14 Low compressor speed (low) means the compressor speed
specified by LG (Docket No. EERE-2018-BT-WAV-0007-0002), at which the
unit operates at low load test conditions, such that
CapacityLow, the measured cooling capacity at this speed at
the test condition in Table 1 of this appendix, is no less than 50
percent and no greater than 60 percent of CapacityFull, the
measured cooling capacity with the full compressor speed at the test
condition in Table 1 of this appendix.
2.15 Theoretical comparable single-speed portable air conditioner
means a theoretical single-speed portable air conditioner with the same
cooling capacity and electrical power input as the single-duct
variable-speed portable air conditioner under test, with no cycling
losses considered, when operating with the full compressor speed and at
the test conditions in Table 1 of this appendix.
Add to the end of Section 3.1.2, Control settings:
Set the compressor speed during cooling mode testing as described
in section 4.1 of this appendix, as amended by this Order.
Replace Section 4.1, Cooling mode with the following:
Cooling mode. Instead of the test conditions in Table 3 of ANSI/
AHAM PAC-1-2015, establish the test conditions presented in Table 1 of
this appendix. Test each sample unit twice, once at each test condition
in Table 1. For each test condition, measure the sample unit's indoor
room cooling capacity and overall power input in cooling mode in
accordance with Section 7.1.b and 7.1.c of ANSI/AHAM PAC-1-2015
(incorporated by reference; see Sec. [thinsp]430.3), respectively, and
determine the test duration in accordance with Section 8.7 of ASHRAE
Standard 37-2009 (incorporated by reference; Sec. [thinsp]430.3).
Conduct the first test in accordance with ambient conditions for Test
Condition 1 in Table 1 of this appendix, with the compressor speed set
to full, for the duration of cooling mode testing
(CapacityFull, PFull), which represents an
outdoor temperature operating condition of 95 [deg]F dry-bulb and 67
[deg]F wet-bulb temperatures. Conduct the second test in accordance
with the ambient conditions for Test Condition 2, in Table 1 of this
appendix, with the compressor speed set to low, for the duration of
cooling mode testing (CapacityLow, PLow), which
represents an outdoor temperature operating condition of 83 [deg]F dry-
bulb and 67.5 [deg]F wet-bulb temperatures. Set the compressor speed
required for each test condition in accordance with the instructions LG
submitted to DOE (Docket No. EERE-2018-BT-WAV-0007-0002).
[[Page 33652]]
Table 1--Evaporator and Condenser (Indoor) Inlet Test Conditions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Evaporator and condenser inlet
air [deg]F ([deg]C)
Test condition -------------------------------- Compressor speed
Dry bulb Wet bulb
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Test Condition 1............................ 80 (26.7) 67 (19.4) Full.
Test Condition 2............................ 80 (26.7) 67 (19.4) Low.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replace the provisions in Section 4.1.1, Duct Heat Transfer that
follow ``j represents the condenser exhaust duct and, for dual-duct
units, the condenser exhaust duct and the condenser inlet duct.'' to
read as follows:
Calculate the total heat transferred from the surface of the
condenser exhaust duct to the indoor conditioned space while operating
in cooling mode at each test condition in Table 1 of this appendix, as
follows:
Qduct_Full = 3 x Aduct x (Tduct_Full-
Tei)
Qduct_Low = 3 x Aduct x (Tduct_Low-
Tei)
Where:
Qduct_Full and Qduct_Low = the total heat
transferred from the condenser exhaust duct to the indoor
conditioned space in cooling mode, in Btu/h, when tested at Test
Condition 1 and Test Condition 2 in Table 1 of this appendix,
respectively.
3 = convection coefficient in Btu/h per square foot per [deg]F.
Aduct = surface area of the condenser exhaust duct, in
square feet.
Tduct_Full and Tduct_Low = average surface
temperature for the condenser exhaust duct, as measured at Test
Condition 1 and Test Condition 2 in Table 1 of this appendix,
respectively, as required in section 4.1 of this appendix.
Tei = average evaporator inlet air dry-bulb temperature,
as measured in this section, in [deg]F.
Replace Section 4.1.2, Infiltration Air Heat Transfer with the
following:
Infiltration Air Heat Transfer. Calculate the sample unit's heat
contribution from infiltration air into the conditioned space for both
cooling mode tests, which represent the 95 [deg]F and the 83 [deg]F
dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating conditions, as described in this
section. Calculate the dry air mass flow rate of infiltration air
according to the following equations:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02JN20.015
Where:
m95 and m83 = dry air mass flow rate of
infiltration air, as calculated for Test Condition 1 and Test
Condition 2 in Table 1 of this appendix, representative of the 95
[deg]F and 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating
conditions, respectively, in pounds per minute (lb/m).
Vco_Full and Vco_Low = average volumetric flow
rate of the condenser outlet air as determined in section 4.1 of
this appendix, during cooling mode testing for Test Condition 1 and
Test Condition 2 in Table 1 of this appendix, respectively, in cubic
feet per minute (cfm).
[rho]co_Full and [rho]co_Low = average density
of the condenser outlet air as determined in section 4.1 of this
appendix, during cooling mode testing at Test Condition 1 and Test
Condition 2 in Table 1 of this appendix, respectively, in pounds
mass per cubic foot (lbm/ft\3\).
[omega]co_Full and [omega]co_Low = average
humidity ratio of condenser outlet air as determined in section 4.1
of this appendix, during cooling mode testing at Test Condition 1
and Test Condition 2 in Table 1 of this appendix, respectively, in
pounds mass of water vapor per pounds mass of dry air
(lbw/lbda).
Replace Section 5.1, Adjusted Cooling Capacity with the following:
Adjusted Cooling Capacity. Calculate the adjusted cooling capacity
at each outdoor temperature operating condition, ACC95 and
ACC83, expressed in Btu/h, according to the following
equations:
ACC95 = CapacityFull-Qduct\Full-Qinfiltration\95
ACC83 = CapacityLow-Qduct\Low-Qinfiltration\83
Where:
CapacityFull and CapacityLow = cooling
capacity, as measured in section 4.1 of this appendix, at Test
Condition 1 and Test Condition 2 in Table 1 of this appendix,
respectively, in Btu/h.
Qduct_Full and Qduct_Low = duct heat transfer
while operating in cooling mode as calculated in section 4.1.1 of
this appendix.
Qinfiltration_95 and Qinfiltration_83 = total
infiltration air heat transfer in cooling mode as calculated in
section 4.1.2 of this appendix, representative of the 95 [deg]F and
83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating conditions,
respectively, in Btu/h.
Replace Section 5.3, Annual Energy Consumption with the following:
Annual Energy Consumption. Calculate the sample unit's annual
energy consumption in each operating mode according to the equation
below. Use the following annual hours of operation and equation for
each operating mode:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual
Operating mode Subscript operating
hours
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cooling Mode, Full \1\.......... full.................. 750
Cooling Mode, Low \1\........... low................... 750
Off-Cycle....................... oc.................... 880
Inactive or Off................. ia or om.............. 1,355
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ These operating mode hours are for the purposes of calculating
annual energy consumption under different ambient conditions and are
not a division of the total cooling mode operating hours. The total
cooling mode operating hours are 750 hours.
AECm = Pm x tm x 0.001
Where:
AECm = annual energy consumption in each operating mode,
in kWh/year.
Pm = average power in each operating mode, in watts.
m represents the operating mode (``Full'' and ``Low'' cooling mode
compressor speeds that represent operation at 95 [deg]F and 83
[deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating conditions,
respectively, ``oc'' off-cycle, and ``ia'' inactive or ``om'' off
mode).
tm = number of annual operating time in each operating
mode, in hours.
0.001 kWh/Wh = conversion factor from watt-hours to kilowatt-hours.
Calculate the sample unit's total annual energy consumption in off
cycle
[[Page 33653]]
mode and inactive or off mode according to the equation below:
AECT = [Sigma]mAECm
Where:
AECT = total annual energy consumption attributed to off
cycle mode and inactive or off mode, in kWh/year;
AECm = total annual energy consumption in each operating
mode, in kWh/year.
m represents the operating modes, off cycle mode and inactive or off
mode.
Replace Section 5.4, Combined Energy Efficiency Ratio with the
following:
Unadjusted Combined Energy Efficiency Ratio. Using the annual
operating hours, as outlined in section 5.3 of this appendix, calculate
the sample unit's unadjusted combined energy efficiency ratio,
CEERUA, expressed in Btu/Wh, according to the following
equation:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02JN20.016
Where:
CEERUA = unadjusted combined energy efficiency ratio for
the sample unit, in Btu/Wh.
ACC95 and ACC83 = adjusted cooling capacity,
tested at Test Condition 1 and Test Condition 2 in Table 1 of this
appendix, respectively, that are representative of operation at the
95 [deg]F and 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating
conditions, respectively, as calculated in section 5.1 of this
appendix, in Btu/h.
AECFull and AECLow = annual energy consumption
for cooling mode operation at Test Condition 1 and Test Condition 2
in Table 1 in this appendix that represent operation at 95 [deg]F
and 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating conditions,
respectively, as calculated in section 5.3 of this appendix, in kWh/
year.
AECT = total annual energy consumption attributed to off
cycle mode and inactive or off mode, in kWh/year, calculated in
section 5.3 of this appendix.
750 = number of cooling mode hours per year.
0.001 kWh/Wh = conversion factor for watt-hours to kilowatt-hours.
0.2 = weighting factor for the 95 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor
temperature operating condition.
0.8 = weighting factor for the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor
temperature operating condition.
Add after Section 5.4, Combined Energy Efficiency Ratio:
5.5 Adjustment of the Combined Energy Efficiency Ratio. Adjust the
sample unit's combined energy efficiency ratio as follows.
5.5.1 Theoretical Comparable Single-Speed Portable Air Conditioner
Cooling Capacity and Power at the Lower Outdoor Temperature Operating
Condition. Calculate the cooling capacity and cooling capacity with
cycling losses, expressed in British thermal units per hour (Btu/h),
and electrical power input, expressed in watts, for a theoretical
comparable single-speed portable air conditioner at the 83 [deg]F dry-
bulb outdoor temperature operating condition.
Capacity83_SS = CapacityFull
Capacity83_SS_CLF = CapacityFull x 0.875
P83_SS = PFull
Where:
Capacity83_SS = theoretical comparable single-speed
portable air conditioner cooling capacity, in Btu/h, calculated for
the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating condition.
Capacity83_SS_CLF = theoretical comparable single-speed
portable air conditioner cooling capacity with cycling losses, in
Btu/h, calculated for the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature
operating condition.
CapacityFull = cooling capacity, in Btu/h, measured in
section 4.1 of this appendix at Test Condition 1 in Table 1 of this
appendix.
P83_SS = theoretical comparable single-speed portable air
conditioner electrical power input, in watts, calculated for the 83
[deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating condition.
PFull = electrical power input, in watts, measured in
section 4.1 of this appendix at Test Condition 1 in Table 1 of this
appendix.
0.875 = cycling loss factor for the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor
temperature operating condition.
5.5.2 Duct Heat Transfer for a Theoretical Comparable Single-Speed
Portable Air Conditioner at the Lower Outdoor Temperature Operating
Condition. Calculate the condenser exhaust duct heat transfer to the
conditioned space for a theoretical comparable single-speed portable
air conditioner at the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating
condition, as follows:
Qduct_83_SS = 3 x Aduct x (Tduct_Full-
Tei)
Where:
Qduct_83_SS = total heat transferred from the condenser
exhaust duct to the indoor conditioned space in cooling mode, for a
theoretical comparable single-speed portable air conditioner at the
83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating condition, in Btu/
h.
3 = convection coefficient, in Btu/h per square foot per [deg]F.
Aduct = surface area of the condenser exhaust duct, as
calculated in section 4.1.1 of this appendix, in square feet.
Tduct_Full = average surface temperature for the
condenser exhaust duct, as measured in section 4.1.1 of this
appendix at Test Condition 1 in Table 1 of this appendix, in [deg]F.
Tei = average evaporator inlet air dry-bulb temperature,
measured in section 4.1.1 of this appendix, in [deg]F.
5.5.3 Infiltration Air Heat Transfer for a Theoretical Comparable
Single-Speed Portable Air Conditioner at the Lower Outdoor Temperature
Operating Condition. Calculate the heat contribution from infiltration
air for a theoretical comparable single-speed portable air conditioner
at the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating condition, as
described in this section. Calculate the dry air mass flow rate of
infiltration air according to the following equation:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02JN20.017
Where:
m83_SS = dry air mass flow rate of infiltration air for a
theoretical comparable single-speed portable air conditioner at the
83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating condition, in lb/m.
Vco_Full = actual average volumetric flow rate of the
condenser outlet air, as determined in section 4.1 of this appendix
during cooling mode testing with the full compressor speed at Test
Condition 1 in Table 1 of this appendix, in cfm.
[rho]co_Full = actual average density of the condenser
outlet air, as determined in section 4.1 of this appendix during
cooling mode at Test Condition 1 in Table 1 of this appendix, in
lbm/ft\3\.
[omega]co_Full = average humidity ratio of condenser
outlet air, as determined in section 4.1 of this appendix during
cooling mode testing at Test Condition 1 in Table 1 of this
appendix, in pounds mass of water vapor per pounds mass of dry air
(lbw/lbda).
Calculate the sensible component of infiltration air heat
contribution for a theoretical comparable single-speed portable air
conditioner at the 83 [deg]F dry-
[[Page 33654]]
bulb outdoor temperature operating condition as follows:
Qs_83_SS = m83_SS x 60 x [(0.24 x
(Tia_83-80)) + (0.444 x (0.01086 x Tia_83-0.0112
x 80))]
Where:
Qs_83_SS = sensible heat added to the room by
infiltration air for a theoretical comparable single-speed portable
air conditioner, at the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature
operating condition, in Btu/h.
0.24 Btu/lbm-[deg]F = specific heat of dry air.
0.444 Btu/lbm-[deg]F = specific heat of water vapor.
80 = indoor chamber dry-bulb temperature, in [deg]F.
Tia_95 and Tia_83 = infiltration air dry-bulb
temperatures for the 95 [deg]F and the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor
temperature operating conditions, 95 [deg]F and 83 [deg]F,
respectively.
0.01086 = [omega]ia_83 = humidity ratio of the
infiltration air for the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature
operating condition, in lbw/lbda.
0.0112 = humidity ratio of the indoor chamber air at Test Condition
1 in Table 1 of this appendix, in lbw/lbda.
60 = conversion factor from minutes to hours.
m83_SS as previously calculated in this section.
Calculate the latent component of infiltration air heat
contribution for a theoretical comparable single-speed portable air
conditioner at the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating
condition as follows:
Ql_83_SS = m83_SS x 63660 x
([omega]ia_83-0.0112)
Where:
Ql_83_SS = latent heat added to the room by infiltration
air for a theoretical comparable single-speed portable air
conditioner, at the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating
condition, in Btu/h.
63660 Btu-m/lbm-h = latent heat of vaporization for water
vapor, 1060 Btu/lbm, multiplied by the conversion factor
from minutes to hours, 60 m/h.
0.0112 lbw/lbda = humidity ratio of the indoor
chamber air.
m83_SS and [omega]ia_83 as previously
calculated and defined, respectively, in this section.
Calculate the total heat contribution of the infiltration air for a
theoretical comparable single-speed portable air conditioner at the 83
[deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating condition according to
the following equation:
Qinfiltration_83_SS = Qs_83_SS +
Ql_83_SS
Where:
Qinfiltration_83_SS = total infiltration air heat in
cooling mode for a theoretical comparable single-speed portable air
conditioner at the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating
condition, in Btu/h.
Qs_83_SS, Ql_83_SS as previously calculated in
this section
5.5.4 Adjusted Cooling Capacity for a Theoretical Comparable
Single-Speed Portable Air Conditioner at the Lower Outdoor Temperature
Operating Condition. Calculate the adjusted cooling capacity for a
theoretical comparable single-speed portable air conditioner at the 83
[deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating condition without cycling
losses, ACC83_SS, and with cycling losses,
ACC83_SS_CLF, in Btu/h, according to the following
equations:
ACC83_SS = Capacity83_SS-Qduct_83_SS-
Qinfiltration_83_SS
ACC83_SS_CLF = Capacity83_SS_CLF-
Qduct_83_SS-Qinfiltration_83_SS
Where:
ACC83_SS and ACC83_SS_CLF = adjusted cooling
capacity for a theoretical comparable single-speed portable air
conditioner at the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating
condition without and with cycling losses, respectively, in Btu/h.
Capacity83_SS and Capacity83_SS_CLF =
theoretical comparable single-speed portable air conditioner cooling
capacity without and with cycling losses, respectively, in Btu/h, at
the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating condition,
calculated in section 5.5.1 of this appendix.
Qduct_83_SS = total heat transferred from the ducts to
the indoor conditioned space in cooling mode for a theoretical
comparable single-speed portable air conditioner at the 83 [deg]F
dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating condition, in Btu/h,
calculated in section 5.5.2 of this appendix.
Qinfiltration_83_SS = total infiltration air heat in
cooling mode for a theoretical comparable single-speed portable air
conditioner at the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating
condition, in Btu/h, calculated in section 5.5.3 of this appendix.
5.5.5 Annual Energy Consumption in Cooling Mode for a Theoretical
Comparable Single-Speed Portable Air Conditioner at the Lower Outdoor
Temperature Operating Condition. Calculate the annual energy
consumption in cooling mode for a theoretical comparable single-speed
portable air conditioner at the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature
operating condition, in kWh/year, according to the following equation:
AEC83_SS = P83_SS x 750 x 0.001
Where:
AEC83_SS = annual energy consumption for a theoretical
comparable single-speed portable air conditioner in cooling mode at
the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating condition, in
kWh/year.
P83_SS = electrical power input for a theoretical
comparable single-speed portable air conditioner at the 83 [deg]F
dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating condition as calculated in
section 5.5.1 of this appendix, in watts.
750 = number of cooling mode hours per year, as defined in section
5.3 of this appendix.
0.001 kWh/Wh = conversion factor from watt-hours to kilowatt-hours.
5.5.6 Combined Energy Efficiency Ratio for a Theoretical Comparable
Single-Speed Portable Air Conditioner. Calculate the combined energy
efficiency ratio for a theoretical comparable single-speed portable air
conditioner without cycling losses, CEERSS, and with cycling
losses, CEERSS_CLF, in Btu/Wh, according to the following
equations:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02JN20.018
[[Page 33655]]
Where:
CEERSS and CEERSS_CLF = combined energy
efficiency ratio for a theoretical comparable single-speed portable
air conditioner without and with cycling losses considered,
respectively, in Btu/Wh.
ACC95 = adjusted cooling capacity for the sample unit, as
calculated in section 5.1 of this appendix, when tested at Test
Condition 1 in Table 1 of this appendix that is representative of
operation at the 95 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating
condition, in Btu/h.
ACC83_SS and ACC83_SS_CLF = adjusted cooling
capacity for a theoretical comparable single-speed portable air
conditioner at the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating
condition without and with cycling losses, respectively, as
calculated in section 5.5.4 of this appendix, in Btu/h.
AECFull = annual energy consumption for the sample unit,
as calculated in section 5.3 of this appendix, for cooling mode
operation at Test Condition 1 in Table 1 of this appendix that
represents operation at a 95 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature
operating condition, in kWh/year.
AEC83_SS = annual energy consumption for a theoretical
comparable single-speed portable air conditioner in cooling mode at
the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating condition,
calculated in section 5.5.5 of this appendix, in kWh/year.
AECT = total annual energy consumption attributed to all
operating modes except cooling for the sample unit, calculated in
section 5.3 of this appendix, in kWh/year.
750 and 0.001 as defined previously in this section.
0.2 = weighting factor for the 95 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor
temperature operating condition.
0.8 = weighting factor for the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor
temperature operating condition.
5.5.7 Single-Duct Variable-Speed Portable Air Conditioner
Performance Adjustment Factor. Calculate the sample unit's performance
adjustment factor, Fp, according to the following equation:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02JN20.019
Where:
CEERSS and CEERSS_CLF = combined energy
efficiency ratio for a theoretical comparable single-speed portable
air conditioner without and with cycling losses considered,
respectively, calculated in section 5.5.6 of this appendix, in Btu/
Wh.
5.5.8 Single-Duct Variable-Speed Portable Air Conditioner Combined
Energy Efficiency Ratio. Calculate the sample unit's final combined
energy efficiency ratio, CEER, in Btu/Wh, according to the following
equation:
CEER = CEERUA x (1 + Fp)
Where:
CEER = combined energy efficiency ratio for the sample unit, in Btu/
Wh.
CEERUA = unadjusted combined energy efficiency ratio for
the sample unit, calculated in section 5.4 of this appendix, in Btu/
Wh.
Fp = sample unit's performance adjustment factor,
determined in section 5.5.7 of this appendix.''
(3) Representations. LG may not make representations about the
efficiency of any basic model listed in paragraph (1) of this Order for
any purpose, including compliance and marketing, unless the basic model
has been tested in accordance with the provisions set forth above and
such representations fairly disclose the results of such testing.
(4) This waiver shall remain in effect according to the provisions
of 10 CFR 430.27.
(5) DOE issues this waiver on the condition that the statements,
representations, and information provided by LG are valid. If LG makes
any modifications to the controls or configurations of a basic model
subject to this waiver, such modifications will render the waiver
invalid with respect to that basic model, and LG will either be
required to use the current Federal test procedure or submit a new
application for a test procedure waiver. DOE may rescind or modify this
waiver at any time if it determines the factual basis underlying the
petition for waiver is incorrect, or the results from the alternate
test procedure are unrepresentative of a basic model's true energy
consumption characteristics. 10 CFR 430.27(k)(1). Likewise, LG may
request that DOE rescind or modify the waiver if LG discovers an error
in the information provided to DOE as part of its petition, determines
that the waiver is no longer needed, or for other appropriate reasons.
10 CFR 430.27(k)(2).
(6) LG remains obligated to fulfill the certification requirements
set forth at 10 CFR part 429.
Signed in Washington, DC, on May 8, 2020.
Alexander N. Fitzsimmons,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency, Energy Efficiency
and Renewable Energy.
[FR Doc. 2020-11765 Filed 6-1-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
