Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Room Air Conditioners, 35700-35743 [2020-11215]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
35700
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Parts 429 and 430
[EERE–2017–BT–TP–0012]
RIN 1904–AD47
Energy Conservation Program: Test
Procedure for Room Air Conditioners
Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Department of
Energy (DOE) proposes to amend the
test procedure for room air conditioners
(‘‘room ACs’’) to address updates to the
industry standards that are incorporated
by reference, provide for the testing of
variable-speed room ACs to better
reflect their relative efficiency gains at
lower outdoor temperatures as
compared to single-speed room ACs,
and to provide specifications and minor
corrections that would improve
repeatability, reproducibility, and
overall readability of the test procedure.
Because there are no testing
modifications proposed for single-speed
room ACs, DOE expects that the
proposed changes will not affect the
measured energy use for these models.
For variable-speed room ACs, the
proposed changes will improve the
representativeness of the measured
energy use of these models. As part of
this proposal, DOE is announcing a
public meeting to collect comments and
data on its proposal.
DATES:
Meeting: DOE will hold a webinar on
Wednesday, July 8, 2020, from 10:00
a.m. to 3:00 p.m. See section V, ‘‘Public
Participation,’’ for webinar registration
information, participant instructions,
and information about the capabilities
available to webinar participants. If no
participants register for the webinar,
then it will be cancelled. DOE will hold
a public meeting on this proposed test
procedure if one is requested by June
25, 2020.
Comments: DOE will accept
comments, data, and information
regarding this proposal no later than
August 10, 2020. See section V, ‘‘Public
Participation,’’ for details.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are
encouraged to submit comments using
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Alternatively, interested persons may
submit comments, identified by docket
number EERE–2017–BT–TP–0012, by
any of the following methods:
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
(2) Email: RoomAC2017TP0012@
ee.doe.gov. Include the docket number
EERE–2017–BT–TP–0012 or regulatory
information number (RIN) 1904–AD47
in the subject line of the message.
(3) Postal Mail: Appliance and
Equipment Standards Program, U.S.
Department of Energy, Building
Technologies Office, Mailstop EE–5B,
1000 Independence Avenue SW,
Washington, DC 20585–0121.
Telephone: (202) 287–1445. If possible,
please submit all items on a compact
disc (CD), in which case it is not
necessary to include printed copies.
(4) Hand Delivery/Courier: Appliance
and Equipment Standards Program, U.S.
Department of Energy, Building
Technologies Office, 950 L’Enfant Plaza
SW, 6th Floor, Washington, DC 20024.
Telephone: (202) 287–1445. If possible,
please submit all items on a CD, in
which case it is not necessary to include
printed copies.
No telefacsimilies (faxes) will be
accepted. For detailed instructions on
submitting comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process,
see section V of this document.
Docket: The docket, which includes
Federal Register notices, public meeting
attendee lists and transcripts (if a public
meeting is held), comments, and other
supporting documents/materials, is
available for review at https://
www.regulations.gov. All documents in
the docket are listed in the https://
www.regulations.gov index. However,
some documents listed in the index,
such as those containing information
that is exempt from public disclosure,
may not be publicly available.
The docket web page can be found at
https://www.regulations.gov/docket?
D=EERE-2017-BT-TP-0012. The docket
web page will contain simple
instructions on how to access all
documents, including public comments,
in the docket. See section V of this
document for information on how to
submit comments through https://
www.regulations.gov.
Mr.
Bryan Berringer, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Building
Technologies Office, EE–5B, 1000
Independence Avenue SW, Washington,
DC 20585–0121. Telephone: (202) 586–
0371. Email:
ApplianceStandardsQuestions@
ee.doe.gov.
Ms. Sarah Butler, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of the General Counsel,
GC–33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW,
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Washington, DC 20585–0121.
Telephone: (202) 586–1777. Email:
Sarah.Butler@hq.doe.gov.
For further information on how to
submit a comment, review other public
comments and the docket, or participate
in the webinar, contact the Appliance
and Equipment Standards Program staff
at (202) 287–1445 or by email:
ApplianceStandardsQuestions@
ee.doe.gov.
DOE
proposes to incorporate by reference the
following industry standards into 10
CFR part 430:
(1) American National Standards
Institute (ANSI)/Association of Home
Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM)
RAC–1–2015, (ANSI/AHAM RAC–1–
2015), ‘‘Room Air Conditioners;’’ ANSI
approved May 13, 2015.
(2) ANSI/American Society of
Heating, Refrigerating, and AirConditioning Engineers (ASHRAE)
Standard 16–2016, (ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 16–2016), ‘‘Method of Testing
for Rating Room Air Conditioners,
Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners,
and Packaged Terminal Heat Pumps for
Cooling and Heating Capacity;’’ ANSI
approved October 31, 2016.
(3) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.1–
2013, (ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.1),
‘‘Standard Method for Temperature
Measurement;’’ ANSI approved January
30, 2013.
(4) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.2–
1987 (RA 1992), (ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 41.2–1987 (RA 1992)),
‘‘Standard Methods for Laboratory
Airflow Measurement;’’ ANSI
reaffirmed April 20, 1992.
(5) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.3–
2014 (‘‘ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.3–
2014’’), ‘‘Standard Methods for Pressure
Measurement;’’ ANSI approved July 3,
2014.
(6) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.6–
2014, (ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.6–
2014), ‘‘Standard Method for Humidity
Measurement;’’ ANSI approved July 3,
2014.
(7) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.11–
2014, (ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.11–
2014), ‘‘Standard Methods for Power
Measurement;’’ ANSI approved July 3,
2014.
(8) International Electrotechnical
Commission (IEC) Standard 62301, (IEC
Standard 62301 Second Edition),
‘‘Household electrical appliances—
Measurement of standby power,
(Edition 2.0);’’.
Copies of ANSI/AHAM RAC–1–2015
can be obtained from the Association of
Home Appliance Manufacturers at
https://www.aham.org/ht/d/Store/.
Copies of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
2016, ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.1–
2013, ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.2–
1987, ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.3–
2014, ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.6–
2014, and ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
41.11–2014 can be obtained from the
American National Standards Institute
at https://webstore.ansi.org/. Copies of
IEC Standard 62301 can be obtained
from https://webstore.iec.ch.
See section IV.N for additional
information on these standards.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
Table of Contents
I. Authority and Background
A. Authority
B. Background
1. The January 2011 Final Rule
2. The June 2015 Request for Information
3. The August 2017 RFI
4. The LG and Midea Waivers
II. Synopsis of the Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking
III. Discussion
A. Room Air Conditioner Definition
B. Industry Test Standards
1. ANSI/AHAM RAC–1
2. ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16
C. Variable-Speed Room Air Conditioner
Test Procedure
1. Methodology
2. Test Conditions
3. Variable-Speed Compressor Operation
4. Capacity and Electrical Power
Adjustment Factors
5. Cycling Loss Factors
6. Test Condition Weighting Factors
7. Performance Adjustment Factor
8. Air-Enthalpy Test Alternative
9. Product Specific Reporting Provisions
10. Estimated Annual Operating Cost
Calculation
11. Potential Cost Impacts
D. Definitions
E. Active Mode Testing
1. Cooling Mode
2. Heating Mode
3. Off-Cycle Mode
F. Standby Modes and Off Mode
1. Referenced Standby Mode and Off Mode
Test Standard
G. Network Functionality
H. Connected Test Procedure
I. Combined Energy Efficiency Ratio
J. Certification and Verification
Requirements
K. Reorganization of Calculations Currently
in 10 CFR 430.23
L. Test Procedure Costs, Harmonization,
and Other Topics
1. Test Procedure Costs and Impact
2. Harmonization With Industry Standards
3. Other Test Procedure Topics
M. Compliance Date and Waivers
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
B. Review Under Executive Orders 13771
and 13777
C. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act
D. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995
E. Review Under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
F. Review Under Executive Order 13132
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
G. Review Under Executive Order 12988
H. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995
I. Review Under the Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act, 1999
J. Review Under Executive Order 12630
K. Review Under Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act, 2001
L. Review Under Executive Order 13211
M. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal
Energy Administration Act of 1974
N. Description of Materials Incorporated by
Reference
V. Public Participation
A. Participation in the Webinar
B. Submission of Comments
C. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment
VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
I. Authority and Background
Room ACs are included in the list of
‘‘covered products’’ for which DOE is
authorized to establish and amend
energy conservation standards and test
procedures. (42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(2)) DOE’s
energy conservation standards and test
procedure for room ACs are currently
prescribed at 10 CFR 430.32(b) and 10
CFR 430.23(f), respectively. The
following sections discuss DOE’s
authority to establish test procedures for
room ACs and relevant background
information regarding DOE’s
consideration of test procedures for this
product.
A. Authority
The Energy Policy and Conservation
Act, as amended, (EPCA or the Act),1
authorizes 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. These products
include room ACs, the subject of this
document. (42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(2))
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 the
Act specifically include definitions (42
U.S.C. 6291), test procedures (42 U.S.C.
6293), energy conservation standards
(42 U.S.C. 6295), labeling provisions (42
U.S.C. 6294), and the authority to
require information and reports from
manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6296).
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
(Oct. 23, 2018).
2 For editorial reasons, upon codification in the
U.S. Code, Part B was redesignated Part A.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
35701
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
those products (42 U.S.C. 6293(c)).
Similarly, DOE must use these test
procedures to determine whether the
products comply with relevant
standards promulgated under EPCA. (42
U.S.C. 6295(s))
Federal energy efficiency
requirements for covered products
established under EPCA generally
supersede State laws and regulations
concerning energy conservation testing,
labeling, and standards. (See 42 U.S.C.
6297) DOE may, however, grant waivers
of Federal preemption for particular
State laws or regulations, in accordance
with the procedures and other
provisions of EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6297(d))
Under 42 U.S.C. 6293, EPCA sets forth
the criteria and procedures DOE must
follow when prescribing or amending
test procedures for covered products.
EPCA requires that any test procedures
prescribed or amended under this
section be reasonably designed to
produce test results which measure
energy efficiency, energy use or
estimated annual operating cost of a
covered product during a representative
average use cycle or period of use and
not be unduly burdensome to conduct.
(42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3))
In addition, EPCA requires that DOE
amend its test procedures for all covered
products to integrate measures of
standby mode and off mode energy
consumption. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A))
Standby mode and off mode energy
consumption must be incorporated into
the overall energy efficiency, energy
consumption, or other energy descriptor
for each covered product unless the
current test procedures already account
for and incorporate standby and off
mode energy consumption or such
integration is technically infeasible. If
an integrated test procedure is
technically infeasible, DOE must
prescribe a separate standby mode and
off mode energy use test procedure for
the covered product, if technically
feasible. (U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A)(ii)) Any
such amendment must consider the
most current versions of the IEC
Standard 62301 3 and IEC Standard
3 IEC 62301, ‘‘Household electrical appliances—
Measurement of standby power’’ (Edition 2.0, 2011–
01).
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
35702
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
62087 4 as applicable. (42 U.S.C.
6295(gg)(2)(A))
If DOE determines that a test
procedure amendment is warranted, it
must publish proposed test procedures
and offer the public an opportunity to
present oral and written comments on
them. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(2)) EPCA also
requires that, at least once every 7 years,
DOE evaluate test procedures for each
type of covered product, including room
ACs, to determine whether amended
test procedures would more accurately
or fully comply with the requirements
for the test procedures to not be unduly
burdensome to conduct and be
reasonably designed to produce test
results that reflect energy efficiency,
energy use, and estimated operating
costs during a representative average
use cycle or period of use. (42 U.S.C.
6293(b)(1)(A) and (3)) If the Secretary
determines, on his own behalf or in
response to a petition by any interested
person, that a test procedure should be
prescribed or amended, the Secretary
shall promptly publish in the Federal
Register proposed test procedures and
afford interested persons an opportunity
to present oral and written data, views,
and arguments with respect to such
procedures. The comment period on a
proposed rule to amend a test procedure
shall be at least 60 days and may not
exceed 270 days. In prescribing or
amending a test procedure, the
Secretary shall take into account such
information as the Secretary determines
relevant to such procedure, including
technological developments relating to
energy use or energy efficiency of the
type (or class) of covered products
involved. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(2)) If DOE
determines that test procedure revisions
are not appropriate, DOE must publish
its determination not to amend the test
procedures. DOE is publishing this
notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR)
pursuant to the 7-year review
requirement specified in EPCA. (42
U.S.C. 6293(b)(1)(A))
B. Background
DOE’s existing test procedure for
room ACs appears at Title 10 of the CFR
part 430, subpart B, appendix F
(‘‘Uniform Test Method for Measuring
the Energy Consumption of Room Air
Conditioners’’ (‘‘appendix F’’)), and the
room AC performance metric
calculations are codified at 10 CFR
430.23(f). The test procedure for room
ACs was established on June 1, 1977
(hereafter the ‘‘June 1977 final rule’’)
and was subsequently redesignated and
4 IEC 62087, ‘‘Methods of measurement for the
power consumption of audio, video, and related
equipment’’ (Edition 3.0, 2011–04).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
editorially amended on June 29, 1979.
42 FR 27896 (June 1, 1977); 44 FR 37938
(June 29, 1979).
1. The January 2011 Final Rule
The Energy Independence and
Security Act of 2007 (Public Law 110–
140; EISA 2007) directed DOE to amend
its energy efficiency test procedures for
all covered products to include
measures of standby mode and off mode
energy consumption. (42 U.S.C.
6295(gg)(2)(A)) In compliance with
these requirements, on January 6, 2011,
DOE published a final rule (hereafter the
‘‘January 2011 Final Rule’’), amending
the room AC test procedure to include
measurements of standby mode and off
mode power and to introduce a new
combined efficiency metric, Combined
Energy Efficiency Ratio (CEER), that
accounts for energy consumption in
active mode, standby mode and off
mode. 76 FR 971. DOE also incorporated
into its regulations a new industry test
method, International Electrotechnical
Commission (IEC) Standard 62301,
‘‘Household electrical appliances—
Measurement of standby power (first
edition June 2005)’’ (‘‘IEC Standard
62301 First Edition’’), to measure the
standby and off mode energy
consumption. In addition to IEC
Standard 62301 First Edition, the
January 2011 Final Rule updated
references to test methods developed by
the American National Standards
Institute (ANSI), the Association of
Home Appliance Manufacturers
(AHAM) and the American Society of
Heating, Refrigerating, and AirConditioning Engineers (ASHRAE). The
current room AC test procedure
incorporates by reference three industry
test methods: (1) ANSI/AHAM RAC–1–
2008, ‘‘Room Air Conditioners’’ (ANSI/
AHAM RAC–1–2008),5 (2) ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 16–1983 (RA 2009),
‘‘Method of Testing for Rating Room Air
Conditioners and Packaged Terminal
Air Conditioners’’ (ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 16–2009),6 and (3) IEC
Standard 62301 First Edition.7
2. The June 2015 Request for
Information
On June 18, 2015, DOE published a
request for information (RFI) (hereafter
the ‘‘June 2015 RFI’’) regarding the
energy conservation standards and test
procedure for room ACs. 80 FR 34843.
In addition to soliciting information
regarding the energy conservations
5 Copies can be purchased from https://
webstore.ansi.org.
6 Copies can be purchased from https://
www.techstreet.com.
7 Copies can be purchased from https://
webstore.iec.ch.
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
standards, the June 2015 RFI discussed
and sought comment on the following
aspects of the room AC test procedure:
(1) Potential updates to the energy
efficiency metric that would address
performance in additional operating
modes; (2) alternate methods for
measuring cooling mode performance;
(3) measuring heating mode
performance and any relevant test
methods, temperature conditions, or test
burden; (4) methods for measuring
performance at reduced cooling loads
and the prevalence of units on the
market with components optimized for
efficient operation at reduced cooling
loads; (5) testing and certification of
units that can operate on multiple
voltages; and (6) the energy usage
associated with connected functionality.
80 FR at 34846–34848 (June 18, 2015).
In response to the June 2015 RFI, DOE
received comments from interested
parties pertaining to the room AC test
procedure, which are summarized
throughout this NOPR.8
3. The August 2017 RFI
On August 4, 2017, DOE published
another RFI (hereafter the ‘‘August 2017
RFI’’) regarding the test procedure for
room ACs. 82 FR 36349. Following
publication of the June 2015 RFI, DOE
identified additional topics and
questions for which it sought feedback,
specifically regarding amendments to
the room AC test procedure to
harmonize with the recently established
portable air conditioner (‘‘portable AC’’)
test procedure, to clarify test setup and
temperature conditions, to reference
updated industry test procedures for
room ACs, and on any additional topics
that might inform DOE’s decisions in a
future test procedure rulemaking. DOE
also welcomed further comments on the
topics raised in the June 2015 RFI and
on other issues relevant to the conduct
of such a rulemaking that were not
specifically identified in that document.
AHAM opposed harmonizing the
room AC test procedure with the
portable AC test procedure, claiming
that harmonization would not assist
consumers in making purchasing
decisions, mainly because the two
products have different consumers and
are used for significantly different
applications, based on recent consumer
survey data. (AHAM, No. 3 at pp. 1–4) 9
8 All public comments are located in the room AC
energy conservation standards rulemaking docket:
https://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=EERE2014-BT-STD-0059.
9 A notation in the form ‘‘AHAM, No. 3 at pp. 1–
4’’ identifies a written comment: (1) Made by the
Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers; (2)
recorded in document number 3 that is filed in the
docket of the current room AC test procedure
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
According to AHAM, the survey
suggested that room ACs are purchased
for homes without central air
conditioning (‘‘central AC’’), where cost
is a key factor, and where portability is
not. AHAM also stated that room ACs
are typically used for primary cooling,
whereas portable ACs are used for
supplemental cooling (i.e., in addition
to a central AC). AHAM claimed that
the significant design difference
between room ACs and portable ACs
(specifically, that room ACs are
installed in the barrier between the
conditioned and unconditioned space,
whereas portable ACs are installed
entirely within the conditioned space)
leads to drastically different design
decisions on the size, weight, and shape
of the product, impacting available
design options for improving efficiency
as well as the physical limitations on
testing the products. Therefore,
according to AHAM, harmonizing the
test procedures for room ACs and
portable ACs would result in consumer
confusion and increased burden for
manufacturers. Id. DOE notes that the
proposals in this document regarding
test procedure updates for room ACs
were not considered on the basis of
similarities or differences between room
ACs and portable ACs. However, in
development of the portable AC test
procedure, DOE relied on data for room
ACs in instances in which data specific
to portable ACs were lacking. In the
current rulemaking, DOE considered
such data for room ACs during
development of the proposed
amendments to the room AC test
procedure.
The Appliance Standards Awareness
Project, Alliance to Save Energy,
American Council for an EnergyEfficient Economy, Consumer
Federation of America, Natural
Resources Defense Council, Northeast
Energy Efficiency Partnerships,
Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance,
and Northwest Power and Conservation
Council (hereafter the ‘‘Joint
Advocates’’) and the Pacific Gas and
Electric Company, Southern California
Gas Company, San Diego Gas and
Electric, and Southern California Edison
(hereafter the ‘‘California IOUs’’) both
noted that harmonizing the room AC
and portable AC test procedures would
allow for a comparison between the two
products, which they agreed provide a
similar function and consumer utility.
(Joint Advocates, No. 6 at p. 1;
California IOUs, No. 5 at p. 2)
rulemaking (Docket No. EERE–2017–BT–TP–0012)
and available for review at https://
www.regulations.gov; and (3) which appears on
pages 1 through 4 of document number 3.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
Nonetheless, neither supported aligning
the room AC test procedure with the
current portable AC test procedure.
The California IOUs expressed
concern that the benefit of
harmonization might not outweigh the
negative impacts of an additional
cooling mode test condition for room
ACs; namely, that adding a second test
condition would obscure the
determination of peak load energy
consumption and would be detrimental
for the effective determination of room
AC energy demand impact during peak
usage times, which is of significant
importance to the California IOUs.
(California IOUs, No. 5 at p. 2) The Joint
Advocates noted that the portable AC
test procedure does not capture partload performance and thus would not
capture the benefits of technologies that
improve part-load performance, such as
variable-speed compressors. In light of
this, rather than aligning the room AC
test procedure with the portable AC test
procedure, the Joint Advocates urged
DOE to incorporate part-load
performance into the room AC test
procedure and the portable AC test
procedure. (Joint Advocates, No. 6 at pp.
1–3) As discussed in sections III.E
through III.K of this document, DOE is
not proposing any significant changes to
the room AC test procedure at this time
for single-speed room ACs, which
represent the majority of room AC
configurations on the market today.
Specifically, as discussed in section
III.E.1.e of this document, DOE
considered multiple test conditions as
well as constant-cooling-load-based 10 or
dynamic-cooling-load-based tests 11 as
an alternative to the existing constanttemperature single outdoor condition
room AC test procedure and has
initially determined that such
amendments would not be warranted
for single-speed room ACs. However,
DOE proposes in this document to adopt
specific testing requirements for room
ACs that use variable-speed
compressors (‘‘variable-speed room
ACs’’) to better represent their relative
efficiency compared to single-speed
10 Constant-cooling-load-based tests fix the
amount of heat to the indoor test room by the
reconditioning equipment, generally less than the
test unit’s nominal cooling capacity, while the
indoor test room temperature is permitted to change
and is controlled by the test unit according to its
thermostat setting, which is fixed throughout
testing.
11 Dynamic-cooling-load-based tests vary the
amount of heat added to the indoor test room by
the chamber reconditioning equipment, while the
indoor test room temperature is permitted to change
and is controlled by the test unit and fixed
thermostat setting, thereby measuring how a unit
reacts to changing load conditions.
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
35703
room ACs, as described further in
section III.C of this document.
4. The LG and Midea Waivers
On June 29, 2018, DOE announced
receipt of a petition for waiver and
application of an interim waiver from
LG Electronic USA, Inc. (‘‘LG’’), in
which LG sought an exemption from the
DOE test procedure for room ACs,
which appears in appendix F for certain
room AC models with variable-speed
capabilities (hereafter the ‘‘LG Petition
for Waiver’’).12 83 FR 30717 (June 29,
2018). According to LG, the current DOE
test procedure for room ACs, which
provides for testing at full-load
performance only, does not take into
account the benefits of variable-speed
room ACs at part-load conditions, and
misrepresents their actual energy
consumption. LG suggested an alternate
test procedure for its variable-speed
room ACs, which provided for testing
each unit at four different outdoor
temperatures instead of a single outdoor
temperature, with the unit compressor
speed fixed at each temperature. LG’s
approach for the alternate test procedure
was derived from the current DOE test
procedure for central ACs (10 CFR part
430, subpart B, appendix M (‘‘appendix
M’’)). As discussed in a notice of
petition for waiver and notice of grant
of interim waiver (hereafter the ‘‘Grant
of LG Interim Waiver’’), DOE initially
agreed with LG’s claim that the DOE test
procedure evaluates the variable-speed
models listed in the LG Petition for
Waiver in a manner that is
unrepresentative of their energy use. 83
FR 30717, 30719. DOE also reviewed the
alternate procedure proposed by LG and
based on that review determined that
LG’s suggested procedure would allow
for the accurate measurement of the
energy use for the listed variable-speed
room ACs. Therefore, DOE granted an
interim waiver to LG to use LG’s
suggested alternate test procedure for
LG’s listed variable-speed room AC
models, with an additional specification
of how to determine the intermediate
compressor speed. On May, 8, 2019,
DOE published a Decision and Order
(hereafter the ‘‘LG Waiver’’), granting a
waiver for four variable-speed basic
models with the condition that LG must
test and rate these models according to
an alternate test procedure that was
substantively consistent with that
suggested by LG, and report productspecific information that reflects the
alternate test procedure. 84 FR 2011.
12 All published documents directly related to the
waiver are available in docket EERE–2018–BT–
WAV–0006. (https://www.regulations.gov/
document?D=EERE-2018-BT-WAV-0006.)
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
35704
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
The alternate test procedure required
under the LG Waiver differs from that
required in the Grant of LG Interim
Waiver as follows: (1) Removing the
allowance to use a psychrometric
chamber (which would be consistent
with an air-enthalpy testing approach)
instead of a calorimeter chamber, (2)
adding definitions for each fixed
compressor speed, (3) adjusting the
annual energy consumption and
operating cost calculations that provide
the basis for the information presented
to consumers on the EnergyGuide Label,
and (4) requiring that compressor
speeds be set in accordance with
instructions submitted by LG on April 2,
2019.13 DOE determined that those
changes were necessary to ensure better
repeatability and reproducibility of the
LG Waiver test procedure, as well as
representativeness of the results. 84 FR
20111.
On March 25, 2019, GD Midea Air
Conditioning Equipment Co. LTD.
(‘‘Midea’’) submitted a petition for
waiver and application for interim
waiver from the room AC test procedure
for six room AC models with variablespeed capabilities.14 Midea sought a test
procedure exemption consistent with
the approach DOE allowed in the Grant
of LG Interim Waiver. DOE reviewed
Midea’s petition and, based on that
review, initially agreed that Midea’s
suggested procedure, with the same
modifications DOE included in the LG
Waiver, would allow for the accurate
measurement of the energy use for the
listed variable-speed room AC models.
Therefore, on December 13, 2019, DOE
granted Midea an interim waiver from
the room AC test procedure (hereafter
the ‘‘Grant of Midea Interim Waiver’’)
for the models listed in Midea’s
petition, using the alternate test
procedure required in the LG Waiver,
which published subsequent to Midea’s
petition for waiver. 84 FR 68159.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 430.27(l),
following the grant of any waiver, DOE
must publish in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking to amend
its regulations so as to eliminate the
need for continuation of the waiver. As
soon thereafter as practicable, DOE must
publish in the Federal Register a final
rule. Id. The waiver would then
terminate on the effective date of the
final rule. 10 CFR 430.27(h)(2).
II. Synopsis of the Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking
In this NOPR, DOE proposes
amendments to the existing test
procedures for room ACs to: (1) Update
to the latest versions of industry test
methods that are incorporated by
reference; (2) adopt new testing
provisions for variable-speed room ACs
that reflect the relative efficiency gains
at reduced cooling loads compared to
single-speed room ACs; (3) adopt new
definitions consistent with these two
proposed amendments; and (4) provide
specifications and minor corrections to
improve the test procedure
repeatability, reproducibility, and
overall readability.
DOE has tentatively determined that
the proposed amendments would both
provide more representative efficiency
measurements for variable-speed room
ACs and not alter the measured
efficiency of single-speed room ACs,
which constitute the large majority of
units on the market. DOE has also
tentatively determined that the
proposed test procedure would not be
unduly burdensome to conduct. DOE’s
proposed actions are summarized in
Table II–1 and addressed in detail in
section III of this document.
TABLE II–1—SUMMARY OF CHANGES IN PROPOSED TEST PROCEDURE RELATIVE TO CURRENT TEST PROCEDURE
Current DOE test procedure
Proposed test procedure
References industry standards— ...................................................
Updates references to applicable sections of: .............................
• ANSI/AHAM RAC–1–2008,
• ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–2009, and
• IEC Standard 62301 First Edition.
Testing, calculation of CEER metric, and certification for all room
ACs based on single temperature rating condition.
—Definition of ‘‘room air conditioner’’ does not explicitly include function of providing cool conditioned air to an enclosed space, and references ‘‘prime,’’ an undefined term,
to describe the source of refrigeration
—‘‘Cooling mode’’ is an undefined term.
Definitions— ............................................................................
Appendix F does not explicitly identify the scope of the test procedure.
Provides that test unit be installed in a manner similar to consumer installation.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
Calculations for average annual energy consumption, combined
annual energy consumption, energy efficiency ratio (EER), and
CEER are located in 10 CFR 430.23(f).
13 The instructions provided by LG on April 2,
2019 were marked as confidential and, as such,
were treated as confidential. The document is
located in the docket at https://
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
• ANSI/AHAM RAC–1–2015,
• ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–2016 (including relevant
cross-referenced industry standards), and
• IEC Standard 62301 Second Edition.
Testing, calculation of CEER metric, and certification for variable-speed room ACs based on additional reduced outdoor
temperature test conditions.
—Adds the word ‘‘cooled’’ in the definition of ‘‘room air conditioner’’ to describe the conditioned air a room AC provides
and removes ‘‘prime’’ from the definition.
—Adds definition for ‘‘cooling mode’’.
Creates new section indicating the appendix applies to the energy performance of room ACs.
—References ANSI/ASHRAE Standard-2016, specifying that
the perimeter of louvered room ACs be sealed to the separating partition, consistent with common testing practice.
—Specifies that non-louvered room ACs be installed inside a
compatible wall sleeve, with the manufacturer-provided installation materials.
—Moves calculations for CEER and annual energy consumption for each operating mode into appendix F.
—Removes EER calculation and references entirely, as it is obsolete.
www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2018-BTWAV-0006-0010.
14 All published documents directly related to the
interim waiver are available in docket EERE–2019–
PO 00000
Attribution
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Industry test procedure updates.
In response to the LG Waiver.
Added by DOE (clarification).
Added by DOE (specifies the
applicability of the test procedure).
Industry test procedure update
and added by DOE (additional installation specifications).
Added by DOE (improve readability).
BT–WAV–0009 (https://www.regulations.gov/
docket?D=EERE-2019-BT-WAV-0009.)
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
III. Discussion
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
A. Room Air Conditioner Definition
DOE defines a ‘‘room air conditioner’’
as a consumer product, other than a
packaged terminal air conditioner,
which is powered by a single-phase
electric current and which is an encased
assembly designed as a unit for
mounting in a window or through the
wall for the purpose of providing
delivery of conditioned air to an
enclosed space. It includes a prime
source of refrigeration and may include
a means for ventilating and heating. 10
CFR 430.2.
DOE does not propose any changes to
the room AC definition in this NOPR
that would modify the current scope of
covered products. However, as
described further below, DOE proposes
minor adjustments to the room AC
definition to ensure the definition does
not inadvertently apply to new products
introduced on the market. The proposed
revised definition would harmonize
with the wording of definitions for other
DOE covered products, which DOE
believes will help avoid any potential
confusion or unintentional overlap in
scope of coverage between room ACs
and any other products.
In the June 2015 RFI, DOE noted that
other consumer products, including
portable ACs and dehumidifiers, are
also self-encased, powered by a singlephase electric current, refrigerationbased, and deliver conditioned air to an
enclosed space, thereby meeting many
of the criteria in the room AC definition.
DOE also noted, however, that the
definition of a room AC specifies that
the unit is designed to be mounted in a
window or through a wall, which
excludes portable ACs and
dehumidifiers. DOE suggested in the
June 2015 RFI that explicitly excluding
other products was unnecessary because
of the distinction based on mounting. 80
FR 34843, 34845 (June 18, 2015). AHAM
agreed that the room AC definition need
not be updated to explicitly exclude
other products and further suggested
that adding these exclusions would be
confusing. (AHAM, June 2015 RFI, No.
5 at p. 2) General Electric Appliances
(GE) supported AHAM’s comments.
(GE, June 2015 RFI, No. 6 at p. 1) 15
Based on DOE’s considerations in the
June 2015 RFI, and given that no
commenters objected to DOE’s
suggestion, DOE does not propose to
add exclusions for other consumer
products in the room AC definition.
15 GE stated that it supports the comments
submitted by AHAM in response to the June 2015
RFI in their entirety and adopted them by reference.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
In the June 2015 RFI, DOE also noted
that some room ACs may have other
functions beyond the cooling, heating,
and ventilation functions currently
specified in the room AC definition.
These additional functions could
include air circulation, where air from
within the room is circulated without
bringing air from the outside into the
room; and air cleaning, where
electrostatic filtration, ultraviolet
radiation, or ozone generators clean the
air as it circulates through the unit. 80
FR 34843, 34845 (June 18, 2015). DOE
received no comments related to the
inclusion of other functions in the room
AC definition in response to the June
2015 RFI. DOE understands that these
functions do not represent the key
functionality of a room AC, and
therefore is not proposing that these
functions be addressed in the room AC
definition at this time.
DOE proposes to add the term
‘‘cooled’’ to the room AC definition, so
that it refers to a system that ‘‘. . .
delivers cooled, conditioned air to an
enclosed space . . .’’ (emphasis added).
DOE believes that this revised wording
would better represent the key function
of a room AC, and would avoid any
potential for the room AC definition to
cover other indoor air quality systems
that could be described as
‘‘conditioning’’ the air, but that would
not be appropriately included within
the scope of coverage of a room AC.
Additionally, as described previously,
the current definition of room AC
specifies that it includes a prime source
of refrigeration. DOE contends that
using the word ‘‘prime’’ to describe the
source of refrigeration in the current
definition is extraneous and could be
construed as referring to a ‘‘primary’’
refrigeration system, a distinction that
could inadvertently exclude future
products that implement a different
technology as the primary source of air
conditioning, while implementing a
refrigeration loop as the ‘‘secondary’’
means of cooling or heating. Primary
and secondary means of conditioning
air are not uncommon in certain
refrigeration products and chiller
systems; in fact, some room ACs with
heating functionality implement a
resistance heater as a supplemental form
of heating to the primary heat pump, for
use under extreme temperature
conditions. DOE also notes that the
recently codified portable AC definition
was not limited to products with a
prime source of refrigeration. For these
reasons, DOE proposes to remove the
word ‘‘prime’’ from the room AC
definition.
DOE proposes to incorporate by
reference ASHRAE Standard 16 and
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
35705
ANSI/AHAM RAC–1. In particular,
Section 3 of ASHRAE Standard 16–2016
contains several definitions for terms
defined in EPCA and DOE regulations:
Room air conditioner, packaged
terminal air conditioner, and packaged
terminal heat pump. Where there is a
conflict with the EPCA definition, the
EPCA definition controls. DOE
elsewhere proposes general language to
make clear that regulatory text drafted
by DOE takes precedence over
conflicting language in a document
incorporated by reference. Therefore,
DOE proposes to include a statement in
new Section 0 ‘‘Incorporation by
Reference,’’ in appendix F as follows:
‘‘If there is any conflict between any
industry standard(s) and this appendix,
follow the language of the test
procedure in this appendix,
disregarding the conflicting industry
standard language.’’
DOE also proposes to reorganize the
room AC definition to improve its
readability. As noted above, the minor
editorial revisions and specifications
discussed in this section are not
intended to modify the scope of the
room AC definition.
In summary, DOE proposes to modify
the room AC definition in 10 CFR 430.2
to read as follows:
‘‘Room air conditioner means a
window-mounted or through-the-wallmounted encased assembly, other than
a ‘packaged terminal air conditioner,’
that delivers cooled, conditioned air to
an enclosed space, and is powered by
single-phase electric current. It includes
a source of refrigeration and may
include additional means for ventilating
and heating.
DOE requests comment on the
proposed amendments to the room AC
definition in 10 CFR 430.2.
DOE also proposes to further specify
the scope of coverage of appendix F by
adding a new beginning section stating
that appendix F covers the test
requirements used to measure the
energy performance of room ACs. In
doing so, DOE would clearly limit the
scope of products tested in accordance
with appendix F, and would harmonize
appendix F with test procedures for
other similar covered products, which
also include similar introductory
statements of scope.
DOE requests comment on the
proposed new beginning section to
appendix F that would explicitly state
the scope of coverage.
B. Industry Test Standards
The DOE room AC test procedure in
appendix F references the following two
industry standards as the basis of the
cooling mode test: ANSI/AHAM RAC–
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
35706
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
1–2008 and ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
16–2009. ANSI/AHAM RAC–1–2008
provides the specific test conditions and
associated tolerances, while ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 16–2009 describes
the test setup, instrumentation and
procedures used in the DOE test
procedure. The cooling capacity,
efficiency metric, and other indicators
are then calculated based on the results
obtained through the application of
these test methods, described in
appendix F and 10 CFR 430.23(f).
New versions of ANSI/AHAM RAC–1
and ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16 have
been released since the publication of
the current DOE test procedure. DOE
assessed the updated versions of these
standards to determine if any updates to
the DOE test procedure were warranted.
1. ANSI/AHAM RAC–1
The cooling mode test in appendix F
is conducted in accordance with the
testing conditions, methods, and
calculations in Sections 4, 5, 6.1, and
6.5 of ANSI/AHAM RAC–1–2008, as
summarized in Table III–1.
TABLE III–1—SUMMARY OF ANSI/
AHAM RAC–1–2008 SECTIONS
REFERENCED IN APPENDIX F
ANSI/AHAM
RAC–1–2008
Section
4 .....................
5 .....................
6.1 ..................
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
6.5 ..................
Description
General test requirements,
including power supply
and test tolerances
Test conditions and requirements for a standard
measurement test
Determination of cooling capacity in British thermal
units per hour (Btu/h)
Determination of electrical
input in watts (W)
Since DOE last revised its room AC
test procedure in 2011, ANSI/AHAM
RAC–1 has been updated and the
current standard was released in 2015 as
ANSI/AHAM RAC–1–2015, ‘‘Room Air
Conditioners’’ (ANSI/AHAM RAC–1–
2015).
In the August 2017 RFI, DOE asserted
that the updates to ANSI/AHAM RAC–
1 appear to provide added specificity
but would not substantively impact the
results of DOE’s cooling mode test.
Specifically, ANSI/AHAM RAC–1–2015
introduced new provisions for the
measurement of standby and off mode
power in Section 6.3, as well as the
calculations for annual energy
consumption and CEER in Sections
6.4¥6.8. Because those updates do not
impact the sections relevant to appendix
F, DOE noted that it expects that
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
updating the references to ANSI/AHAM
RAC–1–2015 in appendix F would not
substantively affect test results or test
burden. 82 FR 36349, 36353 (Aug. 4,
2017).
Friedrich Air Conditioning (Friedrich)
and AHAM supported updating the
reference to ANSI/AHAM RAC–1–2015.
(Friedrich, No. 2 at p. 6; AHAM, No. 3
at p. 6) AHAM encouraged DOE to limit
any revisions to the room AC test
procedure to updating the referenced
industry test methods to the most recent
versions. (AHAM, No. 3 at p. 2)
Although ANSI/AHAM RAC–1–2015
maintains the same general organization
as ANSI/AHAM RAC–1–2008, ANSI/
AHAM RAC–1–2015 adds test
requirements and conditions for standby
and off mode, and heating mode in
sections 4 and 5, respectively. Because
the DOE test procedure already
addressed standby and off mode testing
prior to their inclusion in the latest
version of the ANSI/AHAM RAC
standard and the DOE test procedure
does not address heating mode, which
is now included in ANSI/AHAM RAC–
1–2015, and to avoid confusion
regarding the appropriate applicability
of ANSI/AHAM RAC, DOE proposes to
update the existing references to
Sections 4 and 5 of ANSI/AHAM RAC–
1–2008 with references to only to the
cooling mode-specific subsections of
ANSI/AHAM RAC–1–2015: Sections
4.1, 4.2, 5.2.1.1, and 5.2.4.
DOE also notes that the provisions in
ANSI/AHAM RAC–1–2015 for
measuring electrical power input appear
in Section 6.2, rather than Section 6.5 of
ANSI/AHAM RAC–1–2008. To reflect
this change in section numbers, DOE
proposes to update appendix F to
reference Section 6.2 of ANSI/AHAM
RAC–1–2015 to determine the electrical
power input in cooling mode. Because
there is no change in substance, simply
adjusting the section number cannot
affect the test conduct, burden, or
results.
DOE requests comment on the
proposal to incorporate by reference
ANSI/AHAM RAC–1–2015 to adjust the
section references in appendix F to limit
references to cooling mode-specific
sections (by excluding standby, off
mode, and heat mode sections), and to
update the section reference for
measuring electrical power input.
2. ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16
Appendix F currently references the
1983 version of ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 16, which was reaffirmed in
2009, for cooling mode temperature
conditions, methods, and calculations.
ANSI/AHAM RAC–1–2015 also
references the 1983 version of ANSI/
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
ASHRAE Standard 16 reaffirmed in
2009.
In the August 2017 RFI, DOE noted
that a new version of ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 16, published in 2016 (ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 16–2016). ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 16–2016 made a
number of updates to the industry
standard, including an air-enthalpy test
approach as an alternative to the
calorimeter approach, heating mode
testing, additional clarification on
placement of air samplers and
thermocouples, stability requirement
definitions, and new figures for
additional tests and to also improve
previous figures. The general cooling
mode methodology, however, remains
unchanged. 82 FR 36349, 36353 (Aug. 4,
2017). The addition of the air-enthalpy
approach provides more flexibility in
conducting the tests, and the heating
mode test is based on the tests
previously included in ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 58–1986 ‘‘Method of Testing
for Rating Room Air Conditioner and
Packaged Terminal Air Conditioner
Heating Capacity.’’
AHAM supported updating appendix
F to reference ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
16–2016, excluding the adoption of
Sections 7.1(b)¥(d), which contain the
air-enthalpy method and Section 7.1.2,
which contains the heating mode test).
(AHAM, No. 3 at pp. 6¥7) AHAM
suggested that ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
16–2016 provides additional
clarification on placement of air
samplers and thermocouples, adds
stability requirement definitions, adds
new figures for additional tests, and
fixes old figures. (Id.) DOE recognizes
that the general calorimeter test
methodology is unchanged in ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 16–2016 and has
tentatively determined that the
additional detail and clarifying updates
would improve the repeatability and
reproducibility of test results. First,
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–2016
provides best practices for
thermocouple and air sampler
placement, recognizing that the unique
characteristics of each test chamber will
result in particular air flow and
temperature gradients in the chamber,
influenced by the interaction of the
reconditioning equipment and the test
unit. These practices address the
distances for placing the air sampler
from the unit discharge points and
thermocouple spacing on the air
sampling device. Second, Figure 1 and
Figure 2 of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16
are also updated with additional details
and references. Third, Section 5 of
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–2016
includes additional provisions regarding
instrument calibration and accuracy.
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
Fourth, ANSI/ASHRARE Standard 16–
2016 requires measuring data at more
frequent intervals to minimize the
sensitivity of the final average value to
variations in individual data points,
resulting in a more repeatable and
reproducible test procedure. DOE
expects that requiring more frequent
data measurements will have minimal
impact on testing burden because most
testing laboratories are already using a
data acquisition system that has the
capability to take more frequent
measurements. For these reasons, DOE
contends that the improvements in
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–2016
warrant inclusion in the updates to
appendix F.
DOE requests comment on the
proposal to incorporate relevant
sections of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–
2016 into appendix F.
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–2016
also updates requirements for the
accuracy of instruments. The 2009
reaffirmation of ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 16 requires, in section 5.4.2,
accuracy to ±0.5 percent of the quantity
measured for instruments used for
measuring all electrical inputs to the
calorimeter compartments. ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 16–2016, in section
5.6.2, includes more specific language
(e.g., explicitly mentioning the power
input to the test unit, heaters, and other
cooling load contributors). To ensure
that the electrical input for all key
equipment is properly measured, DOE
proposes to incorporate these
requirements and maintain the
requirement of accuracy to ±0.5 percent
of the quantity measured for
instruments used for measuring all
electrical inputs, to the test unit, all
reconditioning equipment, and any
other equipment that operates within
the calorimeter walls.
DOE requests comment on the
proposal to incorporate the
requirements of ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 16–2016 while maintaining
that an accuracy of ±0.5 percent of the
quantity measured is applicable to all
devices measuring electrical input for
the room AC test procedure.
specifying certain test conditions and
measurement procedures. DOE is also
proposing to incorporate those industry
standards specified in the relevant
sections of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–
2016. Specifically, DOE is proposing to
incorporate by reference: ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 41.1–2013,
‘‘Standard Method for Temperature
Measurement, as referenced in ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 16–2016 section
5.1.1 for all temperature measurements
except for dew-point temperature;
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.2–1987 (RA
1992), ‘‘Standard Methods for
Laboratory Airflow Measurement,’’ as
referenced in Section 5.5.1 of ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 16–2016 for airflow
measurements; ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 41.3–2014, ‘‘Standard
Methods for Pressure Measurement,’’ as
referenced in section 5.2.5 of ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 16–2016 for the
prescribed use of pressure measurement
instruments; ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
41.6–2014, ‘‘Standard Method for
Humidity Measurement,’’ as referenced
in section 5.1.2 of ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 16–2016 for measuring dewpoint temperatures using hygrometers;
and ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.11–
2014, ‘‘Standard Methods for Power
Measurement,’’ as referenced in section
5.6.4 of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–
2016 regarding the use and application
of electrical instruments during tests.
Incorporating these standards will
clarify which versions of the standards
are required to conduct tests according
to the procedure in appendix F.
DOE requests comment on the
proposal to incorporate ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 41.1–2013, ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 41.2–1987 (RA 1992), ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 41.3–2014, ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 41.6–2014, and
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.11–2014 in
appendix F.
C. Variable-Speed Room Air
Conditioner Test Procedure
3. ANSI/ASHRAE Standards 41.1, 41.2,
41.3, 41.6, and 41.11
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–2016
references certain industry standards in
Historically, room ACs have been
designed using a single-speed
compressor, which operates at full
cooling capacity while the compressor
is on. To match the cooling load of the
space, which in most cases is less than
the full cooling power of the
compressor, a single-speed compressor
16 A cooling load is ‘‘applied’’ by adjusting and
fixing the rate of heat added to the indoor test
chamber to a level at or below that of the nominal
cooling capacity of the test unit.
17 This approach aims to represent a consumer
installation in which the amount of heat added to
a room may be less than the rated cooling capacity
of the room AC (e.g., electronics or lighting turned
off, people or pets leaving the room, and external
factors such as heat transfer through walls and
windows reducing with outdoor temperature).
18 DOE notes that this test chamber configuration
differs from the configuration used in appendix F.
Appendix F uses a constant-temperature
configuration, in which the indoor chamber
temperature is held fixed (i.e., the indoor
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
35707
cycles on and off. This cycling behavior
introduces inefficiencies due to the
surge in power draw at the beginning of
each ‘‘on’’ cycle, before the compressor
reaches steady-state performance.
Variable-speed room ACs became
available on the U.S. market in 2018.
These units employ an inverter
compressor that can reduce its speed to
match the observed cooling load.
Accordingly, a variable-speed
compressor runs continuously,
adjusting its speed up or down as
required, thereby avoiding compressor
cycling.
The current DOE test procedure
measures the performance of a room AC
while operating under a full cooling
load; i.e., the compressor is operated
continuously in its ‘‘on’’ state. As a
result, the DOE test does not capture
any inefficiencies due to compressor
cycling. Consequently, the efficiency
gains that can be achieved by variablespeed room ACs due to the avoidance of
cycling losses are not measured by the
current test procedure. DOE proposes to
amend its room AC test procedure to
include a methodology for determining
and applying a ‘‘performance
adjustment factor’’ for variable-speed
room ACs to reflect the avoidance of
cycling losses that would be
experienced in a representative
consumer installation.
DOE conducted investigative testing
comparing the performance of a
variable-speed room AC with a singlespeed room AC under reduced cooling
load conditions. DOE installed each
room AC in a calorimeter test chamber,
set the unit thermostat to 80 degrees
Fahrenheit (°F), and applied a range of
fixed cooling loads to the indoor
chamber.16 17 The calorimeter chamber
was configured so that the indoor
chamber temperature could vary,
thereby allowing the test unit to
maintain the target indoor chamber
temperature by adjusting its cooling
operation in response to the changing
temperature of the indoor chamber.18
Figure III–1 shows the efficiency gains
and losses for the range of reduced
cooling loads tested for each unit,
relative to the performance of each unit
as tested using appendix F under a full
cooling load.19
temperature does not drop while the room AC is
operational).
19 For single-speed room ACs under appendix F,
the thermostat is typically set as low as possible to
ensure that the unit does not cycle on and off
during the cooling mode test period.
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
35708
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
1. Methodology
To measure the efficiency gains for
variable-speed room ACs that are not
captured by the current DOE test
procedure, DOE considered the alternate
test procedure provided in the LG
Waiver and the Grant of Midea Interim
Waiver (collectively, ‘‘the waivers’’) for
specified basic models of variable-speed
room ACs. 84 FR 20111 (May 8, 2019)
and 84 FR 68159 (December 13, 2019).
The alternate test procedure provides a
methodology for obtaining a CEER value
by adjusting the CEER value as tested at
the 95 °F test condition according to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
appendix F using a ‘‘performance
adjustment factor’’ (PAF).
Conceptually, the approach for
variable-speed room ACs involves
measuring performance over a range of
four test conditions with fixed
compressor speeds, which collectively
comprise representative use. These
temperature conditions were derived
from the DOE test procedure for central
ACs with variable-speed compressors
and include three reduced-temperature
test conditions—under which variable
speed room ACs perform more
efficiently than single-speed room
ACs—and the test condition specified in
the current test procedure. The singlespeed room AC test procedure, however,
does not factor in the reducedtemperature test conditions under
which single-speed units also will
perform more efficiently (although not
as well as variable-speed room ACs). As
a result, comparing variable-speed
performance at all test conditions
against a single-speed unit at the
highest-temperature test condition
would not yield a fair comparison. The
PAF represents the average relative
benefit of variable-speed over singlespeed across the whole range of test
conditions. It is applied to the measured
variable-speed room AC performance
only at the high-temperature test
condition to provide a comparison to
the single-speed existing CEER metric
based on representative use.
The steps for determining a variablespeed room AC’s PAF are summarized
as follows:
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
• Measure the capacity and energy
consumption of the sample unit at the
single test condition used for singlespeed room ACs (95 °F dry-bulb outdoor
temperature), with the compressor
speed fixed at the maximum (full)
speed.
• Measure the capacity and energy
consumption of the sample unit at three
additional test conditions (92 °F, 87 °F,
and 82 °F dry-bulb outdoor
temperature),20 with compressor speed
fixed at full, intermediate, and
minimum (low) speed, respectively.21
Using theoretically determined
adjustment factors,22 calculate the
equivalent performance of a singlespeed room AC with the same cooling
capacity and electrical power input at
the 95 °F dry-bulb outdoor temperature,
with no cycling losses (i.e., a
‘‘theoretical comparable single-speed’’
room AC) for each of the three test
conditions.
• Calculate the annual energy
consumption in cooling mode at each of
the four cooling mode test conditions
for a variable-speed room AC, as well as
for a theoretical comparable singlespeed room AC with no cycling losses.
This theoretical single-speed room AC
would perform the same as the variablespeed test unit at the 95 °F test
20 The additional reduced-temperature conditions
are described further in section III.C.2 of this
document.
21 The compressor speeds are described further in
section III.C.3 of this document.
22 These adjustment factors are described further
in section III.C.4 of this document.
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
EP11JN20.000</GPH>
In Figure III–1, the distance of each
data point from the x-axis represents the
change in efficiency relative to the fullload efficiency for each unit. (The data
points at 100-percent cooling load
correspond to the appendix F test
conditions.) The single-speed room AC
efficiency decreases in correlation with
a reduction in cooling load, reflecting
cycling losses that become relatively
larger as the cooling load decreases. In
contrast, the efficiency of the variablespeed room AC increases as the cooling
load decreases, reflecting the lack of
cycling losses and inherent
improvements in compressor efficiency
associated with lower compressor
speeds. These results demonstrate that
the current test procedure does not
account for significant efficiency gains
that variable-speed room ACs can
achieve under reduced temperature
conditions.
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
condition, but perform differently at the
other test conditions.
• Calculate an individual CEER value
at each of the four cooling mode test
conditions for the variable-speed room
AC, as well as for a theoretical
comparable single-speed room AC with
no cycling losses.
• Using cycling loss factors derived
from an industry test procedure,23
calculate an adjusted CEER value at
each of the four cooling mode test
conditions for a theoretical comparable
single-speed room AC, which includes
cycling losses.
• Using weighting factors 24
representing the fraction of time
experienced at each test condition in
representative real-world operation,
calculate a weighted-average CEER
value (reflecting the weighted-average
performance across the four test
conditions) for the variable-speed room
AC, as well as for a theoretical
comparable single-speed room AC.
• Using these weighted-average CEER
values for the variable-speed room AC
and a theoretical comparable singlespeed room AC, calculate the PAF as the
percent improvement of the weightedaverage CEER value of the variablespeed room AC compared to a
theoretical comparable single-speed
room AC.25 This PAF represents the
improvement resulting from the
implementation of a variable-speed
compressor.
DOE’s proposed approach to
addressing the performance
improvements associated with variablespeed room ACs is consistent with the
test procedures required in the waivers.
The following sections of this document
describe each aspect of the proposal in
greater detail.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
2. Test Conditions
As discussed previously, variablespeed room ACs provide improved
performance at reduced cooling loads by
reducing the compressor speed to match
the load, thereby avoiding compressor
cycling and associated cycling
inefficiencies. DOE recognizes that
throughout the cooling season, room
ACs operate under various outdoor
temperature conditions. DOE also
asserts that these varying outdoor
conditions present a range of reduced
cooling loads in the conditioned space,
under which a variable-speed room AC
23 The derivation of these cycling loss factors is
described in more detail in section III.C.5 of this
document.
24 These ‘‘fractional temperature bin’’ weighting
factors are described in more detail in section III.C.6
of this document.
25 The performance adjustment factor is described
in more detail in section III.C.7 of this document.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
would perform more efficiently than a
theoretical comparable single-speed
room AC.
To measure this improved
performance, DOE proposes a test
procedure for variable-speed room ACs
that adds three test conditions (92 °F,
87 °F, and 82 °F dry-bulb outdoor
temperature) to the current 95 °F,
consistent with the test conditions in
the waivers. DOE notes that these
temperatures represent potential
outdoor temperature conditions
between the current 95 °F test condition
and the indoor setpoint of 80 °F (below
which no active cooling would be
necessary). These additional test
conditions are also consistent with the
representative temperatures for bin
numbers 6, 5, and 4 in Table 19 of
DOE’s test procedure for central ACs at
appendix M.
DOE requests comment on the
proposal to adopt for all variable-speed
room ACs these additional test
conditions from test procedures
required in the waivers for variablespeed room ACs.
3. Variable-Speed Compressor
Operation
The DOE test procedure maintains
fixed test conditions in the indoor
chamber and requires configuring the
test unit settings to achieve maximum
cooling capacity. As a result, units
under test constantly operate at their
full cooling capacity, even at the
reduced outdoor temperature test
conditions described in section III.C.2 of
this document, without the compressor
cycling (for single-speed units) or
compressor speed reduction (for
variable-speed units) that would be
expected under real-world operation.
Therefore, DOE proposes additional test
procedure adjustments, beyond reduced
outdoor temperature test conditions, to
fully represent the potential efficiency
gains associated with variable-speed
room ACs at reduced cooling loads.
As described previously, in a typical
consumer installation, reduced outdoor
temperatures would result in reduced
indoor cooling loads. A test that would
provide constant reduced cooling loads
could be considered, but as discussed
below in section III.E.1.e of this
document, DOE concludes such a test
would not be feasible at this time.
Therefore, to better represent what
would occur in typical consumer usage
at reduced outdoor temperatures, DOE
proposes to test variable-speed room
ACs by fixing a particular compressor
speed at each of the outdoor test
conditions, as described further in the
following sections.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
35709
a. Compressor Speeds
To ensure the compressor speeds are
representative of actual speeds at the
expected cooling loads at each of the
outdoor test conditions, DOE proposes
to require that the compressor speed be
set to full speed at the two highest
outdoor temperature test conditions
(based on test AFull at 95 °F and test BFull
at 92 °F), at intermediate compressor
speed at the 87 °F test condition (based
on test EInt), and at low compressor
speed at the 82 °F test condition (based
on test DLow), consistent with the tests
and requirements in Table 8 of the 2017
version of Air-Conditioning, Heating,
and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI)
Standard 210/240, (AHRI Standard 210/
240), ‘‘Performance Rating of Unitary
Air-conditioning & Air-source Heat
Pump Equipment,’’ which specifies
representative test conditions and the
associated compressor speeds for
variable-speed unitary air conditioners.
DOE also proposes to add definitions for
‘‘full compressor speed’’, ‘‘intermediate
compressor speed’’, and ‘‘low
compressor speed’’, which specify how
each speed would be determined, as
described further in section III.D of this
document.
DOE requests comment on the
proposal to require fixing the
compressor speed settings for variablespeed room ACs to full speed at the
95 °F and 92 °F test conditions,
intermediate speed at the 87 °F test
condition, and low speed at the 82 °F
test condition, in accordance with the
requirements in Table 8 of AHRI
Standard 210/240.
b. Instructions for Fixing Compressor
Speeds
DOE understands that setting and
maintaining a specific room AC
compressor speed is not typically
possible without special control
instructions from manufacturers.
Therefore, because maintaining fixed
compressor speeds is critical to the
repeatability of the variable-speed room
AC test procedure, DOE proposes that
manufacturers provide in each
certification report for a variable-speed
room AC basic model all necessary
instructions to maintain the compressor
speeds required for each test condition
when testing that basic model. These
include the compressor frequency set
points at each test condition,
instructions necessary to maintain the
compressor speeds required for each test
condition, and the control settings used
for the variable components.
DOE requests comment on the
proposal to require that manufacturers
provide in their certification reports the
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
35710
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
control settings for each variable-speed
room AC basic model required to
achieve the fixed compressor speed for
each test condition.
c. Boost Compressor Speed
DOE is aware that a variable-speed
room AC’s full compressor speed may
not be its fastest speed. In particular, the
fastest compressor speed may be one
that is automatically initiated and used
for a brief period of time to rapidly
reduce the indoor temperature to within
typical range of the set point. This
compressor speed is referred to as
‘‘Boost Compressor Speed’’ in AHRI
Standard 210/240 and is defined as a
speed faster than full compressor speed,
at which the unit will operate to achieve
increased capacity. DOE understands
that boost compressor speed operation
is typically limited in duration and
would not significantly contribute to
annual energy consumption, as
manufacturers have described it as used
for limited periods of time on occasions
where the indoor room temperature is
far out of normal operating range of the
set point. Once the indoor room
temperature is within the typical
operating range of the setpoint, the room
AC returns to the ‘‘Full Compressor
Speed,’’ as defined in AHRI Standard
210/240. AHRI Standard 210/240 does
not measure boost compressor speed
energy use, and in a final rule published
on June 8, 2016, DOE declined to
include provisions for measuring boost
compressor speed energy use in the
central AC test procedure. 81 FR 36992,
37029. Accordingly, DOE does not
propose to measure boost compressor
speed performance and energy
consumption in appendix F at this time
because of the expected insignificant
impact on annual energy consumption
and performance, to harmonize with the
industry approach for variable-speed
compressor testing, and because DOE
has previously opted to forgo including
it for other air conditioning products. Id.
DOE requests comment on the
proposal not to address boost
compressor speed performance and
energy consumption in appendix F at
this time.
4. Capacity and Electrical Power
Adjustment Factors
In the proposed approach, a capacity
adjustment factor is used to estimate the
increased cooling capacity of a room AC
at lower outdoor temperature
conditions, using a linear extrapolation
based on the measured capacity at the
95 °F test condition. Similarly, an
electrical power adjustment factor is
used to estimate the reduced electrical
power draw of a room AC at lower
outdoor temperature conditions, using a
linear extrapolation based on the
measured electrical power draw at the
95 °F test condition. To determine these
two adjustment factors, DOE used the
MarkN model to model room AC
performance at reduced outdoor
temperature conditions. These modeling
results suggested linear capacity and
electrical power adjustment factors of
0.0099 per °F and 0.0076 per °F,
respectively.
To confirm the validity of these
modeled adjustment factors, DOE tested
a sample of 14 single-speed room ACs
at a range of reduced outdoor
temperature test conditions (92 °F, 87 °F,
and 82 °F) and compared the predicted
values of cooling capacity and electrical
power with the measured values at each
test condition. Table III–2 and Table III–
3 summarize the results for cooling
capacity and electrical power,
respectively.
TABLE III–2—COMPARISON BETWEEN MODELED AND TESTED COOLING CAPACITY
92 °F
Unit
Model
(Btu/h)
87 °F
Tested
(Btu/h)
Diff.
(%)
Model
(Btu/h)
Tested
(Btu/h)
82 °F
Diff.
(%)
Model
(Btu/h)
Tested
(Btu/h)
Diff.
(%)
1 ................................................
2 ................................................
3 ................................................
5 ................................................
6 ................................................
7 ................................................
8 ................................................
9 ................................................
10 ..............................................
11 ..............................................
12 ..............................................
13 ..............................................
14 ..............................................
15 ..............................................
5,890
10,920
12,160
12,430
8,660
12,400
5,360
5,760
5,440
6,520
6,350
8,150
8,830
21,860
5,850
10,810
12,340
12,320
8,490
12,180
5,410
5,640
5,530
6,410
6,320
8,180
8,630
22,440
¥0.6
¥0.9
+1.5
¥0.9
¥2.0
¥1.8
+0.8
¥2.0
+1.6
¥1.7
¥0.5
+0.4
¥2.3
+2.6
6,170
11,440
12,740
13,030
9,070
13,000
5,620
6,030
5,700
6,830
6,650
8,540
9,260
22,920
6,070
11,060
12,880
12,640
8,570
12,310
5,590
5,850
5,730
6,490
6,500
8,530
8,960
23,270
¥1.8
¥3.4
+1.1
¥3.0
¥5.9
¥5.6
¥0.6
¥3.2
+0.6
¥5.2
¥2.4
¥0.1
¥3.2
+1.5
6,460
11,970
13,330
13,620
9,490
13,590
5,880
6,310
5,960
7,140
6,960
8,930
9,680
23,970
6,300
11,330
13,320
12,890
8,680
12,360
5,770
6,000
5,790
6,520
6,820
9,080
9,090
24,260
¥2.5
¥5.4
¥0.1
¥5.7
¥9.3
¥10.0
¥1.9
¥5.3
¥3.0
¥9.6
¥2.0
+1.6
¥6.5
+1.2
Average .....................................
....................
....................
¥0.4
....................
....................
¥2.2
....................
....................
¥4.2
Note: Unit 4 was not included because it is a variable-speed unit and the modeling factors are only applicable to single-speed units that do not adjust performance
at reduced outdoor temperature conditions.
TABLE III–3—COMPARISON BETWEEN MODELED AND TESTED ELECTRICAL POWER DRAW
92 °F
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
Unit
1 ................................................
2 ................................................
3 ................................................
5 ................................................
6 ................................................
7 ................................................
8 ................................................
9 ................................................
10 ..............................................
11 ..............................................
12 ..............................................
13 ..............................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Model
(W)
414
894
989
1,080
705
1,116
433
435
435
537
514
643
Jkt 250001
87 °F
Tested
(W)
Diff.
(%)
412
887
984
1,073
701
1,106
430
430
435
535
514
638
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Model
(W)
+0.6
+0.8
+0.5
+0.7
+0.6
+0.9
+0.7
+1.1
+0.2
+0.5
0.0
+0.8
Fmt 4701
398
859
950
1,038
677
1,073
416
418
418
517
494
618
Sfmt 4702
Tested
(W)
393
846
938
1,024
668
1,046
412
413
417
510
492
610
82 °F
Diff.
(%)
Model
(W)
+1.3
+1.6
+1.3
+1.4
+1.4
+2.6
+1.0
+1.2
+0.2
+1.3
+0.4
+1.3
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
382
825
912
996
650
1,030
399
401
401
496
474
593
Tested
(W)
375
807
895
978
636
993
394
392
403
483
470
584
Diff.
(%)
+1.9
+2.2
+2.0
+1.8
+2.2
+3.7
+1.3
+2.3
-0.4
+2.6
+0.9
+1.5
35711
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
TABLE III–3—COMPARISON BETWEEN MODELED AND TESTED ELECTRICAL POWER DRAW—Continued
92 °F
Unit
Model
(W)
87 °F
Tested
(W)
Diff.
(%)
Model
(W)
82 °F
Tested
(W)
Diff.
(%)
Model
(W)
Tested
(W)
Diff.
(%)
14 ..............................................
15 ..............................................
647
2,074
646
2,068
+0.2
+0.3
622
1,993
615
2,006
+1.1
¥0.6
597
1,912
585
1,935
+1.9
¥1.2
Average .....................................
....................
....................
+0.6
....................
....................
+1.1
....................
....................
+1.6
Note: Unit 4 was not included because it is a variable-speed unit and the modeling factors are only applicable to single-speed units that do not adjust performance
at reduced outdoor temperature conditions.
The results in Table III–2 generally
indicate close agreement (i.e., less than
5 percent difference on average)
between the modeled cooling capacity
(based on an adjustment factor of 0.0099
per °F) and the measured capacity at
each test condition. On average, the
tested cooling capacity was within 0.4
percent of the modeled value at the
92 °F test condition, 2.2 percent at the
87 °F test condition, and 4.2 percent at
the 82 °F test condition.
Similarly, the results in Table III–3
generally indicate close agreement
between the modeled electrical power
draw (based on an adjustment factor of
0.0076 per °F) and the measured
electrical power draw at each test
condition. On average, the tested
electrical power draw was within 0.6
percent of the modeled value at the
92 °F test condition, 1.1 percent at the
87 °F test condition, and 1.6 percent at
the 82 °F test condition.
DOE has tentatively determined that
the average difference of less than 5
percent between the modeled values
and the experimental values confirms
the validity of these modeled
adjustment factors. Therefore, DOE
proposes using the modeled adjustment
factors of 0.0099 per °F and 0.0076 per
°F for capacity and electrical power,
respectively, to calculate the theoretical
comparable single-speed room AC
performance at reduced outdoor
temperature test conditions.
DOE requests comment on the
proposal to use the capacity and
electrical power adjustment factors of
0.0099 per °F and 0.0076 per °F,
respectively.
5. Cycling Loss Factors
To represent the cycling losses of a
theoretical comparable single-speed
room AC at reduced outdoor
temperature test conditions and
expected reduced cooling loads, DOE
identified cycling loss factors to apply
to the interim CEER values at each of
the four cooling mode test conditions
for a theoretical comparable singlespeed room AC. Table III–4 shows the
proposed cycling loss factors for each of
the four proposed test conditions.
TABLE III–4—PROPOSED CYCLING LOSS FACTORS
Evaporator inlet air, °F
Test condition
Dry bulb
Test
Test
Test
Test
Condition
Condition
Condition
Condition
1
2
3
4
...................................................................
...................................................................
...................................................................
...................................................................
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
These cycling loss factors are based
on the default cycling loss factors in
Section 11.2 of AHRI Standards 210/
240. The cycling loss factor at the 82 °F
test condition for a theoretical
comparable single-speed room AC is
consistent with 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. The
remaining cycling loss factors for the
other test conditions are consistent with
linear interpolation between the cycling
loss factor of 0.875 at the 82 °F test
condition and the cycling loss factor of
Condenser inlet air, °F
Wet bulb
80
80
80
80
Dry bulb
67
67
67
67
1.0 at the 95 °F test condition, at which
no cycling is expected.
DOE requests comment on the
proposal to implement cycling loss
factors consistent with AHRI Standard
210/240 to represent the expected
performance of a theoretical comparable
single-speed room AC at reduced
outdoor temperature test conditions.
6. Test Condition Weighting Factors
In the proposed approach, the four
interim CEER values representing each
of the four cooling mode test conditions
are combined, using four weighting
factors, into a single weighted-average
Wet bulb
95
92
87
82
75
72.5
69
65
Cycling loss
factor
1.0
0.971
0.923
0.875
CEER value. The resulting weightedaverage CEER value represents the
weighted-average performance across
the range of outdoor test conditions.
DOE calculated weighting factors based
on the fractional temperature bin hours
in Table 19 of DOE’s test procedure for
central ACs at appendix M. DOE
identified the fractional temperature bin
hours representing the four test
conditions in the proposed approach,
and normalized these four values from
appendix M so that they sum to 1.00.
Table III–5 shows the proposed
weighting factors for each of the four
proposed test conditions.
TABLE III–5—PROPOSED TEMPERATURE CONDITION WEIGHTING FACTORS
Evaporator inlet air, °F
Test condition
Dry bulb
Test Condition 1 ...................................................................
Test Condition 2 ...................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Wet bulb
80
80
Fmt 4701
Condenser inlet air, °F
Sfmt 4702
Dry bulb
67
67
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
Wet bulb
95
92
11JNP2
75
72.5
CEER
weighting
factor
0.05
0.16
35712
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
TABLE III–5—PROPOSED TEMPERATURE CONDITION WEIGHTING FACTORS—Continued
Evaporator inlet air, °F
Test condition
Dry bulb
Test Condition 3 ...................................................................
Test Condition 4 ...................................................................
DOE requests comment on the
proposed weighting factors associated
with each of the outdoor test conditions.
7. Performance Adjustment Factor
The final step in the proposed
approach is to calculate the PAF,
representing the improvement over a
theoretical comparable single-speed
room AC resulting from the
implementation of a variable-speed
compressor. The PAF would be
calculated as the percent improvement
of the weighted-average CEER value of
the variable-speed room AC compared
to the weighted-average CEER value of
a theoretical comparable single-speed
room AC under the four defined test
conditions.
After calculating the PAF, it would be
multiplied by the CEER value of the
variable-speed unit when tested at the
95 °F test condition according to
appendix F, resulting in the final CEER
metric for the variable-speed room AC.
DOE expects that the variable-speed
room AC CEER values would be
comparable to single-speed room AC
CEER values as a result of applying the
adjustment factor to the variable-speed
room AC CEER value determined in
accordance with the current singlespeed test method in appendix F. By
adjusting the variable-speed room AC
CEER values to be comparable to single-
Condenser inlet air, °F
Wet bulb
80
80
Dry bulb
67
67
speed room AC CEER values, consumers
will have the information they need to
understand the relative efficiency of
both types of room AC.
DOE requests comment on the
proposed calculations to determine a
PAF, which would adjust the CEER of
a variable-speed room AC to
appropriately account for its efficiency
improvements relative to a theoretical
comparable single-speed room AC
under varying operating conditions.
8. Air-Enthalpy Test Alternative
DOE recognizes the additional test
burden associated with testing variablespeed room ACs at multiple test
conditions as proposed. In an effort to
minimize that additional test burden,
the Grant of LG Interim Waiver test
procedure provided that LG could
optionally test its variable-speed room
ACs using the air-enthalpy method.
Following the publication of the Grant
of LG Interim Waiver, DOE conducted
investigative testing to further analyze
the air-enthalpy method and its
suitability for testing room ACs. As
described below, this testing
demonstrated that this method was
unrepresentative and inconsistent, and
remedying these deficiencies would be
unduly burdensome.
DOE tested nine room ACs according
to the air-enthalpy procedure prescribed
CEER
weighting
factor
Wet bulb
87
82
69
65
0.31
0.48
by ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 37–2009,
‘‘Methods of Testing for Rating
Electrically Driven Unitary AirConditioning and Heat Pump
Equipment.’’ DOE constructed plenums
to match the cross sectional area of each
room AC evaporator and condenser
exhaust, with instrumented ducts
connected to each. A variable-speed fan
at the end of each duct was used to
maintain a zero static pressure at the
test unit exhaust. Tests were conducted
in accordance with the indoor and
outdoor test conditions specified in
appendix F, and the instrumentation in
the duct measured the psychrometric
characteristic of the air in addition to
the air flow rate to obtain the cooling
capacity. To determine whether there
was reasonable correlation between the
two sets of results and, thus, whether
the air-enthalpy procedure would be a
viable alternative approach, DOE
compared the cooling capacities
measured according to this air-enthalpy
method to the capacities obtained via
the calorimeter method currently
specified in appendix F. Table III–6
shows the measured cooling capacity
and efficiency obtained for each of these
eight test units using the air-enthalpy
and calorimeter methods, and highlights
the differences in results between the
two approaches.
TABLE III–6—COOLING CAPACITY AND EFFICIENCY USING THE AIR-ENTHALPY METHOD AND THE CALORIMETER METHOD
Indoor
air flow
(CFM)
Unit #
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
8 ...................................
9 ...................................
10 .................................
11 .................................
12 .................................
13 .................................
14 .................................
15 .................................
Calorimeter
capacity
(Btu/h)
131
161
126
147
152
197
227
459
5,210
5,591
5,284
5,228
6,164
7,914
8,576
2,1233
The results in Table III–6 indicate a
range of differences between the airenthalpy method and the calorimeter
methods, for both cooling capacity and
efficiency, which appears to correlate
with the evaporator exhaust, or indoor,
air flow rate from each unit. Five of the
eight units (Units 8 through 12)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
Air-enthalpy
capacity
(Btu/h)
Capacity
difference
(%)
4,803
5,059
4,908
4,715
5,650
7,814
8,165
2,1626
¥7.8
¥9.5
¥7.1
¥9.8
¥8.3
¥1.3
¥4.8
+1.8
demonstrated relatively poor agreement
between the two methods, with an
average decrease in cooling capacity of
8.5 percent and an average decrease in
efficiency of 9.4 percent when using the
air-enthalpy method. These units all
had indoor air flow rates at or below 161
cubic feet per minute (CFM).
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Calorimeter
EER
(Btu/Wh)
11.8
12.6
11.9
10.8
11.7
12.0
13.0
10.0
Air-enthalpy
EER
(Btu/Wh)
10.6
11.3
10.9
9.7
10.6
11.8
12.4
10.1
EER
difference
(%)
¥9.7
¥10.1
¥8.0
¥10.7
¥9.4
¥1.8
¥4.1
+0.7
Conversely, the unit with the largest air
flow rate of 459 CFM (Unit 15) showed
a small increase in capacity and
efficiency when tested using the airenthalpy method. The remaining two
units (Units 13 and 14) had air flow
rates between 161 CFM and 459 CFM,
and showed only a modest decrease of
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
less than 5 percent in both capacity and
efficiency.
DOE asserts that these results depend
on the measurement apparatus available
to the testing laboratory for the airenthalpy method. DOE understands that
air-enthalpy test equipment currently
used by testing laboratories is not
typically designed to accurately
measure air conditioning products with
airflow rates lower than approximately
200 CFM because typical test equipment
is optimized for larger air conditioners
with significantly higher airflow rates.
The results for Units 8 through 12
support this assertion: All of these had
evaporator airflows substantively below
200 CFM, and the performance for each
unit measured using the air-enthalpy
and calorimeter approaches differed by
more than five percent on average. DOE
is aware that air-enthalpy equipment
that is optimized to measure units with
airflow between 50 and 500 CFM exists.
However, such equipment may be costly
to design, develop, and produce,
because it is not readily available and
may require custom manufacturing. In
addition, the air-enthalpy method does
not measure any heat transfer within
and through the unit chassis, while the
calorimeter test does. Because of the
unrepresentative and inconsistent
results obtained with the air-enthalpy
test equipment that testing laboratories
are likely to already own, as well as the
higher cost and limited availability of
equipment that would be necessary to
obtain consistent results for all room
ACs of differing airflow rates, DOE
contends that the air-enthalpy test
method would be unduly burdensome
for testing laboratories to implement for
room ACs at this time. DOE further
notes that, in the waivers, DOE did not
allow the air-enthalpy test method as an
alternative to the calorimeter test
method due to the concerns outlined
above. 84 FR 20111 (May 8, 2019), 84
FR 68159 (Dec. 13, 2019). Therefore,
DOE is not proposing in this NOPR to
allow testing of variable-speed room
ACs using the air-enthalpy test method.
DOE seeks comment on the proposal
to not include an optional alternative
air-enthalpy test method for variablespeed room ACs in appendix F.
9. Product Specific Reporting Provisions
As described, the proposed
amendment to Appendix F to test
variable-speed room ACs at multiple
cooling mode test conditions would
require testing each unit with a fixed
compressor speed at each test condition.
To ensure test reproducibility, DOE is
proposing to require, in 10 CFR 429.15,
manufacturers to provide DOE all
necessary instructions to maintain the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
compressor speeds required for each test
condition for a variable-speed basic
model, as additional product-specific
information pursuant to 10 CFR 429.12
(b)(13). DOE expects that this
requirement would add a de minimis
incremental burden to the existing
reporting requirements.
DOE requests comment on the
proposal to include in 10 CFR 429.15
compressor frequencies and control
settings as additional product-specific
information for certification of each
variable-speed room AC basic model.
10. Estimated Annual Operating Cost
Calculation
In conjunction with the proposed
amendments for testing variable-speed
room ACs, DOE is proposing
corresponding amendments to the
calculation that provides the basis of the
annual energy consumption and
operating cost information presented to
consumers on the EnergyGuide Label.
These changes would allow for an
appropriate comparison of the annual
energy consumption and operating costs
between single-speed room ACs and
variable-speed room ACs. As such, DOE
proposes that for variable-speed room
ACs, the average annual energy
consumption used in calculating the
estimated annual operating cost in 10
CFR 430.23(f) would be a weighted
average of the annual energy
consumption at each of the four test
conditions in newly added Table 1 of
appendix F and the annual energy
consumption in inactive mode or off
mode. DOE proposes, however, that the
electrical power input reported for
variable-speed room ACs for purposes of
certification in 10 CFR 429.15(b)(2)
would be the value measured at the
95 °F rating condition, to maintain
consistency with the cooling capacity
measured at the same condition.
DOE requests comment on the
proposal to calculate estimated annual
operating cost for variable-speed room
ACs using a weighted-average annual
energy consumption based on the four
cooling mode test conditions in the
proposed, new Table 1 of appendix F.
DOE also requests comment on the
proposal to report variable-speed room
AC input power for certification
purposes using the value measured at
the 95 °F rating condition.
11. Potential Cost Impacts
The test procedure amendments
proposed above would result in
additional test burden and cost for
testing variable-speed room ACs, mainly
due to the additional time associated
with testing cooling mode performance
of variable-speed room ACs under four
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
35713
total test conditions, compared to the
single cooling mode test currently
required in appendix F. Under the LG
Waiver, LG is already testing its
variable-speed room ACs using the
proposed approach and accordingly
would incur no additional cost due to
the proposed test procedure
amendments. Likewise, under the Grant
of Midea Interim Waiver, Midea is also
already testing its variable-speed room
ACs using the proposed approach and
so would not incur any additional cost
either due to the proposed test
procedure amendments. DOE is not
aware of other manufacturers of
variable-speed room ACs, although the
additional burden described above
would be applicable to any entities that
begin manufacturing a variable-speed
room AC and introduce it to the U.S.
market. Given that variable-speed room
ACs are not available in the U.S. market
from any other manufacturers besides
LG and Midea, the proposed test
procedure amendments in this NOPR
regarding variable-speed room ACs
would not result in any additional cost
to manufacturers.
D. Definitions
DOE proposes to add a number of
definitions to appendix F to accompany
the proposed amendments described in
this document. None of these proposed
definitions would modify the current
scope of covered products. The
following sections describe each
proposed definition in detail.
DOE proposes to define three key
terms that currently appear in Appendix
F but have no definitions: cooling mode,
cooling capacity, and combined energy
efficiency ratio. Although room ACs
may sometimes operate in other modes
as discussed further in section III.E of
this proposed rule, the room AC CEER
metric determined in appendix F is
based primarily on performance in
cooling mode, and several of the
proposed amendments also reference
‘‘cooling mode.’’ DOE proposes to
establish the following definitions for
cooling mode, cooling capacity, and
combined energy efficiency ratio in
appendix F:
‘‘Cooling mode’’ means an active
mode in which a room air conditioner
has activated the main cooling function
according to the thermostat or
temperature sensor signal or switch
(including remote control).
‘‘Cooling capacity’’ means the amount
of cooling, in Btu/h, provided to an
indoor conditioned space, determined
in Section 4.1 of appendix F.
‘‘Combined energy efficiency ratio’’ is
the energy efficiency of a room air
conditioner as measured in Btu/Wh and
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
35714
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
determined in Section 5.2.2 of appendix
F for single-speed room air conditioners
and Section 5.3.12 of appendix F for
variable-speed room air conditioners.
To accompany the proposed
amendments affecting variable-speed
basic models, DOE proposes to define
single-speed and variable-speed room
ACs as follows:
‘‘Single-speed room air conditioner’’
means a type of room AC that cannot
automatically adjust the compressor
speed based on detected conditions.
‘‘Variable-speed room air
conditioner’’ means a type of room AC
that can automatically adjust
compressor speed based on detected
conditions.
In addition, DOE proposes to establish
definitions for the three compressor
speeds required for variable-speed
testing. DOE proposes to refer to these
compressor speeds as ‘‘full,’’
‘‘intermediate,’’ and ‘‘low’’ based on the
test procedure terminology of AHRI
Standard 210/240. The proposed
definitions are as follows:
‘‘Full compressor speed (full)’’ means
the compressor speed at which the unit
operates at full load test conditions,
achieved by following the instructions
certified by the manufacturer.
‘‘Intermediate compressor speed
(intermediate)’’ means a compressor
speed higher than the low compressor
speed by one third of the difference
between low compressor speed and full
compressor speed with a tolerance of
plus 5 percent (designs with nondiscrete speed stages) or the next
highest inverter frequency step (designs
with discrete speed steps), achieved by
following the instructions certified by
the manufacturer.
‘‘Low compressor speed (low)’’ means
the compressor speed at which the unit
operates at low load test conditions,
achieved by following the instructions
certified by the manufacturer, such that
Capacity4, the measured cooling
capacity at test condition 4 in Table 1
of appendix F, is not less than 47
percent and not greater than 57 percent
of Capacity1, the measured cooling
capacity with the full compressor speed
at test condition 1 in Table 1 of
appendix F.
DOE is proposing a definition for low
compressor speed based on the
definition in AHRI Standard 210/240.
To ensure that the low and intermediate
compressor speeds result in
representative cooling capacity under
reduced loads, as explained in the
following paragraphs, DOE is
additionally proposing that the low
compressor speed definition require that
the test unit’s measured cooling
capacity at Test Condition 4, specified
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
in Table III–5 of this document, be not
less than 47 percent and not greater than
57 percent, of the measured cooling
capacity when operating at the full
compressor speed at Test Condition 1,
also specified in Table III–5 of this
document.
DOE developed this range based on
the Building Load Calculation, Equation
11.60, in AHRI Standard 210/240,
which relates the building load to an
AC’s full-load cooling capacity and
outdoor temperature. DOE adapted this
calculation for the room AC test
procedure by normalizing Equation
11.60 so that full-load operation is
assumed to occur at a 95 °F outdoor
temperature, consistent with the
outdoor test condition defined in the
current room AC test procedure, rather
than 98 °F as assumed by Equation
11.60. DOE used the normalized
equation to determine the representative
cooling load at an outdoor temperature
of 82 °F as a percentage of the full-load
cooling capacity at an outdoor
temperature of 95 °F. Based on this
analysis, an outdoor temperature of
82 °F would result in a cooling load of
57 percent of full-load cooling capacity.
Therefore, DOE proposes that the
representative cooling load at the low
compressor speed and outdoor
temperature of 82 °F (i.e. the
temperature represented by Test
Condition 4 in Table III–5), is 57 percent
of the unit’s cooling capacity when
operating at 95 °F (i.e., Test Condition 1
in Table III–5).
DOE recognizes that variable-speed
room ACs may use compressors that
vary their speed in discrete steps and
may not be able to directly operate at a
speed that provides 57 percent cooling
capacity precisely; therefore, the
defined cooling capacity associated with
the low compressor speed is best
presented as a range rather than a single
value. DOE proposes that a 10-percent
range would accommodate compressors
that vary their speed in discrete steps.
DOE further proposes using 57
percent cooling load as the upper bound
of the 10-percent range to define the
cooling capacity associated with the
lower compressor speed (i.e., the range
would be defined as 47 to 57 percent).
The justification for using 57 percent as
an upper bound, rather than as a
midpoint in the 10-percent range, is as
follows. Defining the upper bound of
the 10-percent cooling load range as 57
percent would ensure that a variablespeed room AC is capable of matching
the representative cooling load (57
percent of the maximum) at the 82 °F
outdoor test condition, while providing
the performance benefits associated
with variable-speed operation. In
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
contrast, if the 10-percent range were to
be defined as, for example, 52 to 62
percent (with 57 percent as the
midpoint), a variable-speed room AC
could be tested at 60 percent, for
example, without demonstrating the
capability to maintain variable-speed
performance down to 57 percent.
In summary, DOE proposes in newly
added section 2.16 of appendix F to
define ‘‘low compressor speed (low)’’ as
the compressor speed specified by the
manufacturer at which the unit operates
at low load test conditions, such that the
measured cooling capacity at the 82 °F
outdoor test condition shall be no less
than 47 percent and no greater than 57
percent of the unit’s cooling capacity
when operating at the 95 °F test
condition.
DOE requests comment on the
proposal to add new definitions for
cooling mode, cooling capacity,
combined energy efficiency ratio, singlespeed room air conditioner, variablespeed room air conditioner, variablespeed compressor, full compressor
speed (full), intermediate compressor
speed (intermediate), and low
compressor speed (low) in appendix F.
E. Active Mode Testing
The following sections describe
proposed amendments and other
considerations regarding the active
mode testing provisions of appendix F.
1. Cooling Mode
a. General Test Approach
The current DOE room AC test
procedure uses a calorimeter test
method to determine the cooling
capacity and associated electrical power
input of a room AC. Under this
approach, the test unit is installed
between two chambers, one
representing the indoor side and the
other representing the outdoor side,
which are both maintained at constant
conditions by reconditioning
equipment. The room AC operates in
cooling mode, transferring heat from the
indoor side to the outdoor side, while
the reconditioning equipment
counteracts the effects of the room AC
to maintain constant test chamber
conditions. The room AC cooling
capacity is determined by measuring the
required energy inputs to the
reconditioning equipment.
In response to the June 2015 RFI,
AHAM noted that it planned to conduct
a round-robin test to identify sources of
potential variation in the room AC test
procedure. AHAM stated that because it
believes that the current room AC
standards are stringent, and that slight
variation in the test procedure would
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
have a significant impact in meeting
standards, any DOE test procedure
amendments should address potential
sources of variation. (AHAM, June 2015
RFI, No. 5 at p. 5) In this NOPR, DOE
is proposing various test procedure
modifications intended to improve
repeatability and reproducibility and
mitigate potential areas of variation.
While DOE has not quantified the cost
impacts of these proposed changes,
based on its analysis described in
section III.L.1 of this document, DOE
believes that they would serve to reduce
test burden by reducing the potential
need for tests to be re-run due to
variation. DOE welcomes AHAM’s
round-robin test data to identify areas of
variation in the room AC test procedure
and encourages other interested parties
to provide comment and feedback on
this issue.
b. Test Setup and Air Sampling
In the August 2017 RFI, DOE noted
that Section 4.2.7 of ANSI/ASHRAE 16–
2009, which is incorporated by
reference in the DOE test procedure,
requires the calorimeter chamber
conditions to be verified by air sampled
from a location that is representative of
the temperatures surrounding the unit
and that simulate the conditions in
which the unit operates in the field. As
DOE stated, there is no procedure to
verify whether the measured chamber
temperature reading is representative of
conditions at the test unit condenser
and evaporator inlet, which may be
affected by recirculation from the
condenser and evaporator exhaust,
respectively, thereby potentially
reducing test repeatability and
reproducibility. 82 FR 36349, 36353. In
the August 2017 RFI, DOE requested
data on more specific requirements for
air sampling devices within the
calorimeter test chambers to improve
test repeatability. Id.
Friedrich asserted that the positioning
of the air samplers impacts test
repeatability, especially for through-thewall units which intake and exhaust
condenser air on the same plane.
Friedrich recommended that the air
sampler measurements be verified using
a thermocouple grid at the evaporator
and condenser air inlets. (Friedrich, No.
2 at p. 5)
AHAM stated that it does not
currently have information that the
thermocouple placement as prescribed
in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–2009
affects test repeatability and suggested
that a balanced temperature is achieved
throughout the calorimeter chamber.
AHAM further noted that, unlike in a
psychrometric test approach, the current
calorimeter test approach takes into
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
account any recirculation that would
occur in the field. (AHAM, No. 3 at p.
6)
DOE is aware that the size, capability,
and orientation of components within
calorimeter test chambers may vary
significantly, and that third-party
laboratories extensively analyze their
chambers and testing apparatus to
maintain consistent and accurate air
sampling measurements. DOE also
understands that temperature gradients
and unique airflow patterns can result
from the interaction of a chamber
reconditioning apparatus and the room
AC under test, and that these
interactions are particular to and
dependent upon factors such as
chamber size and shape, chamber
equipment arrangement, size of
reconditioning apparatus, and others, as
noted in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–
2016 Section 8.2.7. Therefore, DOE
contends that universal requirements for
air sampling instrumentation and
thermocouple placement could
potentially reduce test accuracy and
reproducibility. As discussed in section
III.B.2 of this document, DOE is
proposing to update the reference to
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16 to the most
current 2016 version, which includes
additional clarification on best practices
for air sampler and thermocouple
placement.
c. Air-Enthalpy Test
As discussed in section III.B.2 of this
document, DOE is proposing to use the
calorimeter test method specified in
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–2016 for
determining the cooling mode
performance in appendix F. ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 16–2016
additionally contains an air-enthalpy
test method (also referred to as a
psychrometric test method), in which a
technician places instruments in or near
the evaporator air stream to measure the
rate of cooled air added to the
conditioned space. In the June 2015 RFI
and the August 2017 RFI, DOE
discussed the potential differences in
accuracy and test burden associated
with the two test methods and requested
comment on the air-enthalpy method,
specifically its applicability, accuracy,
and associated test burden. 80 FR
34843, 34847 (July 18, 2015) and 82 FR
36349, 36353 (Aug. 4, 2017).
AHAM opposed the use of the airenthalpy method as an alternative to the
calorimeter method, stating that the
calorimeter method is supported by
historical data and is repeatable, while
the repeatability of the air-enthalpy
method for room ACs had not yet been
assessed. According to AHAM,
implementing this alternative test
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
35715
method would likely increase variation
in testing and cause challenges for thirdparty verification and enforcement
testing. (AHAM, June 2015 RFI, No. 5 at
p. 3; AHAM, No. 3 at p. 7)
Friedrich also opposed the use of the
air-enthalpy method for room ACs,
based on internal testing that it stated
showed a 2 to 3-percent variation in test
results for the calorimeter method.
Friedrich suggested that the variability
of a psychrometric method for room
ACs would be greater than the current
variability associated with the
calorimeter method. Friedrich added
that psychrometric testing: (1) would
not represent actual installation
conditions, (2) would add uncertainty to
the exhaust air wet-bulb temperature
measurements, and (3) would fail to
capture cooling from the portion of the
room AC chassis installed in the room.
Friedrich supported not updating the
reference of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
16–2009 in the DOE test procedure until
further round-robin investigation is
completed. (Friedrich, No. 2 at pp. 6–7)
DOE recognizes that installing test
ducts on the evaporator and condenser
exhausts to measure the air-enthalpy
and calculate cooling capacity may
impact the air flow, particularly on the
evaporator side where room ACs
typically locate the inlet and outlet in
close proximity, and thus produce
results that may not be representative of
typical installations. The calorimeter
method requires no test ducts or
instrumentation that might impede or
redirect airflow. DOE also agrees with
Friedrich that, unlike the calorimeter
method, the air-enthalpy method does
not capture heat loss through the chassis
to the room and further notes that the
air-enthalpy method also may not
capture possible heat transfer due to
internal air leakage through the chassis
between the indoor and outdoor test
chambers.
As discussed in section III.C.8 of this
document, DOE conducted testing to
investigate any differences in test results
between the air-enthalpy and
calorimeter approaches. That testing
showed a wide range of discrepancies
between the air-enthalpy method and
the calorimeter method, for both cooling
capacity and efficiency. The largest
differences were observed for units with
evaporator airflows below 200 CFM,
suggesting that the air-enthalpy test
method as typically conducted with
existing instrumentation does not
produce results representative of actual
room AC performance or comparable to
measured performance in a calorimeter
chamber. DOE expects that obtaining
more accurate results would require
specialized test equipment that is
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
limited in availability and costly to
design, develop, and produce.
Finally, DOE notes that the results of
AHAM’s round-robin testing results are
not yet available to further evaluate the
repeatability and reproducibility of the
air-enthalpy method.
For these reasons, DOE is not
proposing to allow the use of the airenthalpy method for determining room
AC cooling mode performance at this
time.26
DOE seeks comment on the proposal
not to include an air-enthalpy test
approach for determine cooling mode
performance of room ACs.
The unit’s outer case (i.e., ‘‘chassis’’)
provides a boundary between the
outdoor and indoor sides, leading to
potential air leakage (and therefore, heat
leakage) into or out of the conditioned
space. This leakage can occur within the
room AC chassis (i.e., internal heat
leakage) or around the chassis (i.e.,
external heat leakage), and may
negatively impact the performance of
the room AC. External heat leakage
consists of two main forms: (1)
Infiltration of outdoor air into the
conditioned space; and (2) heat leakage
through and around non-chassis
installation components, designed to
secure the room AC and prevent air
leakage.
Section 4.2.2 of ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 16–2009, referenced by the
current DOE room AC test procedure,
directs that the test unit be installed
with no efforts made to seal the internal
construction of the unit.27
Consequently, any internal heat leakage
through the room AC that would occur
in a typical consumer installation is
accounted for in the current room AC
test procedure.
Regarding the external sealing to
avoid heat leakage, section 4.2.2 of
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–2009
requires that the test unit be installed in
a way that is similar to its normal
installation. DOE is aware that common
industry practice for testing louvered
room ACs is to install the room AC
using a sealed setup, i.e., the area
around the test unit is sealed. This
sealing prevents any inclusion of air
leakage around the unit chassis. Any
remaining gaps are typically insulated
with tape to ensure a complete seal
around the test unit. Consequently, any
external heat leakage around the unit
that may occur in a typical consumer
installation is not typically accounted
for by laboratories when conducting the
room AC test procedure. DOE
considered whether to clarify the
installation instructions for room ACs to
account for external heat leakage. In the
Non-louvered room ACs, (i.e., those
intended for through-the-wall
installations) are installed inside a wall
sleeve. Although the wall sleeve is
designed to fit snugly within the wall,
there is usually a small gap between the
wall sleeve and the room AC, leading to
potential air leakage into the
conditioned space. Also, the room AC
and wall sleeve represent a break in the
building envelope through which
thermal bridging 28 may occur, thereby
transferring unwanted heat into the
conditioned space. The air and heat
leakage mechanisms for through-thewall installations are shown in Figure
III–3.
26 Although DOE is proposing to reference ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 16–2016, which includes an
optional air-enthalpy method, DOE proposes to
only reference those sections in ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 16–2016 that apply to the calorimeter
method.
27 Note that the same requirements are retained in
Section 6.1.1.4 of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–
2016.
28 Thermal bridging refers to the conductive heat
transfer that can occur through the room AC chassis
and wall sleeve, which are usually made of metal.
The metal acts as an ‘‘easy’’ path for heat transfer
between the indoor side and the outdoor side of the
building, reducing the effective insulation of the
building and leading to heat gain, which is
undesirable when a consumer seeks to cool an
indoor space.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
d. Side Curtain Heat Leakage and
Infiltration Air
DOE considered the installation
requirements for room ACs during
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
testing and the impact of installation on
efficiency performance, as described in
the following sections.
Room ACs are designed to be installed
in a window opening or through a wall,
with the compressor and condenser
outside the conditioned space and the
evaporator inside the conditioned space,
as shown in Figure III–2.
following subsections, DOE describes
the proposed additional direction
intended to further account for the
external heat leakage in a typical
consumer installation.
Non-Louvered (Through-The-Wall)
Room ACs
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
EP11JN20.001</GPH>
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
35716
Because these supplemental
instructions are consistent with the
current requirement to install the test
unit in a way that is similar to its
normal installation and with DOE’s
understanding of current testing
practice, these proposed amendments
are not expected to increase test burden
or change the test conduct from
appendix F.
DOE requests comment on the
proposal to specify in appendix F that
non-louvered room ACs, which are
designed for through-the-wall
installation, must be installed using a
compatible wall sleeve (per
manufacturer instructions), with the
provided or manufacturer-required rear
grille, and with the included trim frame
and other manufacturer-provided
installation materials.
35717
DOE is aware that many
manufacturers currently test nonlouvered room ACs with compatible
wall sleeves, in accordance with the
existing requirement in the DOE test
procedure that no effort be made to seal
the unit internally before cooling mode
testing. Regarding external sealing to
avoid heat leakage, DOE is also aware
that manufacturers typically test nonlouvered room ACs with the included
trim frame and other manufacturerprovided installation materials. As the
non-louvered room ACs are installed in
accordance with the manufacturer
instructions provided to consumers, this
setup would be similar to its normal
installation.29
Some test laboratories have requested
additional direction regarding the
general setup—specifically, whether a
wall sleeve is required when testing
non-louvered room ACs, and if so,
which wall sleeve must be used.
Therefore, DOE proposes to specify in a
new section 3.1.1 of appendix F that
room ACs designed for through-the-wall
installation (i.e., non-louvered room
ACs) must be installed inside a
compatible wall sleeve (in accordance
with the installation instructions
provided to consumers), with the trim
frame and other manufacturer-provided
installation materials that are included
in the retail package when purchasing
the unit, where applicable. DOE
believes that this proposed instruction
would improve the representativeness
and the reproducibility of test results.
Louvered (Window) Room ACs
Louvered room ACs, designed for
window installation, are typically
installed using manufacturer-provided
side curtains to cover the area of the
window opening that is not covered by
the unit itself. Side curtains reduce, but
generally do not eliminate, air leakage
between the conditioned and
unconditioned space. Some heat leakage
is also possible through the side
curtains themselves and surrounding
installation materials.
For hung-sash windows,30 the top
sash can be positioned in direct contact
with the top side of the chassis. Two
side curtains extend horizontally from
the sides of the chassis. For this type of
installation, the air leakage pathways
are: (1) Through the gap between the
surface of the chassis and the edges of
the window opening, which are usually
covered with side curtains (described
below); and (2) through the gap between
the two sashes. Manufacturers typically
provide weather stripping to reduce air
leakage between the window sashes.
For sliding windows,31 the sash can
be positioned in direct contact with the
left or right side of the chassis. One
curtain is typically provided that
extends upward from the chassis to the
top edge of the window opening. With
this type of installation, the air leakage
pathways are: (1) Through the gap
between the surface of the chassis and
top edge of the window opening, which
is usually covered with a curtain; and
(2) through the gap between the two
sashes.
For casement windows, which have
no sliding sashes, the window panels
are attached to hinges and rotate to open
or close the window. Consequently, the
width and height of the window
opening cannot be adjusted to match the
size of the room AC chassis. Because of
this, casement-type room ACs are
usually designed for a narrow range of
window widths. With this type of
installation, the gaps between the
surface of the chassis and the edges of
the window opening represent
significant leakage pathways.
Figure III–4 and Figure III–5 show the
various air infiltration and heat leakage
pathways for louvered room ACs.
29 Note that Section 6.1.1.4 of ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 16–2016 requires the air conditioner be
installed per the manufacturer instructions, which
DOE contends is consistent with the normal
installation requirements in ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 16–2009.
30 A sash is a window panel that usually holds
one or more panes of glass. In hung-sash windows,
the sashes can be moved vertically along a rail in
order to open or close the window.
31 In sliding windows, the sashes can be moved
horizontally along a rail.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
EP11JN20.002</GPH>
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
35718
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
conditions, the test measures energy
needed to compensate for internal heat
leakage through the unit and the
thermal bridging, but any external
leakage (i.e., infiltration air leakage
around the unit chassis or heat leakage
through the manufacturer-provided
installation materials) is eliminated,
neglecting any effect external air leakage
may have on energy efficiency.
EP11JN20.004</GPH>
precluded. DOE understands that
current industry practice is to snugly
install the room AC in the test chamber
partition wall using insulating material
to approximate the insulating properties
of the fixed part of the separating
partition, as shown in Figure III–6. Any
remaining gaps are typically insulated
with tape to ensure a complete seal
around the test unit. Under those
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
EP11JN20.003</GPH>
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
As described previously, Section 4.2.2
of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–2009
requires that the test unit be installed in
a way that is similar to its normal
installation. No further direction is
provided as to what constitutes normal
installation. DOE is aware that common
industry practice is to set up a louvered
room AC for testing so that all air
leakage around the unit chassis is
The current U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) ENERGY
STAR Product Specification for Room
Air Conditioners Version 4.1 (ENERGY
STAR V4.1), 32 requires that window
units be provided with weather
stripping and/or gasket materials
appropriate for all window size(s) for
which the unit is designed.
Furthermore, the criteria require that the
side curtains be tight fitting to minimize
air leaks and contain insulation in the
panel with a minimum insulation value
of R1.33 ENERGY STAR-qualified room
ACs, with R1 side curtains, comprised
26 percent of basic models on the
market as of September 2018.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
Discussion of Comments
In the August 2017 RFI, DOE noted
that, when conducting the calorimeter
test prescribed in ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 16–2009 and referenced by
appendix F, the test unit is installed so
that all air and heat leakage around the
unit that would normally be present in
a typical installation is precluded by
means of sealing. DOE requested
comment on testing room ACs in
accordance with the manufacturerprovided installation materials. 82 FR
36349, 36352 (Aug. 4, 2017).
Friedrich opposed the use of
manufacturer-provided installation
materials that are included in the retail
package when purchasing the unit for
room AC testing. Friedrich noted that
DOE has not specified a required side
curtain surface area for testing, which
Friedrich stated could result in
laboratories using varying side curtain
32 The ENERGY STAR Certification Criteria V4.1
is available at https://www.energystar.gov/sites/
default/files/ENERGY%20STAR%20Version
%204.0%20Room%20Air%20Conditioners
%20Program%20Requirements.pdf
33 The insulation value is determined by the
Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) Labeling and
Advertising of Home Insulation regulations, 16 CFR
part 460.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
surface areas, leading to significant test
result variability and potential
consumer confusion. Friedrich also
suggested that laboratories may not be
capable of testing with side curtains in
place without significant test apparatus
modifications. Friedrich further noted
that, if the psychrometric method
specified in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
16–2016 were adopted, the heat loss
between rooms would not be captured
even when using manufacturerprovided side curtains. Friedrich also
suggested that manufacturer-provided
installation materials are not necessary
because the existing test requirement of
no more than 0.005 inches of water
column pressure difference between the
indoor and outdoor test chambers limits
the effects of heat and air loss between
the test chambers. (Friedrich, No. 2 at
pp. 3–4) DOE agrees that requiring the
use of side curtains may introduce
additional variability in the test
procedure, specifically regarding the
size of the test chamber partition wall
openings used by labs, leading to
differing side curtain extensions and
thus different air and heat leakage
impacts. DOE further recognizes the
additional test burden associated with
modifying the partition wall and
installing side curtains and believes that
this burden outweighs the benefit of
measuring the potentially minimal air
and heat leakage due to the small
pressure differential limit between the
two test chambers.
AHAM noted that heat loss through
the installation materials is already
accounted for in Section 4.2.2 of ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 16–2009, referenced
in appendix F, which requires that the
room AC be installed in a manner
similar to its normal installation with no
effort to seal the internal construction of
the unit to prevent air leakage, other
than specifically provided by the
manufacturer’s consumer installation
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
35719
instructions. AHAM asserted that any
modification to the instructions in
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–2009
would provide little additional value
and is not necessary to ensure the test
procedure is representative of an
average use cycle. According to AHAM,
doing so would increase test variation
due to varying test lab window sizes
and would require laboratories to stock
different sizes of insulated partitions.
AHAM noted that window kits are not
used in the portable AC test procedure,
and that the portable AC test procedure
only measures duct heat loss and
infiltration air heat transfer because
portable ACs draw condenser air from
the conditioned space, which AHAM
believes is not applicable to room ACs.
AHAM claimed that the test burden
increase from requiring the use of
installation materials would not be
justified by the minimal benefit to
consumers. (AHAM, No. 3 at p. 5) As
discussed above, DOE is aware that
common laboratory practice is to forgo
the use of manufacturer-provided
installation materials included in the
retail package and instead to seal to
prevent air and heat leakage around the
unit. DOE is also aware that laboratories
typically modify the chamber partition
wall to fit each test unit by adding or
removing partition wall insulating
materials. DOE also notes that, as
discussed later in this section, Sections
6.1.1.4 and Section 8.4.2 of ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 16–2016 require that
the perimeter of the AC under test must
be sealed to the separating partition,
which is consistent with common
practice when testing room ACs and
ensures repeatability and
reproducibility. Therefore, DOE
recognizes that an alteration to the
common practice by requiring the use of
all manufacturer-provided installation
materials, including side curtains, may
present additional test burden.
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
EP11JN20.005</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
35720
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
The California IOUs and Joint
Advocates commented that room ACs
should be installed with manufacturerprovided installation materials.
(California IOUs, No. 4 at p. 4; Joint
Advocates, No. 6 at p. 3) The California
IOUs believe that the current test setup
does not reflect real-world room AC
operation and thus is contrary to EPCA’s
representative use requirements.
According to the California IOUs, room
ACs are typically installed in windows
and secured with side curtains, wall
sleeves, and other manufacturerprovided materials that are included in
the retail package when purchasing the
unit and are usually poorly insulated
and allow for air infiltration, unlike the
insulated wall in a calorimeter chamber.
The California IOUs, therefore,
encouraged DOE to capture the
efficiency impacts of air infiltration,
heat leakage, and pressure differentials
in the room AC test procedure by
requiring the use of all manufacturerprovided installation materials.
(California IOUs, No. 4 at p. 4) The Joint
Advocates asserted that the current DOE
test procedure for room ACs does not
represent actual unit efficiency for
consumers, and therefore the Joint
Advocates believe that testing room ACs
with manufacturer-provided installation
materials would incentivize
improvements for installation materials
to reduce infiltration air leakage. The
Joint Advocates stated that reducing
infiltration air would save energy and
improve consumer comfort by reducing
hot air entering from outdoors. (Joint
Advocates, No. 6 at p. 3)
As discussed previously, DOE
recognizes that the common practice for
installing room ACs for testing does not
necessarily utilize all manufacturerprovided installation materials.
However, DOE recognizes the
potentially significant variability and
additional test burden associated with
the use of side curtains and other
manufacturer-provided installation
materials that are not currently used.
Further, DOE notes that Sections 6.1.1.4
and Section 8.4.2 of ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 16–2016 require that the
perimeter of the AC under test must be
sealed to the separating partition, which
is consistent with common practice
when testing room ACs. This
requirement represents a change from
the instructions in ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 16–2009, which in Section
4.2.2, as discussed, requires that the
room AC be installed in a manner
similar to its normal installation.
DOE conducted testing to investigate
the inherent air infiltration and
conductive heat transfer effects
associated with manufacturer-provided
installation materials included in the
retail package when purchasing the
unit. DOE tested 13 room ACs both with
and without manufacturer-provided
installation materials, otherwise
following the appendix F test procedure
and conditions. DOE installed each
room AC in accordance with both ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 16–2009 and
manufacturer instructions in a 34-inch
wide window opening of the
calorimeter test chamber partition wall.
Because room AC chassis vary in width
and height, the area filled by side
curtains varied from unit to unit in the
34-inch wide window opening, and the
height of the window opening was
adjusted to match the height of each
unit. Table III–7 displays the results of
testing with and without manufacturerprovided installation materials under
appendix F conditions.
TABLE III–7—IMPACT OF MANUFACTURER-PROVIDED INSTALLATION MATERIALS ON ROOM AIR CONDITIONER COOLING
CAPACITY
Measured cooling capacity
Unit No.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
1 ............................................................................
2 ............................................................................
3 ............................................................................
4 ............................................................................
8 ............................................................................
9 ............................................................................
10 ..........................................................................
11 ..........................................................................
12 ..........................................................................
13 ..........................................................................
14 ..........................................................................
15 ..........................................................................
DOE expected that the measured
cooling capacity with installation
materials would be consistently lower
(worse) than the measured cooling
capacity without installation materials
(for which the unit is tightly sealed
during testing to prevent air and heat
leakage). However, as shown in Table
III–7, DOE observed no consistent
change in cooling capacity when using
manufacturer-provided installation
materials included in the retail package
when purchasing the unit, with capacity
impacts ranging from a reduction of 4.7
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Without
installation
materials
(Btu/h)
Energy star rated
Jkt 250001
Yes ................................
No .................................
Yes ................................
Yes ................................
No .................................
Yes ................................
No .................................
Yes ................................
No .................................
Yes ................................
Yes ................................
Yes ................................
5720
10600
11750
20630
5210
5590
5280
5240
6160
7910
8580
21230
percent to an increase of 2.5 percent
relative to the measured capacity
without installation materials.
Additionally, DOE found that the
magnitude and direction (positive or
negative) of the measured capacity
impacts did not correlate with the
presence of insulated side-curtains (i.e.,
units that ship with minimum R1 side
curtains were measured as having both
higher and lower cooling capacity when
tested with the side curtains installed).
Nor did the magnitude and direction of
the measured cooling capacity change
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
With
installation
materials
(Btu/h)
5450
10530
11950
20470
5260
5580
5420
5270
6050
7940
8340
21200
Measured cooling capacity
change with installation
materials
(Btu/h)
¥270
¥70
+210
¥150
+50
¥10
+130
+30
¥110
+30
¥230
¥40
(%)
¥4.7
¥0.7
+1.8
¥0.7
+1.0
¥0.2
+2.5
+0.6
¥1.8
+0.4
¥2.7
¥0.2
correlate with the rated cooling
capacity. Instead, the unexpected
presence of positive cooling capacity
changes suggests that the observed
variations are driven more by
measurement uncertainty than heat
transfer losses.
Regardless of the source of the
variation, however, all capacities
measured while using manufacturerprovided installation materials were
within 5 percent of those measured
without installation materials. Because
the variation in test results was
minimal, DOE expects that any potential
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
benefits of more representative cooling
capacity measurements by testing with
manufacturer-provided installation
materials included in the retail package
when purchasing the unit would be
small and would be outweighed by the
burden associated with such a testing
configuration. Therefore, DOE is not
proposing to require the use of
manufacturer-provided installation
materials in appendix F for louvered
room ACs at this time.
DOE requests comment on the
proposal, consistent with ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 16–2016, Sections
6.1.1.4 and Section 8.4.2, not to require
installing louvered room ACs with the
manufacturer-provided installation
materials, including side curtains, and
instead to require testing with the
partition wall sealed to the unit.
e. Test Conditions
In the June 2015 RFI, DOE noted that
the current room AC test procedure
measures performance only under fullcooling-load outdoor test conditions of
95 °F dry-bulb and 75 °F wet-bulb, and
therefore, technologies that improve
performance under less extreme partload conditions, such as variable-speed
compressors and variable-opening
expansion devices, would not improve
rated performance under the current test
procedure. DOE noted that for central
ACs and heat pumps, the seasonal
energy efficiency ratio (SEER) accounts
for various annual conditions by testing
at multiple rating conditions. DOE
therefore requested comment on the
merits of revising the current room AC
test procedure to account for the benefit
of technologies that improve
performance under multiple cooling
mode temperature conditions. 80 FR
34843, 34848 (June 18, 2015).
The Natural Resources Defense
Council, Appliance Standards
Awareness Project, Alliance to Save
Energy, National Consumer Law Center,
and Northwest Energy Efficiency
Alliance (hereafter the ‘‘Joint
Commenters’’) stated that measuring
part-load performance in the DOE room
AC test procedure would encourage
manufacturers to develop products with
variable-speed capabilities and other
part-load technologies not available as
of 2015 in room ACs available on the
market. The Joint Commenters
suggested that a metric that captures
part-load performance could result in
additional energy savings because room
ACs are often used as the primary air
conditioning source, either for a single
room or an entire house, and thus are
used more frequently than just for
supplemental air conditioning on the
hottest days and would likely benefit
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
from part-load efficiency improvements.
(Joint Commenters, June 2015 RFI, No.
7 at pp. 1–2)
The California IOUs commented that
the effective and efficient use of partload operation can be useful in
maintaining a more constant room
temperature while reducing overall
energy consumption. However, they
noted that the impact of part-load
efficiency would depend on the number
of operating hours associated with partload operation in the overall
performance metric. Therefore, the
California IOUs suggested that DOE
assess the potential efficiency benefits
of part-load technologies and the
number of operating hours under partload conditions per year, claiming that
including part-load efficiency in the
regulated metric would only be effective
if part-load operation represents a
significant part of the annual operating
hours. The California IOUs suggested
that the part-load operating hours
should not include hours during the
summer, when room ACs typically
operate at full-load conditions, nor
should the inclusion of part-load
operation result in a reduction of overall
room AC operating efficiencies or an
increase in peak demand. If DOE finds
that part-load efficiency has a minimal
impact on overall performance, the
California IOUs expressed continued
support for the current test condition.
(California IOUs, June 2015 RFI, No. 8
at p. 3)
AHAM opposed part-load
performance measurements, based on
DOE’s conclusion in the January 2011
Final Rule that such measurements
would result in significant effort and
additional test burden with minimal
energy savings. (AHAM, June 2015 RFI,
No. 5 at p. 4) In the January 2011 Final
Rule, DOE stated that sufficient
information was not available at the
time to assess whether technologies that
improve part-load efficiency would be
cost effective, and that many of the
technology options that could improve
full-load efficiency would also improve
part-load efficiency, so the current test
conditions were indicative of the
efficiency at a range of conditions. Thus,
DOE decided to not amend the test
procedure to measure part-load
performance at that time. Nevertheless,
DOE noted in the January 2011 Final
Rule that it could consider amendments
if additional information on this subject
were to become available for future
rulemakings. 76 FR 971, 1016 (Jan. 6,
2011). DOE notes that the market has
developed since the January 2011 Final
Rule, and that at least three variablespeed room ACs are now on the market.
DOE expects that manufacturers will
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
35721
continue to introduce variable-speed
room ACs to the market in the near
term, because, on December 28, 2017,
EPA released its ENERGY STAR 2018
Emerging Technology Award Criteria for
Room ACs with Efficient Variable
Output, which recognizes room ACs
with variable-speed compressors that
are more than 25 percent more efficient
than a similar room AC with a singlespeed compressor.34 DOE expects that
the introduction of these ENERGY
STAR award criteria will incentivize
manufacturers to further adopt variablespeed compressors in room ACs.
Multiple Test Conditions
On June 1, 2016, DOE established a
test procedure for portable ACs that
assesses cooling performance under two
cooling mode test conditions,
representative of typical conditions and
extreme conditions (hereafter the ‘‘June
2016 Portable AC Final Rule’’). 81 FR
35241, 35249–35250. As discussed,
room ACs are currently tested at a single
outdoor test condition, 95 °F dry-bulb
and 75 °F wet-bulb temperature, which
aligns with only one of the two cooling
mode test conditions for portable ACs.
Considering the many similarities
between the two products (i.e.,
consumer utility, usage patterns,
internal components), DOE requested
comment in the August 2017 RFI on
whether it would be appropriate to
harmonize the two test procedures by
including an additional test condition
for room AC cooling mode testing
(specifically, 83 °F dry-bulb and 67.5 °F
wet-bulb outdoor temperature). 82 FR
36349, 36351–36352 (Aug. 4, 2017).
Friedrich opposed an additional
cooling mode test condition for room
ACs, stating that room ACs are
optimized for the current 95 °F test
condition and any changes to the test
procedure would require system and
component design changes. For
example, Friedrich asserted that less
expensive and more reliable capillary
tube expansion devices would likely
need to be replaced with more
expensive and complex thermostatic
expansion valves or variable orifice
metering devices. Friedrich stated that
just one component change could
increase manufacturing cost by more
than 15 percent as well as increase
repair and installation complexity, and
that the current room AC chassis may
not have sufficient space to
accommodate such devices. (Friedrich,
No. 2 at pp. 1–2) DOE recognizes that
34 Additional information on the ENERGY STAR
Emerging Award for Industry Stakeholders is
available at https://www.energystar.gov/about/
awards/energy-star-emerging-technology-award/
energy-star-emerging-technology-award-industry.
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
35722
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
optimizing performance at any test
condition likely would require design
and component modifications, which
may include adjusting the expansion
device, blower motor, compressor, and
other performance-related modification.
DOE understands that any time a design
change is initiated, significant
engineering and manufacturing costs are
incurred, for example, to fit larger and
more complex components into sizerestricted chassis. However, although an
amended test procedure requiring
testing room ACs at additional cooling
mode test conditions would necessitate
a corresponding amendment to the
energy conservation standards for room
ACs, the design and manufacturing
costs incurred to redesign units to
perform optimally at these conditions
are outside of the scope of a test
procedure rulemaking analysis. DOE
notes that it would analyze in an energy
conservation standards rulemaking any
design and manufacturing costs
potentially incurred to improve the
efficiency of products.
AHAM and Friedrich opposed the
proposed additional cooling mode test
condition, saying that it would add
significant test burden by effectively
doubling the number of tests needed to
certify a room AC, lengthening test time,
and resulting in less laboratory
availability, which could significantly
slow time to market and disrupt
production schedule. (AHAM, No. 3 at
p. 4; Friedrich, No. 2 at p. 2) DOE agrees
that an additional cooling mode test
condition would increase test burden,
though it would not require an
adjustment in test unit installation and
would instead necessitate adjusting only
the outdoor test chamber conditions,
since the indoor conditions remain the
same for both cooling mode test
conditions. DOE expects the total
additional burden associated with
testing a reduced operating test would
be 4 to 5 hours. This reflects the time
required to adjust the outdoor test
chamber test conditions (about 2 hours
for the chamber to reach a lower
outdoor temperature test condition), and
the additional test time, which is
estimated to be 2 to 3 hours
(approximately 1 to 2 hours for chamber
and unit stabilization and 1 hour for the
rating test period, as specified by ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 16–2009).
AHAM further stated that if DOE did
consider an additional cooling mode
test condition it would be inappropriate
to consider an additional cooling mode
test condition comparable to that which
is established for dual-duct portable
ACs (i.e., the most similar portable AC
configuration to room ACs). AHAM
cited a September 2016 AHAM Home
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
Comfort Survey that indicated the vast
majority of portable ACs on the market
are a single-duct configuration. As a
result, most portable ACs would be
tested with a single outdoor cooling
mode test condition. AHAM therefore
suggested it would be inappropriate to
select test conditions for room ACs that
align with the type of portable AC that
a minority of consumers own and would
not result in a comparable rating
between all portable ACs and room ACs.
(AHAM, No. 3 at p. 4) DOE notes that
the additional cooling mode test
condition that was adopted for dualduct portable ACs was developed using
room AC ownership data and a climate
analysis; and, because the supporting
data were derived from room ACs, DOE
asserts that the previous analysis
conducted in support of the portable AC
test procedure applies to room ACs.
AHAM and Friedrich also contended
that including a second test condition
could confuse consumers, suggesting
that adding a cooler test condition
would result in a larger Seasonally
Adjusted Cooling Capacity (SACC)
compared to the cooling capacity as
measured under the current conditions,
which could result in consumers
purchasing units that have too little
capacity and are unable to meet cooling
needs during peak periods. Friedrich
further commented that if DOE were to
proceed with these changes to the test
procedure, it should coordinate with
EPA and the Federal Trade Commission
(FTC) to harmonize metrics across
efficiency programs. (AHAM, No. 3 at p.
4; Friedrich, No. 2 at p. 2) DOE agrees
that introducing a second cooling mode
test condition for all room ACs would
result in a general increase in the
reported cooling capacities for all units,
which may cause confusion for
consumers who have become familiar
with the typical capacity values in this
well-established market.35 Under the
Memorandum of Understanding that
EPA and DOE signed on September 30,
2009, DOE is responsible for the test
methods and metrics to be used in the
ENERGY STAR program when
qualifying products. Therefore, if DOE
were to modify the energy efficiency
metric for room ACs in appendix F, EPA
would accordingly consider revised
ENERGY STAR qualification criteria
based upon the amended DOE test
35 DOE notes that consumer confusion about the
number of temperature conditions was not a
concern for portable ACs because DOE only
recently established a test procedure for portable
ACs that requires multiple cooling mode test
conditions. Before that there was no DOE test
procedure; the DOE test procedure for portable ACs
has always required multiple cooling mode
temperature conditions.
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
procedure. Additionally, EPCA requires
that any revisions to the labels for room
ACs, for which the FTC is responsible,
include disclosure of the estimated
annual operating cost (determined in
accordance with DOE’s test procedures
prescribed under section 6293 of EPCA),
unless the Secretary determines that
disclosure of estimated annual operating
cost is not technologically feasible, or
the FTC determines that such disclosure
is not likely to assist consumers in
making purchasing decisions or is not
economically feasible. (42 U.S.C.
6294(c)(1)) Were DOE to amend the
room AC test procedure to include an
additional test condition, DOE
understands that the FTC would
develop any revised labeling
requirements to disclose a revised
annual energy cost calculation based on
any modified energy efficiency metric.
The California IOUs opposed an
additional cooling mode test condition,
suggesting it would not be
representative of actual usage
conditions in California, where room
ACs operate at peak capacity or close to
it (i.e., at conditions represented by the
95 °F dry-bulb test condition) for longer
than 750 hours per year and are
typically purchased in reaction to
heatwaves, when peak cooling is
required. The California IOUs cautioned
that allocating less weight to the 95 °F
dry-bulb cooling mode test condition
may devalue the cooling mode operating
performance that is most valued by
consumers and is the basis for their
purchase decisions. (California IOUs,
No. 5 at p. 2) AHAM added that the
current room AC test procedure tests the
‘‘worst case’’ energy use scenario and
there is no reason to test room ACs
under new test conditions that would
result in less energy use. (AHAM, No. 3
at p. 4) Friedrich stated that room ACs
optimized for a new reducedtemperature test condition would not
have enough capacity to meet the
cooling load at the existing highertemperature condition. (Friedrich, No. 2
at p. 2) The California IOUs also
claimed that an additional cooling mode
test condition would interfere with
calculating a room AC’s peak demand
power draw, which can have a large
impact on peak load operation and is
often the basis for future program
development, rate structure, and overall
power needs. (California IOUs, No. 5 at
pp. 2–3)
The California IOUs and Joint
Advocates commented that if DOE were
to include an additional part-load
cooling mode test condition, the test
procedure would likely capture the
benefits of technologies, such as
variable-speed compressors, that enable
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
improved part-load performance. These
commenters further stated that, in
addition to improving part-load
performance and efficiency by reducing
compressor cycling and improving heat
exchanger effectiveness, variable-speed
compressors would provide more
consistent room temperature and
humidity control, improved
dehumidification, and reduced noise
levels. They suggested that adding
variable-speed compressors would
enable utilities to create incentives for
consumers to use more intelligently
controlled and connected room ACs
with little impact on consumer comfort
and would enable more flexible demand
side resources to integrate increasing
amounts of intermittent renewable
energy sources into the grid. (California
IOUs, No. 5 at p. 3; Joint Advocates, No.
6 at p. 2) However, the California IOUs
suggested that further data are necessary
prior to modifying the room AC test
procedure to measure room AC
performance and efficiency at part-load
test conditions and to identify an
appropriate alternative test condition
and operating hours that would
effectively capture part-load operation.
(California IOUs, No. 5 at p. 4) Friedrich
suggested that variable-speed
compressors would not be feasible for
room ACs due to increased installation
and controls costs, as well as chassis
space constraints. (Friedrich, No. 2 at p.
2) AHAM urged DOE to wait until
variable-speed compressors are
available in a number of products that
would be sufficient to evaluate the
impacts of a test procedure change
before considering a test procedure
change to account for them. (AHAM,
No. 3 at p. 5)
DOE agrees with some, but not all, of
these comments. The inclusion of
additional cooling mode test conditions
would better reflect operation under
multiple temperature conditions, and
product information based on testing
using such conditions may create an
incentive to increase the proportion of
variable-speed room ACs on the market.
Use of variable-speed compressors, in
turn, may be beneficial to both
consumers and utilities, because room
ACs would operate more effectively and
efficiently under multiple indoor and
outdoor temperature conditions.
However, DOE also recognizes that a
test procedure that measures
performance at both peak temperature
conditions and a less extreme
temperature condition would require a
new overall weighted metric that would
combine the performance under both
temperature conditions because it
would change measured energy
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
consumption. DOE further recognizes
that room AC performance has
historically been based on peak
performance under elevated outdoor
temperature test conditions, which is
the condition under which consumers
most expect their room ACs to perform,
and that peak performance would no
longer be clearly portrayed by a
weighted metric.36 Furthermore, DOE
notes information about variable-speed
room ACs is limited: There are few
variable-speed products on the market,
and data about them is limited. DOE
does not believe that the benefits of
measuring performance at reduced
outdoor temperature test conditions for
all room ACs would outweigh the
expected substantial increase in test
burden, utility impacts, and consumer
confusion that would result. Therefore,
DOE is proposing to continue using a
single test condition for testing singlespeed room ACs, with no changes to the
current CEER metric. However, as
discussed in section III.C.2 of this
document, DOE is proposing to require
testing multiple test conditions for
variable-speed room ACs, in order to
capture the relative efficiency
improvements associated with variablespeed operation. The test procedure
would represent the performance of
variable-speed room ACs using
adjustments to the CEER calculations to
obtain the same metric, which is based
on performance at the maximum 95 °F
outdoor rating condition.
DOE requests comment on the
proposal not to include additional
cooling mode test conditions for singlespeed room ACs.
Cooling Test Alternatives
The current DOE test procedures for
room ACs and packaged terminal air
conditioners (PTACs) involve fixed
temperature and humidity tests in a
calorimeter at full-load or part-load
conditions, during which specific drybulb and wet-bulb temperatures are
maintained throughout the cooling
mode test period. The DOE test
procedure for central ACs requires
testing at multiple cooling mode test
conditions, with fixed temperature and
humidity at each condition, similar to
the current room AC test procedure,
which has one test condition with a
fixed temperature and humidity.
The Joint Advocates stated that the
lower-temperature test condition
discussed in the August 2017 RFI is a
36 This understanding is based on discussion in
the June 2010 Room AC Test Procedure
Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and
comments from the California IOUs discussed
above. 75 FR 37633–37634 (June 29, 2010).
(California IOUs, No. 5 at p. 2)
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
35723
fixed temperature and humidity test and
would not capture single-speed
compressor cycling losses that would
occur in typical temperature conditions.
By comparison, a dynamic-cooling-load
test, such as that being developed by the
Canadian Standards Association, during
which the compressor would cycle off
when the setpoint is reached, may
capture such cycling losses. The Joint
Advocates suggested that the most
representative room AC test procedure
(i.e., a dynamic-cooling-load test that
measures part-load performance) would
spur adoption of variable-speed
compressors and adjustable fan speeds
because it would capture cycling losses
in single-speed units and increased
efficiency from these technologies.
(Joint Advocates, No. 6 at pp. 2–3)
DOE is aware of two approaches to
measure part-load performance of a
room AC, constant-cooling-load testing
and dynamic-cooling-load testing. In a
constant-cooling load test, a cooling
load is applied to the indoor room using
reconditioning equipment, and this
cooling load does not change
throughout the test. In a dynamiccooling-load test, the cooling load
applied to the indoor room follows a
load profile which approximates how
the cooling load on a typical unit would
change throughout the day. In both the
dynamic-cooling-load test suggested by
the Joint Advocates and a constantcooling-load test explored in DOE
investigative testing, the chamber
indoor cooling load is provided at a
specified rate or value throughout
testing instead of maintaining specific
temperature conditions within the test
chamber. In theory, this approach
would be most representative of actual
usage, where cooling loads are constant
or variable due to external factors (e.g.,
weather, door/window openings) and
internal factors (e.g., room occupants,
appliance operation). Under a constantcooling-load or dynamic-cooling-load
test, a room AC with a single-speed
compressor would cycle the compressor
as the setpoint is reached, thereby
introducing efficiency losses, whereas a
variable-speed compressor could
maintain constant operation at reduced
speeds to match the cooling load with
no cycling losses. As explained below,
DOE explored this approach but is not
proposing it because an increased test
burden and reduced repeatability and
reproducibility outweigh potential
benefits.
DOE investigated the status of test
data and uniform procedures to test
with a specified constant or dynamic
cooling load but found no widely
adopted and industry-accepted test
procedure for room ACs or other AC
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
35724
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
products that uses a constant-coolingload or dynamic-cooling-load test. DOE
is aware of investigative efforts to test
central ACs under varying cooling load
conditions, but those have yielded only
preliminary results which did not
involve room ACs and did not provide
sufficient evidence to show that a
constant or dynamic load test would be
repeatable and reproducible and not
overly burdensome to conduct.37 38
Due to the limited data available
regarding constant-cooling-load testing,
DOE conducted investigative testing to
better understand the benefits and
potential challenges associated with a
constant-cooling-load test for room ACs.
These tests were conducted using a
variable-speed room AC rated at 18,000
Btu/h and a conventional single-speed
room AC rated at 12,100 Btu/h. The
single-speed room AC was selected
because it was the louvered unit in the
test sample closest in capacity to the
variable-speed unit. DOE installed each
room AC in a calorimeter test chamber,
set the unit thermostat to 80 °F to match
the indoor temperature specified in the
appendix F test procedures, and then
applied a fixed cooling load to the
indoor room that was below the
nominal rated cooling capacity of the
test unit. The calorimeter chamber was
configured to permit the indoor
chamber temperature to vary, thereby
allowing the test unit to eventually
reach its thermostat set point and to
adjust its cooling in response to the
cooling load demands on the indoor
room, as opposed to the constanttemperature test, which results in
unvarying cooling operation. Table III–
8 shows the results of these tests. All
percentages are displayed are relative to
full-cooling-load values measured
during constant-temperature tests.
TABLE III–8—FIXED COOLING-LOAD-BASED TEST SINGLE-SPEED ROOM AIR CONDITIONER
Chamberimposed
cooling load
(%)
Outdoor test condition (°F dry-bulb)
95 .........................................................................................
49
76
78
79
80
46
48
67
70
82 .........................................................................................
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
Compressor
on time
(%)
Percent of
full-load power
(%)
53
80
82
82
84
48
50
69
72
62
84
86
86
88
58
60
77
78
EER
(Btu/Wh)
Percent of
full-load EER
(%)
9.2
10.6
10.6
10.7
10.6
11.8
12.0
13.1
13.3
79
91
91
91
91
79
80
88
89
As discussed previously in section
III.C of this document, and shown in
Figure III–1, when tested under these
same test conditions, the variable-speed
room AC adjusted its compressor speed
to match the applied cooling load,
resulting in increased efficiency of
between 9 percent and 25 percent at
decreased cooling loads of 85 percent
and 45 percent of the full-load cooling
capacity, respectively, compared to the
tested cooling capacity of the variablespeed room AC under the appendix F
test procedure.
When tested according to the same
constant-cooling-load test, the singlespeed unit operated continuously until
the unit thermostat setpoint was
satisfied, at which time the unit cycled
off the compressor. When the chamber
temperature rose above the thermostat
setpoint, the single-speed room AC
activated the compressor. This off-andon compressor cycling process
continued throughout the rating test
period. As shown in Table III–8, the
fractional time the compressor was on
(‘‘compressor on time’’) for a single
compressor cycle during the test ranged
from 84 percent to 48 percent as the
cooling load decreased from 80 percent
to 46 percent, respectively, of the tested
cooling capacity. DOE also observed
during testing that the total compressor
cycle time (i.e., the sum of a single
period of compressor on time and
compressor off time) decreased as
cooling loads reduced, resulting in more
frequent cycling and subsequent
increased cycling losses.
As shown in Table III–8, DOE
observed that the single-speed room AC
was able to provide cooling that closely
matched the chamber-imposed cooling
load by cycling the compressor (i.e., the
percentage of compressor on time
approximated the cooling load
percentage). However, the single-speed
room AC average input power during
those same tests did not decrease at the
same rate as the cooling capacity, which
was indicative of the fan or blower
remaining on when the compressor
cycled off, as well as the significant
additional power necessary to start up
the compressor at the beginning of each
compressor on cycle (i.e., the percent of
full-load power consumption during the
same test was consistently higher than
the cooling load percentage, as shown in
Table III–8). As a result of the
disproportionate cooling capacity and
power decreases at reduced cooling
loads, the overall efficiency of a singlespeed room AC in terms of EER at
reduced cooling loads decreased by up
to 20 percent at a reduced load of about
50 percent of the full-load cooling
capacity, as shown in Table III–8.39 The
overall efficiency of the variable-speed
room AC in terms of EER increased by
about 24 percent under similar reduced
load conditions, as shown in Figure
III–1.
Constant-cooling load tests have
initially confirmed behavior that would
be expected of room ACs in the field
under conditions associated with partial
loads (i.e., lower outdoor temperatures
at which the cooling load is typically
smaller). During the constant-coolingload test, single-speed room ACs cycle
in proportion to the cooling load, and
variable-speed room ACs adjust the
compressor speed to match the
measured cooling load in the room.
Therefore, DOE would expect that
37 The Canadian Standards Association has
conducted dynamic-load testing for heat pumps. A
summary is available at https://neep.org/sites/
default/files/NEEPCSAHarley2017-06-28.pdf.
38 Researchers at the University of Tokyo
investigated the operation of split-type ACs under
constant-load conditions in 2012. https://docs.lib.
purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&
httpsredir=1article=2335context=iracc.
39 EER, is defined as the ratio of cooling capacity
to unit power, in contrast to CEER, which
additionally includes inactive mode or off mode
power. Because the investigative testing did not
include inactive mode or off mode testing, the
investigative testing results are reported in EER.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
35725
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
cycling losses decrease the efficiency of
single-speed room ACs at lower outdoor
temperature conditions, an effect which
variable-speed room ACs avoid.
However, DOE contends that load-based
tests, for reasons presented below, are
currently not feasible for room ACs.
DOE is concerned that the constantcooling-load test would reduce
repeatability and reproducibility. Based
on investigative testing, DOE found that
conducting a constant-cooling-load test
in an ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–2009compliant calorimeter test chamber
would impact repeatability and
reproducibility. Table III–9 shows the
results of indoor wet-bulb temperatures
for the cooling-load-based tests
conducted by DOE.
TABLE III–9—INDOOR WET-BULB TEMPERATURES FOR COOLING-LOAD-BASED TESTS
Outdoor test
condition
(°F dry-bulb)
Tested unit
Single-Speed ...................................................................................................
Cooling load
(%)
49
76
78
79
80
67.6
67.2
67.0
67.1
67.1
0.6
0.2
0.0
0.1
¥0.1
82
........................
........................
........................
46
48
67
70
67.5
66.5
66.8
67.1
0.1
0.5
¥0.5
¥0.2
67.1
0.1
95
........................
........................
........................
........................
49
73
74
85
86
67.9
68.0
67.0
67.0
67.0
0.9
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
87
........................
........................
........................
........................
45
46
63
64
85
67.0
67.0
67.0
67.0
67.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
67.2
0.2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
Average
As shown in Table III–9, at cooling
loads less than 75 percent of the tested
unit cooling capacity, the indoor wetbulb temperature variation sometimes
exceeded the 0.3 °F arithmetic average
tolerance required by ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 16–2009. DOE believes this is
because the test chamber lacks a
dehumidifier and instead relies on the
test unit to remove moisture from the
indoor chamber and assist in
maintaining the wet-bulb temperature.
The single-speed and variable-speed
room ACs were unable to remove
sufficient water vapor from the indoorside chamber while cycling on and off
or while operating at reduced
compressor speed, respectively, causing
the indoor chamber wet-bulb
temperature to vary from 67 °F up to
0.6 °F for the single-speed unit, and up
to 1.0 °F for the variable-speed unit.
Also, because the chamber used for
testing was not designed to
accommodate constant-cooling-load
testing, the chamber controls were not
capable of automatically achieving a
specific cooling load condition. Instead,
an iterative process was necessary to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
manually program and adjust the
heating, cooling, and humidification
inputs to the room to achieve the
desired cooling load. This difficulty in
automatically achieving specific loading
conditions contributed significant
increased testing time and test burden
arising from the need to ensure uniform
test chamber dimensions. In addition,
the chamber size and particular
conditioning equipment may affect the
rate at which the indoor chamber
temperature and relative humidity
decrease in response to the room AC
operation, or increase after a singlespeed unit cycles off, thus affecting
cycle time and frequency, which in turn
impact cycling losses and measured
performance.
DOE notes that constant-cooling-load
tests may not be reproducible because
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16 does not
specify chamber dimensions and
reconditioning equipment
characteristics which affect heat transfer
capabilities within the chamber, and
thus they likely are not uniform across
the industry. DOE expects that coolingload-based test reproducibility could
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Difference
from rating
condition
(°F wet-bulb)
95
........................
........................
........................
........................
Average
Variable-Speed ................................................................................................
Average
indoor
temperature
(°F wet-bulb)
Sfmt 4702
increase with test chamber
modifications to improve cooling loadsetting controls, standardizing or
normalizing for test chamber size, and
adding a dehumidifier to the indoor
chamber, although these would place
some additional test burden on
manufacturers. Furthermore, because
existing calorimeter chambers rely on
steady-state operation to ensure
accuracy and precision, dynamiccooling-load testing in a calorimeter test
chamber would require extraordinarily
slow cooling load changes, which DOE
estimates would be on the order of
about one percent of the tested unit
cooling capacity every two hours to
maintain chamber stability, requiring an
impractically long test to measure a full
range of cooling load conditions (e.g., it
would require an estimated 86 hours to
reduce the cooling load from 100
percent to 57 percent of full load to
reach the expected cooling load at an
outdoor test condition of 82 °F, as
discussed in section III.D of this
document, compared to the 2 hours
typically required to conduct the
current test procedure). Because of the
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
35726
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
current lack of industry consensus on a
constant-cooling-load or dynamiccooling-load test procedure and the
uncertainty regarding the repeatability
of such tests, DOE judges that the
potential benefits of constant-coolingload or dynamic-cooling-load tests do
not justify the increase in test burden in
the form of test time and changes to test
equipment. For these reasons, DOE is
not proposing a constant-cooling-load or
dynamic-cooling-load test for room ACs
at this time.
f. Power Factor
In response to the June 2015 RFI, the
California IOUs suggested that DOE
should identify the power factor 40 at
each operating voltage, provided that
the market size for multiple-voltage
units warrants that kind of coverage.
(California IOUs, June 2015 RFI, No. 8
at p. 4) DOE measured power factor for
a sample of 23 room ACs of varying
product classes, capacities, and
efficiencies and found that power factor
results ranged from 0.93 to 0.99, with an
average power factor of 0.97. Because
the range of power factors was small
and all measurements were close to a
value of 1, DOE’s testing suggests that
there is no significant difference
between the actual power drawn by a
room AC and the apparent power
supplied to the unit. Based on this, DOE
expects that the metrics proposed in this
document accurately described the
power consumption of a room AC and
therefore, the additional burden of
measuring and reporting the power
factor would outweigh any benefits this
information would provide. Therefore,
DOE does not propose to establish
requirements for measuring and
reporting the power factor for room ACs.
DOE seeks comment on the proposal
to not establish requirements for
measuring and reporting the power
factor for room ACs.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
2. Heating Mode
In the June 2015 RFI, DOE requested
comment on appropriate test methods,
industry test standards, and temperature
conditions for measuring room AC
reverse-cycle heating performance. DOE
also requested information on the
burdens associated with testing heating
performance and whether they would
disproportionately impact certain
businesses. 80 FR 34843, 34847–34848.
40 The power factor of an alternating current
electrical power system is defined as the ratio of the
real power flowing to the load to the apparent
power in the circuit. A load with a low power factor
draws more electrical current than a load with a
high power factor for the same amount of useful
power transferred. The higher currents associated
with low power factor increase the amount of
energy lost in the electricity distribution system.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
The California IOUs supported
measuring room AC heating mode
performance in the DOE test procedure,
but noted that with a combined
performance metric, consumers would
be unable to determine performance in
individual active modes. According to
the California IOUs, consumers could
thus be confused when comparing units
with and without heating, and might
incorrectly assume that a high CEER
necessarily represents efficient
performance in both cooling and heating
modes. The California IOUs also
suggested that a combined efficiency
metric could allow manufacturers to
improve efficiency in heating mode
while maintaining or even reducing
cooling mode efficiency. Therefore, the
California IOUs suggested that DOE
implement separate cooling mode and
heating mode metrics. (California IOUs,
June 2015 RFI, No. 8 at pp. 2–3)
AHAM asserted that a heating mode
test method is not necessary for room
ACs, and that DOE should not adopt any
metric for heating, whether separate or
combined with cooling mode
performance. AHAM stated that there is
a trade-off between cooling and heating
performance, so it would be difficult to
optimize performance for both modes.
Therefore, AHAM believes that
including heating performance in the
efficiency metric could increase prices
while reducing product availability and
consumer utility. AHAM also
commented that a CEER metric that
combines cooling and heating would
confuse consumers, limit comparisons
between room ACs with only cooling
and those with both heating and
cooling, and would diverge from the
approach adopted for similar products.
(AHAM, June 2015 RFI, No. 5 at pp. 3–
4; AHAM, No. 3 at p. 7)
DOE agrees that combining cooling
mode and heating mode performance
into a single metric may limit a
consumer’s ability to recognize the
mode-specific performance and
compare performance with room ACs
that only provide cooling. DOE also
recognizes that a combined metric may
lead to a reduction in cooling mode
efficiency, if heating mode efficiency
increases but the overall metric remains
the same. DOE considered the approach
taken for similar products and notes that
PTACs and central ACs have separate
metrics for heating and cooling
performance while the test procedure
for portable ACs does not consider
heating performance. Further, DOE is
not aware of data suggesting that heating
mode is a significant operating mode for
room ACs. Based on the lack of data of
room ACs used for heating, and given
the potential concerns raised by
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
commenters, DOE is not proposing a test
procedure to measure room AC heating
mode in the room AC test procedure at
this time.
DOE requests comment on the
proposal not to establish a heating mode
test procedure for room ACs at this time.
3. Off-Cycle Mode
Single-speed room ACs typically
operate with a compressor on-off control
strategy, where the compressor runs
until the room temperature drops below
a consumer-determined setpoint, then
ceases to operate (i.e., the unit operates
in off-cycle mode 41) until the room
temperature rises above the setpoint, at
which time the compressor starts again.
The points at which the compressor
stops and restarts depend on the
setpoint temperature defined by the user
and the deadband 42 programmed by the
manufacturer. During the period in
which the compressor remains off (i.e.,
off-cycle mode), the fan may operate in
different ways depending on
manufacturer implementation: (1) The
fan ceases operation entirely; (2) the fan
continues to operate for a short period
of time after the setpoint is reached and
then stops until the compressor is
reactivated; (3) the fan continues to
operate continuously for a short period
of time, after which it cycles on and off
periodically until the compressor is
reactivated; or (4) the fan continues to
operate continuously until the
compressor is reactivated.43
In the June 2015 RFI, DOE requested
comment on the merits and limitations
of including a requirement to measure
off-cycle mode in the room AC test
procedure. 80 FR 34843, 34846 (June 18,
2015). AHAM commented that DOE had
previously concluded in a test
procedure supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking (SNOPR)
published for room ACs on June 29,
2010 (hereafter the ‘‘June 2010
SNOPR’’), that the benefit of
incorporating the energy use of the offcycle mode into the overall energy
efficiency metric is outweighed by the
additional test burden for
manufacturers. 75 FR 37954, 37604.
AHAM asserted that nothing has
changed since those determinations that
41 ‘‘Off-cycle mode’’ is distinct from ‘‘off mode,’’
in which a room AC not only ceases compressor
and fan operation but also and may remain in that
state for an indefinite time, not subject to restart by
thermostat or temperature sensor signal.
42 The term ‘‘deadband’’ refers to the range of
ambient air temperatures around the setpoint for
which the compressor remains off, and above which
cooling mode is triggered on.
43 Unlike air circulation mode, off-cycle mode is
not user-initiated and only occurs when the
ambient temperature has satisfied the setpoint.
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
would justify changing them. (AHAM,
June 2015 RFI, No. 5 at pp. 2–3)
In the June 2010 SNOPR, DOE
considered a definition for off-cycle
mode that it proposed in a NOPR
published in the Federal Register on
December 9, 2008 (73 FR 74639),
namely that off-cycle mode is a standby
mode in which a room AC: (1) Has
cycled off its main function by
thermostat or temperature sensor, (2)
does not have its fan or blower
operating, and (3) will reactivate the
main function according to the
thermostat or temperature sensor signal.
DOE notes that the 2010 off-cycle mode
definition proposal only addressed a
low-power state, excluding the
possibility of fan or blower operation.
By excluding the periods of fan
operation from off-cycle mode, the
definition for off-cycle mode considered
in the June 2010 SNOPR would not have
accounted for potentially significant
room AC energy consumption. Unlike
that definition, off-cycle mode as
considered in this NOPR could include
periods of potentially significant fan or
blower energy use.
AHAM also noted DOE’s conclusion
in the January 2011 Final Rule that offcycle mode does not persist for an
indefinite time and therefore would not
be considered a standby mode. (AHAM,
June 2015 RFI, No. 5 at pp. 2–3; AHAM,
No. 3 at p. 6) DOE agrees that, because
off-cycle mode is terminated when the
compressor reactivates, it would not be
classified as a standby mode even if no
fan or blower operation occurs.
Regardless, such classification would
not preclude any determination as to
whether off-cycle mode should be
incorporated in the energy efficiency
metric.
In response to the August 2017 RFI,
AHAM stated that the room AC industry
recently adjusted to the CEER metric
that was implemented in June 1, 2014,
and that the metric has yet to be
included on the EnergyGuide label.
Therefore, AHAM suggested that
including off-cycle mode in the room
AC test procedure would prematurely
adjust the performance metric, resulting
in another burdensome redesign and
testing process and potentially causing
confusion with the test procedure.
(AHAM, No. 3 at p. 6)
Friedrich also opposed including offcycle mode testing for room ACs, stating
that the portable AC off-cycle mode test
requires an additional 2 hours in the test
chamber after the cooling mode test,
which is not an efficient use of test
chamber time and which delays the
manufacturer test and development
timeline. (Friedrich, No. 2 at p. 4) DOE
agrees that including an off-cycle mode
test for room ACs would likely increase
testing by 2 hours, in addition to a short
period to adjust the test unit control
settings.
35727
The California IOUs noted that, in a
previous test procedure rulemaking for
room ACs, DOE discussed, but did not
describe, a test procedure to measure
fan-only energy use, and requested
clarification regarding how off-cycle
mode would address fan energy
consumption. The California IOUs cited
a Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory study, which found that
portable ACs consume 102 W when
only operating the fan,44 and suggested
that room AC fan-only operation may
similarly consume a significant amount
of power and thus should be captured
in the room AC test procedure.
(California IOUs, No. 5 at p. 1) The Joint
Advocates supported measuring offcycle mode power consumption in the
room AC test procedure, stating that it
would provide better representation of
actual use and efficiency, more
information to consumers, and
encourage manufactures to introduce
more efficient fans and fan motors. The
Joint Advocates commented that
capturing fan operation outside of
cooling mode would be consistent with
the test procedures for portable ACs,
dehumidifiers, and dishwashers. (Joint
Advocates, No. 6 at pp. 3–4)
To investigate the merits of including
off-cycle mode in the DOE test
procedure, DOE conducted investigative
testing of off-cycle mode for a sample of
27 room ACs.45 The results of the testing
are presented in Table III–10.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
TABLE III–10—ROOM AC OFF-CYCLE MODE TESTING
Off-cycle
average power
(W)
Unit No.
Fan operation scheme in off-cycle mode
OC–1 ................................................
OC–2 ................................................
OC–3 ................................................
OC–4 ................................................
OC–5 ................................................
OC–6 ................................................
OC–7 ................................................
OC–8 ................................................
OC–9 ................................................
OC–10 ..............................................
OC–11 ..............................................
OC–12 ..............................................
OC–13 ..............................................
OC–14 ..............................................
OC–15 ..............................................
OC–16 ..............................................
OC–17 ..............................................
OC–18 ..............................................
OC–19 ..............................................
OC–20 ..............................................
OC–21 ..............................................
OC–22 ..............................................
Continuous ................................................................................................
Continuous ................................................................................................
Cyclical—Indefinite ....................................................................................
Cyclical—Indefinite ....................................................................................
Cyclical—Indefinite ....................................................................................
Cyclical—Indefinite ....................................................................................
Cyclical—Indefinite ....................................................................................
Cyclical—Indefinite ....................................................................................
Cyclical—Indefinite ....................................................................................
Cyclical—Indefinite ....................................................................................
Cyclical—Indefinite ....................................................................................
Cyclical—Indefinite ....................................................................................
Cyclical—Indefinite ....................................................................................
Cyclical—Indefinite ....................................................................................
Cyclical—Indefinite ....................................................................................
Cyclical—Indefinite ....................................................................................
Cyclical—Indefinite ....................................................................................
Cyclical—Indefinite ....................................................................................
Cyclical—Indefinite ....................................................................................
Cyclical—Indefinite ....................................................................................
Cyclical—Indefinite ....................................................................................
Cyclical—Indefinite ....................................................................................
44 Burke, Thomas et al. ‘‘Using Field-Metered
Data to Quantify Annual Energy Use of Portable Air
Conditioners’’ Environmental Energy Technologies
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
Division Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
December 2014.
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
253.3
286.9
17.0
2.2
15.9
15.3
22.3
20.2
5.3
8.6
7.8
9.9
4.8
5.3
6.7
7.0
22.6
4.8
11.7
7.0
3.8
15.3
Average
power for fan
operating
scheme
(W)
270.1
10.7
45 Room AC off-cycle mode investigative testing
was consistent with the portable AC off-cycle mode
test methodology.
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
35728
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
TABLE III–10—ROOM AC OFF-CYCLE MODE TESTING—Continued
Unit No.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
OC–23
OC–24
OC–25
OC–26
OC–27
Fan operation scheme in off-cycle mode
..............................................
..............................................
..............................................
..............................................
..............................................
Cyclical—Limited .......................................................................................
Cyclical—Limited .......................................................................................
Cyclical—Limited .......................................................................................
Cyclical—Limited .......................................................................................
No Fan Operation ......................................................................................
As shown in Table III–10, two of the
units operated the fan continuously in
off-cycle mode and consumed 270.1 W
on average. Of the remaining 25, one did
not operate the fan at all during offcycle mode and consumed 1.8 W; four
disabled the fan after a few fan cycles
(shown as ‘‘cyclical–limited’’) and
consumed 2.7 W on average; and the
remaining 20 units continued cycling
the fan throughout the test period
(shown as ‘‘‘‘cyclical–indefinite’’), 10.7
W on average. The cyclical fan behavior
that DOE observed was generally
consistent with the ENERGY STAR V4.1
specification, which as discussed in
section III.C.3 of this document, requires
that all ENERGY STAR-certified room
ACs ship with an energy saver mode
enabled by default that minimizes
energy consumption by limiting fan
operation to: (1) While the compressor
is operating (i.e., cooling mode); (2) a
period not exceeding 5 minutes after the
compressor is switched off (i.e.,
following cooling mode and prior to offcycle mode); and (3) up to 17 percent of
the total compressor off cycle time
following the initial 5-minute period
(i.e., off-cycle mode), equivalent to 1
minute of fan-on time for every 5
minutes of fan-off time.
As discussed in a NOPR for the
portable AC test procedure published on
February 25, 2015, DOE tentatively
determined that the benefits of
measuring off-cycle mode power for
portable ACs outweighed the additional
test burden because all models tested
from a market-representative sample
operated the fan continuously in offcycle mode with an average off-cycle
mode power of 93 W. 80 FR 10211,
10231. However, based on the results
described above, which indicate
relatively low (i.e., approximately 10
percent or less) average power use in
off-cycle mode compared to the average
power used in cooling mode, DOE has
tentatively determined that the
additional 2-hour test burden that
would be required would outweigh the
benefits of measuring off-cycle mode
power for room ACs. Therefore, DOE is
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Off-cycle
average power
(W)
Jkt 250001
not proposing to define off-cycle mode
or establish means for measuring offcycle mode average power for room ACs
in appendix F.
DOE requests comment on the
proposal to not establish a definition or
test procedure for off-cycle mode.
F. Standby Modes and Off Mode
Section 1.7 of appendix F defines
standby mode as any mode where a
room AC is connected to a mains power
source and offers one or more of the
following user-oriented or protective
functions which may persist for an
indefinite time: (a) To facilitate the
activation of other modes (including
activation or deactivation of active
mode) by remote switch (including
remote control), internal sensor, or
timer; or (b) continuous functions,
including information or status displays
(including clocks) or sensor-based
functions. Section 1.5 of appendix F
defines inactive mode as a mode that
facilitates the activation of active mode
by remote switch (including by remote
control) or internal sensor, or provides
continuous status display. Section 1.6 of
appendix F defines off mode as a mode
distinct from inactive mode in which a
room AC is connected to a mains power
source and is not providing any active
or standby mode function and where the
mode may persist for an indefinite time.
An indicator that only shows the user
that the product is in the off position is
included within the classification of an
off mode.
1. Referenced Standby Mode and Off
Mode Test Standard
In the January 2011 Final Rule, DOE
amended the room AC test procedure by
incorporating provisions from IEC
Standard 62301 First Edition for
measuring standby mode and off mode
power. 76 FR 971, 979–980 (Jan. 6,
2011). At that time, DOE reviewed the
IEC Standard 62301 First Edition and
concluded that it would generally apply
to room ACs, with some clarifications,
including allowance for testing standby
mode and off mode in either the test
chamber used for cooling mode testing,
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Average
power for fan
operating
scheme
(W)
3.5
2.6
2.5
2.2
1.8
2.7
1.8
or in a separate test room that meets the
specified standby mode and off mode
test conditions. 76 FR 971, 986.
On January 27, 2011, IEC published
IEC Standard 62301 Second Edition, an
internationally accepted test procedure
for measuring standby power in
residential appliances, which included
various clarifications to IEC Standard
62301 First Edition. Provisions from IEC
Standard 62301 Second Edition are
currently referenced in DOE test
procedures for multiple consumer
products for which standby mode and
off mode energy use are measured (e.g.,
dehumidifiers, portable ACs,
dishwashers, clothes washers, clothes
dryers, conventional cooking products,
microwave ovens).
Based on its previous determinations
for similar consumer products, DOE
expects that the use of IEC Standard
62301 Second Edition for measuring the
standby mode and off mode energy use
for room ACs would improve the
accuracy and representativeness of the
test measurements and would not be
unduly burdensome, compared to IEC
Standard 62301 First Edition.
Accordingly, DOE proposes to
incorporate by reference relevant
paragraphs of IEC Standard 62301
Second Edition in appendix F in place
of those from IEC Standard 62301 First
Edition, as follows.
a. Power Measurement Uncertainty
Section 4.4 of IEC Standard 62301
Second Edition introduces a more
comprehensive specification for power
measurement accuracy, which depends
on the crest factor 46 and power factor of
the input power, and the resulting
calculated maximum current ratio
(MCR). DOE notes that the allowable
uncertainty is the same or less stringent
than the allowable uncertainty specified
in the First Edition, depending on the
value of MCR and the power level being
measured. In a final rule published in
the Federal Register on October 31,
46 The crest factor is the measured peak current
drawn by the product divided by the measured root
mean square current drawn by the product.
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
2012 (hereafter the ‘‘October 2012 Final
Rule’’), regarding test procedures for
consumer dishwashers, dehumidifiers,
and conventional cooking products,
DOE determined that this change in the
allowable uncertainty would maintain
sufficient accuracy of measurements
under a full range of possible measured
power levels while minimizing test
burden associated with high
instrumentation accuracy. 77 FR 65942,
65948. Because DOE understands that
the standby power characteristics of
room ACs are similar to those of
dishwashers, dehumidifiers, and
conventional cooking products and
were tested using the same standard
until the publication of the October
2012 Final Rule, DOE relies on that
analysis and adopts it for room ACs.
Therefore, DOE proposes to reference
the power equipment specifications
from Section 4.4 of IEC Standard 62301
Second Edition for determining standby
mode and off mode power in appendix
F.
DOE requests comment on the
proposal to reference the power
equipment specifications from Section
4.4 of IEC Standard 62301 Second
Edition for determining standby mode
and off mode power in appendix F.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
b. Power Consumption Measurement
Procedure
Section 4.2 of appendix F requires
measuring standby mode and off mode
power according to Section 5, Paragraph
5.3 of IEC Standard 62301 First Edition,
as modified by Appendix F.47 Paragraph
5.3 specifies a direct meter reading
method. If the power varies over a cycle,
as described in Section 5, Paragraph
5.3.2 of IEC Standard 62301 First
Edition, testing must follow the average
power approach for power that varies
over a cycle in Section 5, Paragraph
5.3.2(a). This approach requires a
measurement period long enough to
include one or more complete cycles,
and then calculating the average power
over the measurement period is
calculated.
IEC Standard 62301 Second Edition
defines three different mode stability
types (stable, cyclic, and irregular) and
provides three methods to measure
power consumption of an appliance: (1)
Sampling, (2) average reading, and (3)
direct meter reading. The direct meter
reading method and average reading
method are similar to the options in IEC
Standard 62301 First Edition for stable
and non-stable (cyclic or irregular)
47 Appendix F provides additional direction
requiring the product to stabilize for 5 to 10
minutes and using an energy use measurement
period of 5 minutes.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
standby modes, respectively, that are
currently referenced in the room AC test
procedure. The following paragraphs
describe the three methods in IEC
Standard 62301 Second Edition to
determine power consumption.
(1) The sampling method requires
different approaches for stable, cyclic,
and irregular power consumption
modes. For stable modes, it requires a
test period of at least 15 minutes, with
power data recorded at least once every
second. The first third of the total
period is discarded, and the other twothirds of the period are used to
determine stability. Stability is achieved
when the slope of a linear regression of
the data is within tolerances listed in
Section 5.3.2 of IEC Standard 62301
Second Edition. Once the stability
criteria are satisfied, the result is the
average power consumed during the
latter two thirds of the total test period.
For cyclic modes, the method requires
two test periods, each not less than 10
minutes, and not less than two cycles
each. Stability for a cyclic mode is
achieved when the power difference
between the two test periods is within
tolerance. The representative average
power is the average power consumed
over both comparison periods. For
irregular modes, or cyclic modes where
the cycles never meet stability criteria,
IEC Standard 62301 Second Edition
requires collecting data sufficient to
characterize the power consumption of
the mode and recommends measuring a
minimum of ten cycles.
(2) The direct meter reading method
may only be used for stable modes, and
requires a 30-minute stabilization
period, which is extended if stability
cannot be achieved. Once stability has
been achieved, two instantaneous
measurements are taken not less than 10
minutes apart. The average of these two
readings is the result, as long as the two
measurements agree within the
tolerances specified in Section 5.3.4 of
IEC Standard 62301 Second Edition. If
the measurements do not agree
sufficiently or stability cannot be
achieved, testing must follow a different
method.
(3) The average reading method may
only be used for stable modes. This is
a change from the first edition of IEC
Standard 62301, which also allowed use
for non-stable modes. After a 30-minute
stabilization period, average power
measurements are taken over two equal
comparison periods, each not less than
10 minutes in duration. If the two
measurements agree within the
tolerances specified in Section 5.3.3 of
IEC Standard 62301 Second Edition, the
result is determined by the average of
readings from both comparison periods.
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
35729
If the measurements do not agree within
the specified tolerances or stability
cannot be achieved, testing must follow
the sampling method.
According to IEC Standard 62301
Second Edition, the sampling method is
preferred for all cases and is specified
for all units in which the power varies
over the mode, or the mode to be
measured is of limited duration. Thus,
IEC Standard 62301 Second Edition
specifies the sampling method to be
used for modes when the power is
cyclic or irregular and suggests that it is
the fastest test method for stable modes.
DOE expects that adopting a single
test method from IEC Standard 62301
Second Edition would ensure that the
standby power test procedure for room
ACs is uniform and repeatable because
allowing multiple test methods may
affect reproducibility if systematic
differences exist between the test
methods. DOE does not expect that
proposing the sampling method for all
standby mode and off mode testing
would increase test burden, because
power meters that can measure, store,
and output readings at the required
proposed sampling rate and accuracy for
the sampling method are already widely
used by test laboratories. DOE also does
not anticipate that the power
consumption measured with the
sampling method would substantively
vary from that measured with the direct
meter or average reading methods. DOE
notes that other covered products, such
as dehumidifiers and portable ACs,
require using the sampling method to
measure standby mode and off mode
average power. For these reasons, DOE
proposes to adopt the sampling method
from Section 5.3.2 of IEC Standard
62301 Second Edition to determine
standby mode and off mode average
power in appendix F.
DOE requests comment on the
proposal to adopt and reference the
sampling method from Section 5.3.2 of
IEC Standard 62301 Second Edition to
determine standby mode and off mode
average power in appendix F.
G. Network Functionality
Network functionality on room ACs
may enable functions such as
communicating with the network to
provide real-time information on the
temperature conditions in the room or
receiving commands via a remote user
interface such as a smartphone. DOE has
observed that network features on room
ACs are designed to operate in the
background while the room AC
performs other functions. These
network functions may operate
continuously during all operating
modes, and therefore may impact the
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
35730
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
power consumption in all operating
modes.
In the June 2010 SNOPR, DOE
considered whether it should adopt
amendments to the room AC test
procedure to measure energy
consumption when network
functionality is enabled. DOE noted that
a draft version of IEC Standard 62301
Second Edition described network mode
as a mode where the energy using
product is connected to a main power
source and at least one network function
is activated (such as reactivation via
network command or network integrity
communication) but where the primary
function is not active. 75 FR 37594,
37605 (June 29, 2010). Due to the lack
of information about room ACs with
network functionality, in the January
2011 Final Rule, DOE did not adopt
provisions to account for energy
consumption associated with network
functionality. 76 FR 971, 983–984 (Jan.
6, 2011).
DOE investigated the network-enabled
units currently available in the market
to assess whether an amendment to
room AC test procedure to measure
network functionality would be
appropriate. DOE did not find networkcapabilities to be common at this time
and found that to the extent offered, in
most cases, such units are sold networkready or with the necessary hardware
included. However, at least one
manufacturer does not include the
necessary hardware with the original
purchase, instead selling a connectivity
module separately. Based on these
findings, and as discussed further in
section III.H of this document, DOE is
not proposing provisions to specifically
measure and account for energy
consumption associated with network
functionality. However, to provide
further direction and simplify the test
setup and configuration settings, DOE
proposes to specify in section 3.1.4 of
appendix F that units with network
capabilities must be tested with the
network settings disabled, and that
those network settings remain disabled
for all tested operating modes (i.e.,
cooling mode, standby mode, and off
mode).
DOE also recently published an RFI
on the emerging smart technology
appliance and equipment market. 83 FR
46886 (Sept. 17, 2018). In that RFI, DOE
sought information to better understand
market trends and issues in the
emerging market for appliances and
commercial equipment that incorporate
smart technology. DOE’s intent in
issuing the RFI was to ensure that DOE
did not inadvertently impede such
innovation in fulfilling its statutory
obligations in setting efficiency
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
standards for covered products and
equipment. In this NOPR, DOE seeks
comment on the same issues presented
in the RFI as they may be applicable to
room ACs.
DOE requests comment on the
proposal to specify that all network or
connectivity settings must be disabled
during testing.
H. Connected Test Procedure
ENERGY STAR V4.1 specifies
optional criteria for room ACs designed
to provide additional functionality to
consumers, such as alerts and messages,
remote control and energy information,
as well as demand response (DR)
capabilities, which support the
inclusion of room ACs in smart grid
applications (hereafter ‘‘connected room
ACs’’). These capabilities are all
considered network functionality, as
they require the room AC maintain
communication continuously or
intermittently with a server; however,
DR functionality is a unique subset that
enables smart grid communication and
active modified operation in response to
DR signals from an electric utility.
In the June 2015 RFI, DOE noted that
the ENERGY STAR V4.0 criteria 48 may
increase the market penetration of
connected room ACs and that the
operation of connected functions may
require a significant amount of energy.
Thus, DOE requested input on whether
the test procedure should be amended
to account for the energy consumed
while the room AC performs connected
functions. Specifically, DOE requested
information on the connected features
available in the market and the energy
consumption of those features.
Furthermore, DOE requested
information on the current and
anticipated market penetration of
connected room ACs. 80 FR 34843,
34848 (June 18, 2015).
The Joint Advocates stated that there
were already seven ‘‘connected’’ models
in the ENERGY STAR list of certified
room ACs as of August 29, 2017, and as
more are introduced into the market,
there may be significant and continuous
additional energy consumption due to
the connected functionality operating in
an ‘‘always on’’ standby mode. The Joint
Advocates suggested that the test
procedure for room ACs should capture
any power consumption associated with
connected features to encourage
manufacturers to provide connected
functionality with low power
consumption. (Joint Advocates, No. 6 at
48 The optional criteria for connected room air
conditioners contained in ENERGY STAR V4.0 are
identical to those contained in the currently
applicable V4.1 version.
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
p. 4) DOE reiterates its request for
comment on network connectivity
issues in light of the September 17, 2018
RFI.
The Joint Commenters and California
IOUs encouraged DOE to consider
amending the existing room AC test
procedure to include the energy
consumption of connected features for
connected room ACs. These
commenters expect that connected room
ACs, which can support smart grid
interconnection, would become more
common with the publication of the
ENERGY STAR V4.0. The California
IOUs noted that room ACs typically
operate during peak hours, so the
connected functionalities are
particularly beneficial to both utilities
and consumers by reducing the overall
load and providing better-informed user
control. The California IOUs also stated
that as the market continues to grow for
these features, it is important to
understand how to measure, capture,
and monitor the energy consumption
and energy reduction that results from
implementing the connected features.
The California IOUs urged DOE to
include the connected functions in the
test procedure if the energy impacts are
significant. (Joint Commenters, June
2015 RFI, No. 7 at p. 2; California IOUs,
June 2015 RFI, No. 8 at p. 4; California
IOUs, No. 5 at p. 1)
AHAM stated that an ENERGY STAR
test method to evaluate DR capabilities
had not yet been published, and
therefore the market penetration for
connected room ACs was still minimal.
AHAM also stated that connected
products offer consumers and utilities a
unique energy savings opportunity by
improving grid energy efficiency and
allowing for peak-load shifting and
implementation of renewable power
sources). Therefore, AHAM suggested
that DOE should not revise the room AC
test procedure to account for the energy
consumption associated with connected
functionality because that would negate
the potential benefits these products
provide. (AHAM, June 2015 RFI, No. 5
at pp. 4–5)
On June 7, 2017, DOE and EPA
published the final ENERGY STAR
Program Requirements Product
Specification for Room Air
Conditioners: Test Method to Validate
Demand Response (hereafter the ‘‘June
2017 ENERGY STAR Test Method’’).
This test method validates that a unit
complies with ENERGY STAR’s DR
requirements, which are designed to
reduce energy consumption upon
receipt of a DR signal. However, DOE
notes that the June 2017 ENERGY STAR
Test Method does not measure the total
energy consumption or average power
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
while a unit responds to a DR signal.
Further, DOE notes that no connected
room ACs are currently available on the
market that comply with the full set of
ENERGY STAR V4.1 connected criteria,
and therefore, the energy consumption
cannot be determined for a range of
products and manufacturers. There is
also little available information
indicating the frequency of received DR
signals that are specified in the ENERGY
STAR connected criteria. As a result, it
is not possible to determine annual
energy use attributed to DR signals.
Therefore, given the issues raised in the
September 17, 2018 RFI and the lack of
available connected room ACs on the
market and lack of energy consumption
and usage data regarding the DR signals,
DOE does not propose to amend its
room AC test procedure in this
rulemaking to measure energy
consumption while a connected room
AC is responding to a DR signal.
DOE requests comment on the
proposal not to amend the DOE test
procedure for room ACs to include
energy consumption while a connected
room AC responds to a DR signal.
I. Combined Energy Efficiency Ratio
The current room AC energy
efficiency metric, CEER, accounts for
the cooling provided by the room AC in
cooling mode as a function of the total
energy consumption in cooling mode
and inactive mode or off mode. In the
June 2015 RFI, DOE requested comment
on the merits and limitations of revising
the room AC test procedure and
efficiency metric to account for energy
consumption in various modes, such as
cooling mode, heating mode, off-cycle
mode, inactive mode, and off mode. 80
FR 34843, 34846 (June 18, 2015).
AHAM opposed adding additional
energy metrics for room ACs, noting that
the industry recently implemented
product redesigns adding standby and
off mode energy consumption in the
overall efficiency metric, in response to
the CEER established in the January
2011 Final Rule. As previously
discussed in section III.E.3 of this
document for off-cycle mode
specifically, AHAM suggested that an
additional metric would require another
burdensome redesign and any new
mode definitions and metrics would
complicate the test procedure and
increase the test burden. (AHAM, June
2015 RFI, No. 5 at p. 2) As discussed in
section III.E.2 and section III.E.3 of this
document, respectively, DOE is not
proposing a heating mode or off-cycle
mode test in appendix F. Further,
although DOE is proposing a new test
procedure for variable-speed room ACs
that requires testing at additional
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
outdoor test conditions, the new
variable-speed room AC test procedure
calculations produce a CEER value
comparable to the existing CEER metric
for single-speed units. The new
calculations would not change the
procedure for single-speed units.
DOE requests comment on the
proposal to maintain the current CEER
calculations for single-speed room ACs.
J. Certification and Verification
Requirements
In a direct final rule published on
April 22, 2011 (hereafter the ‘‘April
2011 Direct Final Rule’’), DOE
published amended energy conservation
standards for room ACs, with a
compliance date of June 1, 2014. 76 FR
22454. The amended standards reflect
performance in standby mode or off
mode, based on a new performance
metric, CEER, expressed in Btu/Wh.
However, the sampling plan and
certification reporting requirements in
10 CFR 429.15(a)(2)(ii) and (b)(2) were
not updated in the April 2011 Direct
Final Rule. DOE proposes in this NOPR
to update those requirements to conform
to the current metric by requiring the
reporting of the CEER metric and to
remove references to the previous
performance metric, EER. For variablespeed room ACs, DOE proposes to
require the additional reporting of
cooling capacity and electrical input
power for each of the three additional
test conditions as part of a supplemental
PDF that would be referenced within
the manufacturer’s certification report.
Friedrich urged DOE to examine the
enforcement procedure for room AC
standards, noting that CEER
measurements can differ by 2 to 3
percent from laboratory to laboratory,
especially for units rated below 12,000
Btu/h. Friedrich expressed the view that
the current enforcement methodology
fails to account for this variation.
(Friedrich, No. 2 at p. 7)
DOE appreciates the comment by
Friedrich, although it is outside the
scope of this rulemaking. DOE may
consider this information in the future
if DOE conducts a rulemaking that
would address certification and
enforcement procedures and encourages
Friedrich to submit its comment in any
such rulemaking.
K. Reorganization of Calculations
Currently in 10 CFR 430.23
Currently, 10 CFR 430.23(f) contains
instructions for determining a room
AC’s estimated annual operating cost,
with calculations described for the
average annual energy consumption,
combined annual energy consumption,
EER, and CEER.
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
35731
DOE proposes to move the formula for
a unit’s CEER from 10 CFR 430.23(f) to
appendix F, to mitigate potential
confusion, harmonize with the approach
used for other products, and improve
the readability of the calculations
currently in 10 CFR 430.23(f) and
appendix F. Similarly, DOE proposes to
remove the formulas for average annual
energy consumption in cooling mode
and combined annual energy
consumption from 10 CFR 430.23(f) and
instead add formulas for annual energy
consumption for each operating mode in
appendix F.
Because the EER performance metric
is does not apply to either current or
future manufacturing, DOE proposes
removing the EER formula from 10 CFR
430.23(f), and also proposes to remove
the formulas for overall annual energy
consumption in that section (i.e., a
combined annual energy consumption
as well as an average annual energy
consumption). Instead, DOE proposes to
update the estimated annual operating
cost calculation in 10 CFR 430.23(f) to
reference energy consumption values
calculated in appendix F.
Finally, DOE proposes to include in
10 CFR 429.15(a)(3) through (5) and
(b)(3) and 10 CFR 430.23(f) instructions
to round cooling capacity to the nearest
100 Btu/h, electrical input power to the
nearest 10 W, and CEER to the nearest
0.1 Btu/Wh, to provide consistency in
room AC capacity, electrical input
power, and efficiency representations.
DOE requests comment on the
proposed rounding instructions in
appendix F for cooling capacity,
electrical input power, and CEER and to
revise the estimated annual operating
cost calculation to now reference the
annual energy consumption for each
operating mode as calculated in
appendix F, as opposed to the annual
energy consumption calculation
currently located in 10 CFR 430.23.
L. Test Procedure Costs, Harmonization,
and Other Topics
1. Test Procedure Costs and Impact
EPCA requires that test procedures
proposed by DOE not be unduly
burdensome to conduct. In this NOPR,
DOE proposes to amend the existing test
procedure for room ACs by (1) updating
industry standard references to the
current versions; (2) adopting
procedures for variable-speed room ACs
that reflect the relative efficiency gains
compared to single-speed room ACs; (3)
adopting new definitions consistent
with the proposed amendments; and (4)
providing specifications and minor
corrections to improve the test
procedure repeatability, reproducibility,
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
35732
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
and overall readability. DOE has
tentatively determined that these
proposed amendments would not be
unduly burdensome for manufacturers
to conduct.
Based on review of the Compliance
Certification Database in DOE’s
Compliance Certification Management
System, DOE has identified 812 basic
models of room ACs, representing 31
manufacturers.49 However, this number
likely is artificially high. DOE
frequently finds that manufacturers fail
to report a model as discontinued.
DOE’s analysis of this proposal
indicates that, if finalized, the only cost
savings or additional costs to
manufacturers would be those already
being incurred for variable-speed room
ACs under the LG Waiver and Grant of
Midea Interim Waiver.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
a. Variable-Speed Test Impact
As discussed in section III.C.1 of this
document, DOE proposes to add three
additional cooling mode test conditions
to the appendix F test procedure for
variable-speed room ACs to better
reflect the relative efficiency
improvements of variable-speed ACs
compared to single-speed room ACs.
DOE estimates that the proposed
amendments for variable-speed room
AC would require a total of 14 hours of
test chamber time, while the current test
procedure requires approximately two
hours of test chamber time. However, as
discussed previously, all ten basic
models (four from LG and six from
Midea) currently on the market are
subject to either the LG Waiver or the
Grant of Midea Interim Waiver and are
generally being tested consistent with
the proposed amendments in this
NOPR. 84 FR 20111 and 84 FR 68159.
Therefore, the ten variable-speed room
AC basic models identified by DOE
would not need to be re-tested or recertified if DOE adopts the amendments
as proposed in this document. Although
no other manufacturers are currently
producing variable-speed room ACs that
are sold in the United States, the
additional testing time described above
would be applicable to any entities that
begin manufacturing a variable-speed
room AC for introduction to the U.S.
market.
DOE has tentatively concluded that
the proposed test procedure in this
NOPR would not add any industry test
burden and that the minimal costs
associated with the LG Waiver and
49 https://www.regulations.doe.gov/certificationdata/CCMS-4-Air_Conditioners_and_Heat_Pumps__Room_Air_Conditioners.html. Accessed October
8th, 2018.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
Grant of Midea Interim Waiver test
procedure are already being incurred.
DOE requests comment on the
understanding of the estimated impact
and associated costs to room AC
manufacturers of the proposed
amendment to test variable-speed room
ACs.
b. Additional Amendments
DOE affirms that manufacturers of
single-speed room ACs can rely on data
generated under the current test
procedure for single-speed room ACs
should any of these additional proposed
amendments be finalized. Therefore, the
remainder of the amendments proposed
in this NOPR for single-speed room ACs
would not impact test costs.
2. Harmonization With Industry
Standards
DOE is proposing that the test
procedure for room ACs at appendix F
incorporate by reference certain
provisions of ANSI/AHAM RAC–1–
2015 and ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–
2016 for active mode testing conditions,
methods, and calculations, and IEC
Standard 62301 Second Edition for
measuring standby and off mode power
consumption.
DOE seeks comment on the degree to
which the DOE test procedure should
consider and be harmonized further
with the most recent relevant industry
standards for room ACs and whether
any changes to the Federal test method
would provide additional benefits to the
public. DOE also requests comment on
the benefits and burdens of, or any other
comments regarding adopting any
industry or voluntary consensus-based
or other appropriate test procedure,
without modification.
DOE notes that current industry test
procedures, ANSI/AHAM RAC–1–2015
and ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–2016
do not include test procedures for
variable-speed units, such as the
multiple test conditions proposed in
this NOPR. DOE requests comment on
whether the industry is considering
updating its standards for room AC
testing to include provisions for testing
variable-speed room ACs.
3. Other Test Procedure Topics
In addition to the issues identified
earlier in this document, DOE welcomes
comment on any other aspect of the
existing test procedure for room ACs not
already addressed by the specific areas
identified in this document. DOE
particularly seeks information that
would improve the representativeness
of the test procedure, as well as
information that would help DOE create
a procedure that would limit
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
manufacturer test burden. Comments
regarding repeatability and
reproducibility are also welcome.
DOE also requests information that
would help DOE create procedures that
would limit manufacturer test burden
through streamlining or simplifying
testing requirements. In particular, DOE
notes that under Executive Order 13771,
‘‘Reducing Regulation and Controlling
Regulatory Costs,’’ Executive Branch
agencies such as DOE must manage the
costs associated with the imposition of
expenditures required to comply with
Federal regulations. See 82 FR 9339
(Feb. 3, 2017). Consistent with that
Executive Order, DOE encourages the
public to provide input on measures
DOE could take to lower the cost of its
regulations applicable to room ACs
consistent with the requirements of
EPCA.
M. Compliance Date and Waivers
EPCA prescribes that, if DOE amends
a test procedure, all representations of
energy efficiency and energy use,
including those made on marketing
materials and product labels, must be
made in accordance with that amended
test procedure, beginning 180 days after
publication of such a test procedure
final rule in the Federal Register. (42
U.S.C. 6293(c)(2)) If DOE were to
publish an amended test procedure for
room ACs, EPCA provides an allowance
for individual manufacturers to petition
DOE for an extension of the 180-day
period if the manufacturer would
experience undue hardship in meeting
the 180-day deadline. (42 U.S.C.
6293(c)(3)) To receive such an
extension, a manufacturer must file a
petition with DOE no later than 60 days
before the end of the 180-day period and
detail how the manufacturer will
experience undue hardship. (Id.)
Upon the compliance date of an
amended test procedure, if DOE issues
such an amendment, any waivers that
had been previously issued and are in
effect that pertain to issues addressed by
the amended test procedure terminate.
10 CFR 430.27(h)(2). Recipients of any
such waivers would be required to test
products subject to the waiver according
to the amended test procedure as of the
effective date of the amended test
procedure. There is currently one
waiver from the test procedure for room
ACs for four variable-speed models
manufactured by LG. In a decision and
order published on May 8, 2019, DOE
granted this waiver from DOE’s room
AC test procedure. 84 FR 20111.
Additionally, there is one interim
waiver from the room AC test procedure
for six variable-speed models,
manufactured by Midea, that DOE
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
granted on December 13, 2019 (84 FR
68159) that would also terminate upon
the compliance date of such an
amended test procedure.
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory
Review
A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
The Administrator of the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs
(OIRA) in the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has determined that the
proposed regulatory action is a
significant regulatory action under
section (3)(f) of Executive Order 12866.
Accordingly, this action was reviewed
by OIRA in the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB).
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
B. Review Under Executive Orders
13771 and 13777
On January 30, 2017, the President
issued Executive Order (E.O.) 13771,
‘‘Reducing Regulation and Controlling
Regulatory Costs.’’ See 82 FR 9339 (Feb.
3, 2017). E.O. 13771 stated the policy of
the executive branch is to be prudent
and financially responsible in the
expenditure of funds, from both public
and private sources. E.O. 13771 stated it
is essential to manage the costs
associated with the governmental
imposition of private expenditures
required to comply with Federal
regulations.
Additionally, on February 24, 2017,
the President issued E.O. 13777,
‘‘Enforcing the Regulatory Reform
Agenda.’’ 82 FR 12285 (March 1, 2017).
E.O. 13777 required the head of each
agency designate an agency official as
its Regulatory Reform Officer (RRO).
Each RRO oversees the implementation
of regulatory reform initiatives and
policies to ensure that agencies
effectively carry out regulatory reforms,
consistent with applicable law. Further,
E.O. 13777 requires the establishment of
a regulatory task force at each agency.
The regulatory task force is required to
make recommendations to the agency
head regarding the repeal, replacement,
or modification of existing regulations,
consistent with applicable law. At a
minimum, each regulatory reform task
force must attempt to identify
regulations that:
(i) Eliminate jobs, or inhibit job
creation;
(ii) Are outdated, unnecessary, or
ineffective;
(iii) Impose costs that exceed benefits;
(iv) Create a serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfere with regulatory
reform initiatives and policies;
(v) Are inconsistent with the
requirements of Information Quality
Act, or the guidance issued pursuant to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
that Act, in particular those regulations
that rely in whole or in part on data,
information, or methods that are not
publicly available or that are
insufficiently transparent to meet the
standard for reproducibility; or
(vi) Derive from or implement
Executive Orders or other Presidential
directives that have been subsequently
rescinded or substantially modified.
DOE initially concludes that this
rulemaking is consistent with the
directives set forth in these executive
orders. This proposed rule would not
yield any cost savings or additional
costs to manufacturers other than those
already being incurred for variablespeed room ACs under the LG Waiver
and the Grant of Midea Interim Waiver.
C. Review Under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires preparation
of an initial regulatory flexibility
analysis (IFRA) for any rule that by law
must be proposed for public comment,
unless the agency certifies that the rule,
if promulgated, will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. As
required by Executive Order 13272,
‘‘Proper Consideration of Small Entities
in Agency Rulemaking,’’ 67 FR 53461
(Aug. 16, 2002), DOE published
procedures and policies on February 19,
2003, to ensure that the potential
impacts of its rules on small entities are
properly considered during the DOE
rulemaking process. 68 FR 7990. DOE
has made its procedures and policies
available on the Office of the General
Counsel’s website: https://energy.gov/gc/
office-general-counsel.
DOE reviewed this proposed rule
under the provisions of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act and the procedures and
policies published on February 19,
2003. The proposed rule prescribes
amended test procedures to measure the
energy consumption of room ACs in
cooling mode, standby modes, and off
mode. DOE tentatively concludes that
this proposed rule would not have a
significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities, and the factual
basis for this certification is set forth in
the following paragraphs.
The Small Business Administration
(SBA) considers a business entity to be
small business, if, together with its
affiliates, it employs less than a
threshold number of workers specified
in 13 CFR part 121. These size standards
and codes are established by the North
American Industry Classification
System (NAICS) and are available at
https://www.sba.gov/document/support-table-size-standards. Room AC
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
35733
manufacturing is classified under
NAICS 333415, ‘‘Air-Conditioning and
Warm Air Heating Equipment and
Commercial and Industrial Refrigeration
Equipment Manufacturing.’’ The SBA
sets a threshold of 1,250 employees or
fewer for an entity to be considered as
a small business for this category.
DOE used DOE’s Compliance
Certification Database 50 to create a list
of companies that sell room ACs
covered by this rulemaking in the
United States. Additionally, DOE
surveyed the AHAM member directory
to identify manufacturers of room ACs.
DOE then consulted other publicly
available data, purchased company
reports from vendors such as Dun and
Bradstreet, and contacted
manufacturers, where needed, to
determine if they meet the SBA’s
definition of a ‘‘small business
manufacturing facility’’ and have their
manufacturing facilities located within
the United States. Based on this
analysis, DOE is unable to identify any
small businesses that currently
manufacture room ACs in the United
States.
Because DOE identified no small
businesses that manufacture room ACs
in the United States, DOE tentatively
concludes that the impacts of the test
procedure amendments proposed in this
NOPR would not have a ‘‘significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities,’’ and that the
preparation of an IRFA is not warranted.
DOE will transmit the certification and
supporting statement of factual basis to
the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration for
review under 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
DOE seeks comment on the finding
that there are no small businesses that
manufacture room ACs.
D. Review Under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995
Manufacturers of room ACs must
certify to DOE that their products
comply with any applicable energy
conservation standards. To certify
compliance, manufacturers must first
obtain test data for their products
according to the DOE test procedures,
including any amendments adopted for
those test procedures. DOE has
established regulations for the
certification and recordkeeping
requirements for all covered consumer
products and commercial equipment,
including room ACs. (See generally 10
CFR part 429.) The collection-ofinformation requirement for the
certification and recordkeeping is
50 https://www.regulations.doe.gov/certificationdata. Accessed October 5, 2018
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
35734
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
subject to review and approval by OMB
under the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA). This requirement has been
approved by OMB under OMB control
number 1910–1400. Public reporting
burden for the certification is estimated
to average 35 hours per response,
including the time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data
sources, gathering and maintaining the
data needed, and completing and
reviewing the collection of information.
Notwithstanding any other provision
of the law, no person is required to
respond to, nor shall any person be
subject to a penalty for failure to comply
with, a collection of information subject
to the requirements of the PRA, unless
that collection of information displays a
currently valid OMB Control Number.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
E. Review Under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
DOE is analyzing this proposed
regulation in accordance with the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (NEPA) and DOE’s NEPA
implementing regulations (10 CFR part
1021). DOE’s regulations include a
categorical exclusion for rulemakings
interpreting or amending an existing
rule or regulation that does not change
the environmental effect of the rule or
regulation being amended. 10 CFR part
1021, subpart D, Appendix A5. DOE
anticipates that this rulemaking
qualifies for categorical exclusion A5
because it is an interpretive rulemaking
that does not change the environmental
effect of the rule and otherwise meets
the requirements for application of a
categorical exclusion. See 10 CFR
1021.410. DOE will complete its NEPA
review before issuing the final rule.
F. Review Under Executive Order 13132
Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism,’’
64 FR 43255 (Aug. 4, 1999) imposes
certain requirements on agencies
formulating and implementing policies
or regulations that preempt State law or
that have federalism implications. The
Executive Order requires agencies to
examine the constitutional and statutory
authority supporting any action that
would limit the policymaking discretion
of the States and to carefully assess the
necessity for such actions. The
Executive Order also requires agencies
to have an accountable process to
ensure meaningful and timely input by
State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that
have federalism implications. On March
14, 2000, DOE published a statement of
policy describing the intergovernmental
consultation process it will follow in the
development of such regulations. 65 FR
13735. DOE has examined this proposed
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
rule and has determined that it would
not have a substantial direct effect on
the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States,
or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. EPCA governs and
prescribes Federal preemption of State
regulations as to energy conservation for
the products that are the subject of this
proposed rule. States can petition DOE
for exemption from such preemption to
the extent, and based on criteria, set
forth in EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6297(d)) No
further action is required by Executive
Order 13132.
G. Review Under Executive Order 12988
Regarding the review of existing
regulations and the promulgation of
new regulations, section 3(a) of
Executive Order 12988, ‘‘Civil Justice
Reform,’’ 61 FR 4729 (Feb. 7, 1996),
imposes on Federal agencies the general
duty to adhere to the following
requirements: (1) Eliminate drafting
errors and ambiguity, (2) write
regulations to minimize litigation, (3)
provide a clear legal standard for
affected conduct rather than a general
standard, and (4) promote simplification
and burden reduction. Section 3(b) of
Executive Order 12988 specifically
requires that Executive agencies make
every reasonable effort to ensure that the
regulation (1) clearly specifies the
preemptive effect, if any, (2) clearly
specifies any effect on existing Federal
law or regulation, (3) provides a clear
legal standard for affected conduct
while promoting simplification and
burden reduction, (4) specifies the
retroactive effect, if any, (5) adequately
defines key terms, and (6) addresses
other important issues affecting clarity
and general draftsmanship under any
guidelines issued by the Attorney
General. Section 3(c) of Executive Order
12988 requires Executive agencies to
review regulations in light of applicable
standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b) to
determine whether they are met or it is
unreasonable to meet one or more of
them. DOE has completed the required
review and determined that, to the
extent permitted by law, the proposed
rule meets the relevant standards of
Executive Order 12988.
H. Review Under the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) requires
each Federal agency to assess the effects
of Federal regulatory actions on State,
local, and Tribal governments and the
private sector. Public Law 104–4, sec.
201 (codified at 2 U.S.C. 1531). For a
proposed regulatory action likely to
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
result in a rule that may cause the
expenditure by State, local, and Tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector of $100 million or more
in any one year (adjusted annually for
inflation), section 202 of UMRA requires
a Federal agency to publish a written
statement that estimates the resulting
costs, benefits, and other effects on the
national economy. (2 U.S.C. 1532(a), (b))
The UMRA also requires a Federal
agency to develop an effective process
to permit timely input by elected
officers of State, local, and Tribal
governments on a proposed ‘‘significant
intergovernmental mandate,’’ and
requires an agency plan for giving notice
and opportunity for timely input to
potentially affected small governments
before establishing any requirements
that might significantly or uniquely
affect small governments. On March 18,
1997, DOE published a statement of
policy on its process for
intergovernmental consultation under
UMRA. 62 FR 12820; also available at
https://energy.gov/gc/office-generalcounsel. DOE examined this proposed
rule according to UMRA and its
statement of policy and determined that
the rule contains neither an
intergovernmental mandate, nor a
mandate that may result in the
expenditure of $100 million or more in
any year, so these requirements do not
apply.
I. Review Under the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations
Act, 1999
Section 654 of the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations
Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105–277) requires
Federal agencies to issue a Family
Policymaking Assessment for any rule
that may affect family well-being. This
proposed rule would not have any
impact on the autonomy or integrity of
the family as an institution.
Accordingly, DOE has concluded that it
is not necessary to prepare a Family
Policymaking Assessment.
J. Review Under Executive Order 12630
DOE has determined, under Executive
Order 12630, ‘‘Governmental Actions
and Interference with Constitutionally
Protected Property Rights,’’ 53 FR 8859
(March 18, 1988), that this regulation
would not result in any takings that
might require compensation under the
Fifth Amendment to the U.S.
Constitution.
K. Review Under Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act, 2001
Section 515 of the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations
Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C. 3516 note) provides
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
for agencies to review most
disseminations of information to the
public under guidelines established by
each agency pursuant to general
guidelines issued by OMB. OMB’s
guidelines were published at 67 FR
8452 (Feb. 22, 2002), and DOE’s
guidelines were published at 67 FR
62446 (Oct. 7, 2002). DOE has reviewed
this proposed rule under the OMB and
DOE guidelines and has concluded that
it is consistent with applicable policies
in those guidelines.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
L. Review Under Executive Order 13211
Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use,’’ 66 FR 28355 (May
22, 2001), requires Federal agencies to
prepare and submit to OMB, a
Statement of Energy Effects for any
proposed significant energy action. A
‘‘significant energy action’’ is defined as
any action by an agency that
promulgated or is expected to lead to
promulgation of a final rule, and that (1)
is a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866, or any successor
order; and (2) is likely to have a
significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy; or (3) is
designated by the Administrator of
OIRA as a significant energy action. For
any proposed significant energy action,
the agency must give a detailed
statement of any adverse effects on
energy supply, distribution, or use
should the proposal be implemented,
and of reasonable alternatives to the
action and their expected benefits on
energy supply, distribution, and use.
The proposed regulatory action to
amend the test procedure for measuring
the energy efficiency of room ACs is not
a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866. Moreover, it
would not have a significant adverse
effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy, nor has it been designated as
a significant energy action by the
Administrator of OIRA. Therefore, it is
not a significant energy action, and,
accordingly, DOE has not prepared a
Statement of Energy Effects.
M. Review Under Section 32 of the
Federal Energy Administration Act of
1974
Under section 301 of the Department
of Energy Organization Act (Public Law
95–91; 42 U.S.C. 7101), DOE must
comply with section 32 of the Federal
Energy Administration Act of 1974, as
amended by the Federal Energy
Administration Authorization Act of
1977. (15 U.S.C. 788; ‘‘FEAA’’) Section
32 essentially provides in relevant part
that, where a proposed rule authorizes
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
or requires use of commercial standards,
the notice of proposed rulemaking must
inform the public of the use and
background of such standards. In
addition, section 32(c) requires DOE to
consult with the Attorney General and
the Chairman of the FTC concerning the
impact of the commercial or industry
standards on competition.
The proposed modifications to the
test procedure for room ACs adopted in
this final rule incorporates testing
methods contained in certain sections of
the following commercial standards:
‘‘Room Air Conditioners,’’ ANSI/AHAM
RAC–1–2015, ‘‘Method of Testing for
Rating Room Air Conditioners,
Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners,
and Packaged Terminal Heat Pumps for
Cooling and Heating Capacity,’’ ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 16–2016, and
‘‘Household electrical appliances—
Measurement of standby power,’’ IEC
62301 Edition 2.0, 2011–01. DOE has
evaluated these standards and is unable
to conclude whether they fully comply
with the requirements of section 32(b) of
the FEAA (i.e., whether they were
developed in a manner that fully
provides for public participation,
comment, and review.) DOE will
consult with both the Attorney General
and the Chairman of the FTC
concerning the impact of these test
procedures on competition, prior to
prescribing a final rule.
N. Description of Materials Incorporated
by Reference
In this NOPR, DOE proposes to
incorporate by reference the test
standard published by AHAM, titled
‘‘Room Air Conditioners,’’ ANSI/AHAM
RAC–1–2015. ANSI/AHAM RAC–1–
2015 is an industry-accepted test
procedure that measures room AC
performance in cooling mode, in
addition to other modes. ANSI/AHAM
RAC–1–2015 specifies testing
conducted in accordance with other
industry-accepted test procedures
(already incorporated by reference) and
determines energy efficiency metrics for
various room AC operating modes. The
proposed amendments in this NOPR
include updating references to various
sections in ANSI/AHAM RAC–1–2015
that address test setup, instrumentation,
test conduct, calculations, and
rounding. ANSI/AHAM RAC–1–2015 is
reasonably available at https://
www.aham.org/ht/d/Store/.
In this NOPR, DOE also proposes to
incorporate by reference the test
standard published by ASHRAE, titled
‘‘Method of Testing for Rating Room Air
Conditioners and Packaged Terminal
Air Conditioners,’’ ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 16–2016. ANSI/ASHRAE
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
35735
Standard 16–2016 is an industryaccepted test procedure that provides
means for testing and determining the
cooling and heating capacities of room
ACs and packaged terminal air
conditioners (PTACs), using either a
calorimeter method or air-enthalpy
method. The proposed amendments in
this NOPR include updated general
references to ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
16–2016, that address all areas of testing
including installation, test setup,
instrumentation, test conduct, data
collection, and calculations. ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 16–2016 is
reasonably available at https://
webstore.ansi.org/.
In this NOPR, DOE also proposes to
incorporate by reference several test
standards published by ASHRAE:
‘‘Standard Method for Temperature
Measurement,’’ ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 41.1–2013, ‘‘Standard
Methods for Air Velocity and Airflow
Measurement,’’ ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 41.2–1987 (RA 1992),
‘‘Standard Methods for Pressure
Measurement,’’ ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 41.3–2014, ‘‘Standard
Methods for Humidity Measurement,’’
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.6–2014,
and ‘‘Standard Methods for Power
Measurement,’’ ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 41.11–2014. These standards
are industry-accepted test procedures
that prescribe methods and instruments
for measuring temperature, air velocity,
pressure, humidity, and power,
respectively. These standards are cited
by ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–2016,
which this NOPR proposes to
incorporate by reference. These
standards are reasonably available at
https://webstore.ansi.org/.
In this NOPR, DOE also proposes to
incorporate by reference the test
standard IEC 62301, titled ‘‘Household
electrical appliances—Measurement of
standby power,’’ (Edition 2.0, 2011–01)
for appendix F. IEC 62301 is an
industry-accepted test standard that sets
a standardized method to measure the
standby power of household and similar
electrical appliances and is already
incorporated by reference for a number
of other DOE test procedures. IEC
Standard 62301 Second Edition
includes details regarding test set-up,
test conditions, and stability
requirements that are necessary to
ensure consistent and repeatable
standby and off-mode test results. IEC
Standard 62301 Second Edition is
reasonably available at https://
webstore.iec.ch/ and https://
www.webstore.ansi.org. The proposed
amendments in this NOPR include
updating general references to IEC
62301 from the First Edition to the
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
35736
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Second Edition and adopting a new
standby power test approach.
V. Public Participation
A. Participation in the Webinar
The time and date of the webinar are
listed in the DATES section at the
beginning of this document. If no
participants register for the webinar,
then it will be cancelled.
Webinar registration information,
participant instructions, and
information about the capabilities
available to webinar participants will be
published on DOE’s website: https://
www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/
appliance_standards/product.aspx/
productid/41. Participants are
responsible for ensuring their systems
are compatible with the webinar
software.
Additionally, you may request an inperson meeting to be held prior to the
close of the request period provided in
the DATES section of this document.
Requests for an in-person meeting may
be made by contacting Appliance and
Equipment Standards Program staff at
(202) 287–1445 or by email: Appliance_
Standards_Public_Meetings@ee.doe.gov.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
B. Submission of Comments
DOE will accept comments, data, and
information regarding this proposed
rule before or after the public meeting,
but no later than the date provided in
the DATES section at the beginning of
this proposed rule. Interested parties
may submit comments using any of the
methods described in the ADDRESSES
section at the beginning of this proposed
rule.
Submitting comments via https://
www.regulations.gov. The https://
www.regulations.gov web page will
require you to provide your name and
contact information. Your contact
information will be viewable to DOE
Building Technologies staff only. Your
contact information will not be publicly
viewable except for your first and last
names, organization name (if any), and
submitter representative name (if any).
If your comment is not processed
properly because of technical
difficulties, DOE will use this
information to contact you. If DOE
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, DOE may not be
able to consider your comment.
However, your contact information
will be publicly viewable if you include
it in the comment or in any documents
attached to your comment. Any
information that you do not want to be
publicly viewable should not be
included in your comment, nor in any
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
document attached to your comment.
Following this instruction, persons
viewing comments will see only first
and last names, organization names,
correspondence containing comments,
and any documents submitted with the
comments.
Do not submit to https://
www.regulations.gov information for
which disclosure is restricted by statute,
such as trade secrets and commercial or
financial information (hereafter referred
to as Confidential Business Information
(CBI)). Comments submitted through
https://www.regulations.gov cannot be
claimed as CBI. Comments received
through the website will waive any CBI
claims for the information submitted.
For information on submitting CBI, see
the Confidential Business Information
section.
DOE processes submissions made
through https://www.regulations.gov
before posting. Normally, comments
will be posted within a few days of
being submitted. However, if large
volumes of comments are being
processed simultaneously, your
comment may not be viewable for up to
several weeks. Please keep the comment
tracking number that https://
www.regulations.gov provides after you
have successfully uploaded your
comment.
Submitting comments via email, hand
delivery, or mail. Comments and
documents submitted via email, hand
delivery, or mail also will be posted
https://www.regulations.gov. If you do
not want your personal contact
information to be publicly viewable, do
not include it in your comment or any
accompanying documents. Instead,
provide your contact information on a
cover letter. Include your first and last
names, email address, telephone
number, and optional mailing address.
The cover letter will not be publicly
viewable as long as it does not include
any comments.
Include contact information each time
you submit comments, data, documents,
and other information to DOE. If you
submit via mail or hand delivery, please
provide all items on a CD, if feasible, in
which case it is not necessary to submit
printed copies. No faxes will be
accepted.
Comments, data, and other
information submitted to DOE
electronically should be provided in
PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or
Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file
format. Provide documents that are not
secured, written in English and free of
any defects or viruses. Documents
should not contain special characters or
any form of encryption and, if possible,
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
they should carry the electronic
signature of the author.
Campaign form letters. Please submit
campaign form letters by the originating
organization in batches of between 50 to
500 form letters per PDF or as one form
letter with a list of supporters’ names
compiled into one or more PDFs. This
reduces comment processing and
posting time.
Confidential Business Information.
According to 10 CFR 1004.11, any
person submitting information that he
or she believes to be confidential and
exempt by law from public disclosure
should submit via email, postal mail, or
hand delivery two well-marked copies:
One copy of the document marked
confidential including all the
information believed to be confidential,
and one copy of the document marked
non-confidential with the information
believed to be confidential deleted.
Submit these documents via email to
RoomAC2017TP0012@ee.doe.gov or on
a CD, if feasible. DOE will make its own
determination about the confidential
status of the information and treat it
according to its determination.
It is DOE’s policy that all comments
may be included in the public docket,
without change and as received,
including any personal information
provided in the comments (except
information deemed to be exempt from
public disclosure).
C. Issues on Which DOE Seeks
Comment
Although DOE welcomes comments
on any aspect of this proposal, DOE is
particularly interested in receiving
comments and views of interested
parties concerning the following issues:
(1) The proposed amendments to the
room AC definition in 10 CFR
430.2. (See section III.A of this
document)
(2) The proposed new beginning section
to appendix F that would explicitly
state the scope of coverage. (See
section III.A of this document)
(3) The proposal to incorporate by
reference ANSI/AHAM RAC–1–
2015, and to adjust the section
references in appendix F, to more
narrowly refer to the cooling modespecific sections and to update the
section reference for measuring
electrical power input. (See section
III.B.1 of this document)
(4) The proposal to reference the
relevant sections of ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 16–2016 in appendix F.
(See section III.B.2 of this
document)
(5) The proposal to incorporate the
requirements of ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 16–2016 while
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
maintaining that an accuracy of
±0.5 percent of the quantity
measured is applicable to all
devices measuring electrical input
for the room AC test procedure.
(See section III.B.2 of this
document)
(6) The proposal to incorporate ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 41.1–2013,
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.2–1987
(RA 1992), ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 41.3–2014, ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 41.6–2014, and
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.11–
2014 in appendix F. (See section
III.B.3 of this document)
(7) The proposal to adopt the additional
test conditions from the LG Waiver
test procedure for variable-speed
room ACs. (See section III.C.2 of
this document)
(8) The proposal to require fixing the
compressor speed settings for
variable-speed room ACs to full
speed at the 95 °F and 92 °F test
conditions, intermediate speed at
the 87 °F test condition, and low
speed at the 82 °F test condition.
(See section III.C.3.a of this
document)
(9) The proposal to require that
manufacturers provide the thirdparty lab with the control settings
required to achieve the fixed
compressor speed for each test
condition. (See section III.C.3.b of
this document)
(10) The proposal to not address boost
compressor speed performance and
energy consumption in appendix F
at this time. (See section III.C.3.c of
this document)
(11) The proposal to use the capacity
and electrical power adjustment
factors of 0.0099 per °F and 0.0076
per °F, respectively. (See section
III.C.4 of this document)
(12) The proposal to implement cycling
loss factors consistent with AHRI
Standard 210/240 to represent the
expected performance of a
theoretical comparable single-speed
room AC at reduced outdoor
temperature test conditions. (See
section III.C.5 of this document)
(13) The proposed weighting factors
associated with each of the outdoor
test conditions. (See section III.C.6
of this document)
(14) The proposed calculations to
determine a performance
adjustment factor, which would
credit the CEER of variable-speed
room ACs to account for their
efficiency improvements relative to
a theoretical comparable singlespeed room AC under varying test
conditions. (See section III.C.7 of
this document)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
(15) The proposal not to allow for an
optional alternative air-enthalpy
test approach for room ACs. (See
section III.C.8 and section III.E.1.c
of this document)
(16) The proposal to include compressor
frequencies and control settings as
additional product-specific
information for certifications
involving variable-speed room ACs
in 10 CFR 429.15. (See section
III.C.9 and section III.J of this
document)
(17) The proposal to calculate estimated
annual operating cost for variablespeed room ACs using a weightedaverage annual energy consumption
based on the four cooling mode test
conditions in newly added Table 1
of appendix F. (See section III.C.10
of this document)
(18) The proposal to report variablespeed room AC input power for
certification purposes using the
value measured at the 95 °F rating
condition. (See section III.C.10 of
this document)
(19) The proposal to add new
definitions for cooling mode,
cooling capacity, combined energy
efficiency ratio, single-speed room
air conditioner, variable-speed
room air conditioner, variablespeed compressor, full compressor
speed (full), intermediate
compressor speed (intermediate),
and low compressor speed (low) in
appendix F. (See section III.D of
this document)
(20) The proposal to specify in appendix
F that room ACs designed for
through-the-wall installation (i.e.,
non-louvered room ACs) must be
installed using a compatible wall
sleeve (per manufacturer
instructions), with the provided or
manufacturer-required rear grille,
and with the included trim frame
and other manufacturer-provided
installation materials. (See section
III.E.1.d of this document)
(21) The proposal, consistent with
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–2016,
Sections 6.1.1.4 and Section 8.4.2,
to not require that room ACs
designed for window installation
(i.e., louvered room ACs) be
installed with the manufacturerprovided installation materials,
including side curtains, and instead
be tested with the partition wall
sealed to the unit. (See section
III.E.1.d of this document)
(22) The proposal to not include
additional cooling mode test
conditions for single-speed room
ACs. (See section III.E.1.e of this
document)
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
35737
(23) The proposal to not establish
requirements for measuring and
reporting the power factors for room
ACs. (See section III.E.1.f of this
document)
(24) The proposal to not establish a
heating mode test procedure for
room ACs at this time. (See section
III.E.2 of this document)
(25) The proposal to not establish a
definition or test procedure for offcycle mode. (See section III.E.3 of
this document)
(26) The proposal to incorporate
provisions from IEC Standard 62301
Second Edition for measuring
standby mode and off mode power.
(See section III.F of this document)
(27) The proposal to reference the power
equipment specifications from
Section 4.4 of IEC Standard 62301
Second Edition for determining
standby mode and off mode power
in appendix F. (See section III.F.1.a
of this document)
(28) The proposal to adopt and reference
the sampling method from Section
5.3.2 of IEC Standard 62301 Second
Edition to determine standby mode
and off mode average power in
appendix F. (See section III.F.1.b of
this document)
(29) The proposal to specify that all
network or connectivity settings
must be disabled during testing.
(See section III.G of this document)
(30) The proposal to not amend the DOE
test procedure for room ACs to
consider energy consumption while
a connected room AC responds to a
DR signal. (See section III.H of this
document)
(31) The proposal to maintain the
current CEER calculations for
single-speed room ACs at this time.
(See section III.I of this document)
(32) The proposed rounding instructions
in appendix F for cooling capacity,
electrical input power, and CEER
and to adjust the estimated annual
operating cost calculation to
reference the annual energy
consumption for each operating
mode as calculated in appendix F.
(See section III.K of this document)
(33) The understanding of the estimated
impact and associated costs to room
AC manufacturers of the proposed
amendment to test variable-speed
room ACs. (See section III.L.1.a of
this document)
(34) The degree to which the DOE test
procedure should consider and be
harmonized further with the most
recent relevant industry standards
for room ACs and whether any
changes to the Federal test method
would provide additional benefits
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
35738
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
to the public. (See section III.L.2 of
this document)
(35) The benefits and burdens of
adopting any industry or voluntary
consensus-based or other
appropriate test procedure, without
modification. (See section III.L.2 of
this document)
(36) Whether the industry is considering
updating its standards for room AC
testing to include provisions for
testing variable-speed room ACs.
(See section III.L.2 of this
document)
(37) Any other aspect of the existing test
procedure for room ACs not already
addressed by the specific areas
identified in this document. (See
section III.L.3 of this document)
(38) The finding that there are no small
businesses that manufacture room
ACs. (See section IV.C of this
document)
VI. Approval of the Office of the
Secretary
The Secretary of Energy has approved
publication of this proposed rule.
List of Subjects
10 CFR Part 429
Administrative practice and
procedure, Confidential business
information, Energy conservation,
Household appliances, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Administrative practice and
procedure, Confidential business
information, Energy conservation,
Household appliances, Imports,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Small
businesses.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
Signing Authority
This document of the Department of
Energy was signed on April 30, 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.
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, DOE is proposing to amend
parts 429 and 430 of Chapter II of Title
10, Code of Federal Regulations as set
forth below:
PART 429—CERTIFICATION,
COMPLIANCE, AND ENFORCEMENT
FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS AND
COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL
EQUIPMENT
1. The authority citation for part 429
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6317; 28 U.S.C.
2461 note.
2. Section 429.15 is amended by:
a. Removing the words ‘‘energy
efficiency ratio’’ in paragraph (a)(2)(ii)
and adding, in its place the words
‘‘combined energy efficiency ratio
(CEER) (determined in § 430.23(f)(3) for
each unit in the sample)’’;
■ b. Adding paragraphs (a)(3), (4) and
(5);
■ c. Revising paragraph (b)(2); and
■ d. Adding paragraph (b)(3).
The revision and additions read as
follows:
■
■
§ 429.15
10 CFR Part 430
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Signed in Washington, DC, on May 20,
2020.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S.
Department of Energy.
Room air conditioners.
Frm 00040
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
PART 430—ENERGY CONSERVATION
PROGRAM FOR CONSUMER
PRODUCTS
3. The authority citation for part 430
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6309; 28 U.S.C.
2461 note.
4. Section 430.2 is amended by
revising the definition of ‘‘Room air
conditioner’’ to read as follows:
■
(a) * * *
(3) The cooling capacity of a basic
model is the mean of the measured
cooling capacities for each tested unit of
the basic model, as determined in
§ 430.23(f)(1) of this chapter. Round the
cooling capacity value to the nearest
hundred.
(4) The electrical power input of a
basic model is the mean of the measured
electrical power inputs for each tested
unit of the basic model, as determined
in § 430.23(f)(2) of this chapter. Round
the electrical power input to the nearest
ten.
(5) Round the value of CEER for a
basic model to one decimal place.
(b) * * *
(2) Pursuant to § 429.12(b)(13), a
certification report shall include the
following public product-specific
information: The combined energy
efficiency ratio in British thermal units
per Watt-hour (Btu/Wh)), cooling
capacity in British thermal units per
hour (Btu/h), and the electrical power
input in watts (W).
(3) Pursuant to § 429.12(b)(13), a
certification report for a variable-speed
room air conditioner basic model must
include supplemental information and
instructions in PDF format that
include—
PO 00000
(i) The mean measured cooling
capacity for the units tested at each
additional test condition (i.e.,
respectively, the mean of Capacity2,
Capacity3, and Capacity4, each
expressed in Btu/h and rounded to the
nearest 100 Btu/h, as determined in
accordance with section 4.1.2 of
appendix F of subpart B of part 430 of
this chapter);
(ii) The mean electrical power input
at each additional test condition
(respectively, the mean of Power2,
Power3, and Power4, each expressed in
W and rounded to the nearest 10 W, in
accordance with section 4.1.2 of
appendix F of subpart B of part 430 of
this chapter, for test conditions 2, 3, and
4, in Table 1 of appendix F of subpart
B of part 430 of this chapter); and
(iii) All additional testing and testing
set up instructions (e.g., specific
operational or control codes or settings)
necessary to operate the basic model
under the required conditions specified
by the relevant test procedure.
§ 430.2
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
Room air conditioner means a
window-mounted or through-the-wallmounted encased assembly, other than
a ‘‘packaged terminal air conditioner,’’
that delivers cooled, conditioned air to
an enclosed space, and is powered by
single-phase electric current. It includes
a source of refrigeration and may
include additional means for ventilating
and heating.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 5. Section 430.3 is amended by:
■ a. Revising paragraph (g)(1);
■ b. In paragraph (g)(6), removing,
‘‘appendix X1’’, and adding in its place,
‘‘appendices F and X1’’;
■ c. Redesignating paragraphs (g)(11)
through (14) as (g)(15) through (18),
respectively;
■ d. Redesignating paragraphs (g)(9) as
(g)(12), and (g)(10) as (g)(13);
■ e. Redesignating paragraph (g)(8) as
(g)(9);
■ f. Adding new paragraphs (g)(8), (10),
(11), and (14);
■ g. Revising paragraph (i)(6);
■ g. In paragraph (p)(5), removing
‘‘appendix F and’’; and
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
h. In paragraph (p)(6), adding ‘‘F,’’
before ‘‘G’’.
The revisions and additions read as
follows:
■
§ 430.3 Materials incorporated by
reference.
*
*
*
*
*
(g) * * *
(1) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–2016
(‘‘ANSI/ASHRAE 16’’), Method of
Testing for Rating Room Air
Conditioners, Packaged Terminal Air
Conditioners, and Packaged Terminal
Heat Pumps for Cooling and Heating
Capacity, ASHRAE approved October
31, 2016, ANSI approved November 1,
2016, IBR approved for appendix F to
subpart B.
*
*
*
*
*
(8) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.2–
1987 (RA 1992), (‘‘ASHRAE 41.2–1987
(RA 1992)’’), Standard Methods for
Laboratory Airflow Measurement, ANSI
reaffirmed April 20, 1992, IBR approved
for appendix F to subpart B.
*
*
*
*
*
(10) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.3–
2014, (‘‘ASHRAE 41.3–2014’’), Standard
Methods for Pressure Measurement,
ANSI approved July 3, 2014, IBR
approved for appendix F to subpart B.
(11) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.6–
2014, (‘‘ASHRAE 41.6–2014’’), Standard
Method for Humidity Measurement,
ANSI approved July 3, 2014, IBR
approved for appendix F to subpart B.
*
*
*
*
*
(14) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.11–
2014, (‘‘ASHRAE 41.11–2014’’),
Standard Methods for Power
Measurement, ANSI approved July 3,
2014, IBR approved for appendix F to
subpart B.
*
*
*
*
*
(i) * * *
(6) ANSI/AHAM RAC–1–2015
(‘‘ANSI/AHAM RAC–1’’), Room Air
Conditioners, approved 2015, IBR
approved for appendix F to subpart B of
this part.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 6. Section 430.23 is amended by
revising paragraph (f) to read as follows:
§ 430.23 Test procedures for the
measurement of energy and water
consumption.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
*
*
*
*
*
(f) Room air conditioners. (1)
Determine cooling capacity, expressed
in British thermal units per hour (Btu/
h), with the results of the test rounded
to the nearest 100 Btu/h, as follows:
(i) For a single-speed room air
conditioner, determine the cooling
capacity in accordance with section
4.1.2 of appendix F of this subpart.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
(ii) For a variable-speed room air
conditioner, determine the cooling
capacity in accordance with section
4.1.2 of appendix F of this subpart for
test condition 1 in Table 1 of appendix
F of this subpart.
(2) Determine electrical power input,
expressed in watts (W) and rounded to
the nearest 10 W as follows:
(i) For a single-speed room air
conditioner, determine the electrical
power input in accordance with section
4.1.2 of appendix F of this subpart.
(ii) For a variable-speed room air
conditioner, determine the electrical
power input in accordance with section
4.1.2 of appendix F of this subpart, for
test condition 1 in Table 1 of appendix
F of this subpart.
(3) Determine the combined energy
efficiency ratio (CEER), expressed in
British thermal units per watt-hour
(Btu/Wh) and rounded to the nearest 0.1
Btu/Wh as follows:
(i) For a single-speed room air
conditioner, determine the CEER in
accordance with section 5.2.2 of
appendix F of this subpart.
(ii) For a variable-speed room air
conditioner, determine the CEER in
accordance with section 5.3.11 of
appendix F of this subpart.
(4) Determine the estimated annual
operating cost for a room air
conditioner, expressed in dollars per
year, by multiplying the following two
factors and rounding as directed:
(i) For single-speed room air
conditioners, the sum of AECcool and
AECia/om, determined in accordance
with section 5.2.1 and section 5.1,
respectively, of appendix F of this
subpart. For variable-speed room air
conditioners, the sum of AECwt and
AECia/om, determined in accordance
with section 5.3.4 and section 5.1,
respectively, of appendix F of this
subpart; and
(ii) A representative average unit cost
of electrical energy in dollars per
kilowatt-hour as provided by the
Secretary. Round the resulting product
to the nearest dollar per year.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 7. Appendix F to subpart B of part 430
is revised to read as follows:
Appendix F to Subpart B of Part 430—
Uniform Test Method for Measuring the
Energy Consumption of Room Air
Conditioners
Note: On or after [DATE 180 DAYS AFTER
DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL
RULE IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER], any
representations made with respect to the
energy use or efficiency of room air
conditioners must be made in accordance
with the results of testing pursuant to this
appendix.
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
35739
Prior to [DATE 180 DAYS AFTER DATE
OF PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL RULE IN
THE FEDERAL REGISTER], manufacturers
must either test room air conditioners in
accordance with this appendix, or the
previous version of this appendix as it
appeared in the Code of Federal Regulations
on January 1, 2020. DOE notes that, because
representations made on or after [DATE 180
DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF
THE FINAL RULE IN THE FEDERAL
REGISTER] must be made in accordance
with this appendix, manufacturers may wish
to begin using this test procedure
immediately.
0. Incorporation by Reference
DOE incorporated by reference the entire
standard for ANSI/AHAM RAC–1, ANSI/
ASHRAE 16, ANSI/ASHRAE 41.1, ASHRAE
41.2–1987 (RA 1992), ASHRAE 41.3–2014,
ASHRAE 41.6–2014, ASHRAE 41.11–2014,
and IEC 62301 in § 430.3. However, only
enumerated provisions of ANSI/AHAM
RAC–1 and ANSI/ASHRAE 16 apply to this
appendix, as follows:
(1) ANSI/AHAM RAC–1:
(i) Section 4—Testing Conditions, Section
4.1—General, using ANSI/ASHRAE 16–
2016 in place of ANSI/ASHRAE 16–1983
(RA 2014)
(ii) Section 5—Standard Measurement Test,
Section 5.2—Standard Test Conditions:
5.2.1.1
(iii) Section 6—Performance Tests—Cooling
Units, Section 6.1—Cooling Capacity
Test, using ANSI/ASHRAE 16–2016 in
place of ANSI/ASHRAE 16–1983 (RA
2014)
(iv) Section 6—Performance Tests—Cooling
Units, Section 6.2—Electrical Input Test,
using ANSI/ASHRAE 16–2016 in place
of ANSI/ASHRAE 16–1983 (RA 2014)
(2) ANSI/ASHRAE 16:
(i) Section 3—Definitions
(ii) Section 5—Instruments
(iii) Section 6—Apparatus, Section 6.1—
Calorimeters, Sections 6.1.1–6.1.1.,
6.1.1.3a, 6.1.1.4–6.1.4, including Table 1
(iv) Section 7—Methods of Testing, Section
7.1—Standard Test Methods, Section
7.1a, 7.1.1a
(v) Section 8—Test Procedures, Section 8.1—
General
(vi) Section 8—Test Procedures, Section
8.2—Test Room Requirements
(viii) Section 8—Test Procedures, Section
8.3—Air Conditioner Break-In
(ix) Section 8—Test Procedures, Section
8.4—Air Conditioner Installation
(x) Section 8—Test Procedures, Section 8.5—
Cooling Capacity Test
(xi) Section 9—Data To Be Recorded, Section
9.1
(xii) Section 10—Measurement Uncertainty
(xiii) Normative Appendix A Cooling
Capacity Calculations—Calorimeter Test
Indoor and Calorimeter Test Outdoor
If there is any conflict between any
industry standard(s) and this appendix,
follow the language of the test procedure in
this appendix, disregarding the conflicting
industry standard language.
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
35740
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
1. Scope
This appendix contains the test
requirements to measure the energy
performance of a room air conditioner.
2. Definitions
2.1 ‘‘Active mode’’ means a mode in which
the room air conditioner is connected to a
mains power source, has been activated and
is performing any of the following functions:
Cooling or heating the conditioned space, or
circulating air through activation of its fan or
blower, with or without energizing active aircleaning components or devices such as
ultra-violet (UV) radiation, electrostatic
filters, ozone generators, or other air-cleaning
devices.
2.2 ‘‘ANSI/AHAM RAC–1’’ means the test
standard published jointly by the American
National Standards Institute and the
Association of Home Appliance
Manufacturers, titled ‘‘Room Air
Conditioners,’’ Standard RAC–1–2015
(incorporated by reference; see § 430.3).
2.3 ‘‘ANSI/ASHRAE 16’’ means the test
standard published jointly by the American
National Standards Institute and the
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating,
and Air-Conditioning Engineers titled
‘‘Method of Testing for Rating Room Air
Conditioners and Packaged Terminal Air
Conditioners,’’ Standard 16–2016
(incorporated by reference; see § 430.3).
2.4 ‘‘ANSI/ASHRAE 41.1’’ means the test
standard published jointly by the American
National Standards Institute and the
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating,
and Air-Conditioning Engineers titled
‘‘Standard Method for Temperature
Measurement,’’ Standard 41.1–2013
(incorporated by reference; see § 430.3).
2.5 ‘‘ASHRAE 41.2–1987 (RA 1992)’’
means the test standard published jointly by
the American National Standards Institute
and the American Society of Heating,
Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning
Engineers titled ‘‘Standard Methods for
Laboratory Airflow Measurement,’’ Standard
41.2–1987 (RA 1992) (incorporated by
reference; see § 430.3).
2.6 ‘‘ASHRAE 41.3–2014’’ means the test
standard published jointly by the American
National Standards Institute and the
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating,
and Air-Conditioning Engineers titled
‘‘Standard Methods for Pressure
Measurement,’’ Standard 41.3–2014
(incorporated by reference; see § 430.3).
2.7 ‘‘ASHRAE 41.6–2014’’ means the test
standard published jointly by the American
National Standards Institute and the
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating,
and Air-Conditioning Engineers titled
‘‘Standard Method for Humidity
Measurement,’’ Standard 41.6–2014
(incorporated by reference; see § 430.3).
2.8 ‘‘ASHRAE 41.11–2014’’ means the test
standard published jointly by the American
National Standards Institute and the
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating,
and Air-Conditioning Engineers titled
‘‘Standard Methods for Power
Measurement,’’ Standard 41.11–2014
(incorporated by reference; see § 430.3).
2.9 ‘‘Combined energy efficiency ratio’’
means the energy efficiency of a room air
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
conditioner in British thermal units per watthour (Btu/Wh) and determined in section
5.2.2 of this appendix for single-speed room
air conditioners and section 5.3.12 of this
appendix for variable-speed room air
conditioners.
2.10 ‘‘Cooling capacity’’ means the amount
of cooling, in British thermal units per hour
(Btu/h), provided to a conditioned space,
measured under the specified conditions and
determined in section 4.1 of this appendix.
2.11 ‘‘Cooling mode’’ means an active
mode in which a room air conditioner has
activated the main cooling function
according to the thermostat or temperature
sensor signal or switch (including remote
control).
2.12 ‘‘Full compressor speed (full)’’ means
the compressor speed at which the unit
operates at full load testing conditions,
achieved by following the instructions
certified by the manufacturer.
2.13 ‘‘IEC 62301’’ means the test standard
published by the International
Electrotechnical Commission, titled
‘‘Household electrical appliances—
Measurement of standby power,’’ Publication
62301 (Edition 2.0 2011–01), (incorporated
by reference; see § 430.3).
2.14 ‘‘Inactive mode’’ means a standby
mode that facilitates the activation of active
mode by remote switch (including remote
control) or internal sensor or which provides
continuous status display.
2.15 ‘‘Intermediate compressor speed
(intermediate)’’ means the compressor speed
higher than the low compressor speed by one
third of the difference between low
compressor speed and full compressor speed
with a tolerance of plus 5 percent (designs
with non-discrete speed stages) or the next
highest inverter frequency step (designs with
discrete speed steps), achieved by following
the instructions certified by the
manufacturer.
2.16 ‘‘Low compressor speed (low)’’ means
the compressor speed at which the unit
operates at low load test conditions, achieved
by following the instructions certified by the
manufacturer, such that Capacity4, the
measured cooling capacity at test condition
4 in Table 1 of this appendix, is no less than
47 percent and no greater than 57 percent of
Capacity1, the measured cooling capacity
with the full compressor speed at test
condition 1 in Table 1 of this appendix.
2.17 ‘‘Off mode’’ means a mode in which
a room air conditioner is connected to a
mains power source and is not providing any
active or standby mode function and where
the mode may persist for an indefinite time,
including an indicator that only shows the
user that the product is in the off position.
2.18 ‘‘Single-speed room air conditioner’’
means a type of room air conditioner that
cannot automatically adjust the compressor
speed based on detected conditions.
2.19 ‘‘Standby mode’’ means any product
mode where the unit is connected to a mains
power source and offers one or more of the
following user-oriented or protective
functions which may persist for an indefinite
time:
(a) To facilitate the activation of other
modes (including activation or deactivation
of active mode) by remote switch (including
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
remote control), internal sensor, or timer. A
timer is a continuous clock function (which
may or may not be associated with a display)
that provides regular scheduled tasks (e.g.,
switching) and that operates on a continuous
basis.
(b) Continuous functions, including
information or status displays (including
clocks) or sensor-based functions.
2.20 ‘‘Theoretical comparable single-speed
room air conditioner’’ means a theoretical
single-speed room air conditioner with the
same cooling capacity and electrical power
input as the variable-speed room air
conditioner under test, with no cycling losses
considered, at test condition 1 in Table 1 of
this appendix.
2.21 ‘‘Variable-speed compressor’’ means a
compressor that can vary its rotational speed
in non-discrete stages or discrete steps from
low to full.
2.22 ‘‘Variable-speed room air conditioner’’
means a type of room air conditioner that can
automatically adjust compressor speed based
on detected conditions.
3. Test Methods and General Instructions
3.1 Cooling mode. The test method for
testing room air conditioners in cooling mode
(‘‘cooling mode test’’) consists of applying
the methods and conditions in ANSI/AHAM
RAC–1 Section 4, Paragraph 4.1 and Section
5, Paragraph 5.2.1.1, except in accordance
with ANSI/ASHRAE 16, including the
references to ANSI/ASHRAE 41.1, ANSI/
ASHRAE 41.2–1987 (RA 1992), ANSI/
ASHRAE 41.3–2014, ANSI/ASHRAE 41.6–
2014, and ANSI/ASHRAE 41.11–2014, all
referenced therein, as defined in sections 2.3
through 2.8 of this appendix. Use the cooling
capacity simultaneous indoor calorimeter
and outdoor calorimeter test method in
Section 7.1.a and Sections 8.1 through 8.5 of
ANSI/ASHRAE 16, except as otherwise
specified in this appendix. If a unit can
operate on multiple operating voltages as
distributed in commerce by the
manufacturer, test it and rate the
corresponding basic models at all nameplate
operating voltages. For a variable-speed room
air conditioner, test the unit following the
cooling mode test a total of four times: One
test at each of the test conditions listed in
Table 1 of this appendix, consistent with
section 4.1 of this appendix.
3.1.1 Through-the-wall installation. Install
a non-louvered room air conditioner inside a
compatible wall sleeve with the provided or
manufacturer-required rear grille, and with
the included trim frame and other
manufacturer-provided installation materials,
per manufacturer instructions provided to
consumers.
3.1.2 Power measurement accuracy. All
instruments used for measuring electrical
inputs to the test unit, reconditioning
equipment, and any other equipment that
operates within the calorimeter walls must be
accurate to ±0.5 percent of the quantity
measured.
3.1.3 Electrical supply. For cooling mode
testing, test at each nameplate operating
voltage, and maintain the input standard
voltage within ±1 percent. Test at the rated
frequency, maintained within ±1 percent.
3.1.4 Control settings. If the room air
conditioner has network capabilities, the
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
network settings must be disabled throughout
testing.
3.1.5 Measurement resolution. Record
measurements at the resolution of the test
instrumentation.
3.1.6 Temperature tolerances. Maintain
each of the measured chamber dry-bulb and
wet-bulb temperatures within a range of
1.0 °F.
3.2 Standby and off modes.
3.2.1 Install the room air conditioner in
accordance with section 5, paragraph 5.2 of
IEC 62301 and maintain the indoor test
conditions (and outdoor test conditions
where applicable) as required by section 4,
paragraph 4.2 of IEC 62301. If testing is not
conducted in a facility used for testing
cooling mode performance, the test facility
must comply with section 4, paragraph 4.2 of
IEC 62301.
3.2.2 Electrical supply. For standby mode
and off mode testing, test at each nameplate
operating voltage, and maintain the input
standard voltage within ±1 percent. Maintain
the electrical supply at the rated frequency
±1 percent.
3.2.3 Supply voltage waveform. For the
standby mode and off mode testing, maintain
the electrical supply voltage waveform
indicated in section 4, paragraph 4.3.2 of IEC
62301.
3.2.4 Wattmeter. The wattmeter used to
measure standby mode and off mode power
consumption must meet the resolution and
accuracy requirements in Section 4,
Paragraph 4.4 of IEC 62301.
3.2.5 Air ventilation damper. If the unit is
equipped with an outdoor air ventilation
damper, close this damper during standby
mode and off mode testing.
35741
4. Test Conditions and Measurements
4.1 Cooling mode.
4.1.1 Temperature conditions. Establish
the test conditions described in sections 4
and 5 of ANSI/AHAM RAC–1 and in
accordance with ANSI/ASHRAE 16,
including the references to ANSI/ASHRAE
41.1 and ANSI/ASHRAE 41.6–2014, for
cooling mode testing, with the following
exceptions for variable-speed room air
conditioners: Conduct the set of four cooling
mode tests with the test conditions presented
in Table 1 of this appendix. Set the
compressor speed required for each test
condition in accordance with instructions the
manufacturer provided to DOE.
TABLE 1—INDOOR AND OUTDOOR INLET AIR TEST CONDITIONS—VARIABLE-SPEED ROOM AIR CONDITIONERS
Evaporator inlet (indoor) air, °F
Test condition
Dry bulb
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
Test
Test
Test
Test
Condition
Condition
Condition
Condition
1
2
3
4
............................
............................
............................
............................
80
80
80
80
4.1.2 Cooling capacity and power
measurements. For single-speed units,
measure the cooling mode cooling capacity
(expressed in Btu/h), Capacity, and electrical
power input (expressed in watts), Pcool, in
accordance with section 6, paragraphs 6.1
and 6.2 of ANSI/AHAM RAC–1, respectively,
and in accordance with ANSI/ASHRAE 16,
including the references to ANSI/ASHRAE
41.2–1987 (RA 1992) and ANSI/ASHRAE
41.11–2014. For variable-speed room air
conditioners, measure the condition-specific
cooling capacity (expressed in Btu/h),
Capacitytc, and electrical power input
(expressed in watts), Ptc, for each of the four
cooling mode rating test conditions (tc), as
required in section 6, paragraphs 6.1 and 6.2,
respectively, of ANSI/AHAM RAC–1,
respectively, and in accordance with ANSI/
ASHRAE 16, including the references to
ANSI/ASHRAE 41.2–1987 (RA 1992) and
ANSI/ASHRAE 41.11–2014.
4.2 Standby and off modes. Establish the
testing conditions set forth in section 3.2 of
this appendix, ensuring the unit does not
enter any active mode during the test. For a
unit that drops from a higher power state to
a lower power state as discussed in section
5, paragraph 5.1, Note 1 of IEC 62301, allow
sufficient time for the room air conditioner
to reach the lower power state before
proceeding with the test measurement. Use
the sampling method test procedure specified
in section 5, paragraph 5.3.2 of IEC 62301 for
testing all standby and off modes, with the
following modifications: allow the product to
stabilize for 5 to 10 minutes and use an
energy use measurement period of 5 minutes.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
Wet bulb
Condenser inlet (outdoor) air, °F
Dry bulb
67
67
67
67
95
92
87
82
4.2.1 If the unit has an inactive mode, as
defined in section 2.14 of this appendix, as
defined in section 2.17 of this appendix,
measure and record the average inactive
mode power, Pia, in watts.
4.2.2 If the unit has an off mode, as
defined in section 2.17 of this appendix,
measure and record the average off mode
power, Pom, in watts.
5. Calculations
5.1 Annual energy consumption in
inactive mode and off mode. Calculate the
annual energy consumption in inactive mode
and off mode, AECia/om, expressed in
kilowatt-hours per year (kWh/year).
AECiaom = Pia × tia + Pom + tom
Where:
AECia/om = annual energy consumption in
inactive mode and off mode, in kWh/
year.
Pia = average power in inactive mode, in
watts, determined in section 4.2 of this
appendix.
Pom = average power in off mode, in watts,
determined in section 4.2 of this
appendix.
tia = annual operating hours in inactive mode
and multiplied by a 0.001 kWh/Wh
conversion factor from watt-hours to
kilowatt-hours. This value is 5.115 kWh/
W if the unit has inactive mode and no
off mode, 2.5575 kWh/W if the unit has
both inactive and off mode, and 0 kWh/
W if the unit does not have inactive
mode.
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Compressor speed
Wet bulb
75
72.5
69
65
Full
Full
Intermediate
Low
tom = annual operating hours in off mode and
multiplied by a 0.001 kWh/Wh
conversion factor from watt-hours to
kilowatt-hours. This value is 5.115 kWh/
W if the unit has off mode and no
inactive mode, 2.5575 kWh/W if the unit
has both inactive and off mode, and 0
kWh/W if the unit does not have off
mode.
5.2 Combined energy efficiency ratio for
single-speed room air conditioners. Calculate
the combined energy efficiency ratio for
single-speed room air conditioners as
follows:
5.2.1 Single-speed room air conditioner
annual energy consumption in cooling mode.
Calculate the annual energy consumption in
cooling mode for a single-speed room air
conditioner, AECcool, expressed in kWh/year.
AECcool = 0.75 × Pcool
Where:
AECcool = single-speed room air conditioner
annual energy consumption in cooling
mode, in kWh/year.
Pcool = single-speed room air conditioner
average power in cooling mode, in watts,
determined in section 4.1.2 of this
appendix.
0.75 is 750 annual operating hours in cooling
mode multiplied by a 0.001 kWh/Wh
conversion factor from watt-hours to
kilowatt-hours.
5.2.2 Single-speed room air conditioner
combined energy efficiency ratio. Calculate
the combined energy efficiency ratio, CEER,
expressed in Btu/Wh, as follows:
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
Where:
CEER = combined energy efficiency ratio, in
Btu/Wh.
Capacity = single-speed room air conditioner
cooling capacity, in Btu/h, determined in
section 4.1.2 of this appendix.
AECcool = single-speed room air conditioner
annual energy consumption in cooling
mode, in kWh/year, calculated in section
5.2.1 of this appendix.
AECia/om = annual energy consumption in
inactive mode or off mode, in kWh/year,
calculated in section 5.1 of this
appendix.
0.75 as defined in section 5.2.1 of this
appendix.
5.3 Combined energy efficiency ratio for
variable-speed room air conditioners.
Calculate the combined energy efficiency
ratio for variable-speed room air conditioners
as follows:
5.3.1 Weighted electrical power input.
Calculate the weighted electrical power input
in cooling mode, Pwt, expressed in watts, as
follows:
Where:
Pwt = weighted electrical power input, in
watts, in cooling mode.
Ptc = electrical power input, in watts, in
cooling mode for each test condition in
Table 1 of this appendix.
Wtc = weighting factors for each cooling
mode test condition: 0.05 for test
condition 1, 0.16 for test condition 2,
0.31 for test condition 3, and 0.48 for test
condition 4.
tc represents the cooling mode test condition:
‘‘1’’ for test condition 1 (95 °F condenser
inlet dry-bulb temperature), ‘‘2’’ for test
condition 2 (92 °F), ‘‘3’’ for test condition
3 (87 °F), and ‘‘4’’ for test condition 4
(82 °F).
5.3.2 Theoretical comparable singlespeed room air conditioner. Calculate the
cooling capacity, expressed in Btu/h, and the
electrical power input, expressed in watts,
for a theoretical comparable single-speed
room air conditioner at all cooling mode test
conditions.
Capacityss_tc = Capacity1 × (1 + (Mc × (95—
Ttc)))
Pss_tc = P1 × (1—(Mp × (95—Ttc)))
Where:
Capacityss_tc = theoretical comparable singlespeed room air conditioner cooling
capacity, in Btu/h, calculated for each of
the cooling mode test conditions in
Table 1 of this appendix.
Capacity1 = variable-speed room air
conditioner unit’s cooling capacity, in
Btu/h, determined in section 4.1.2 of this
appendix for test condition 1 in Table 1
of this appendix.
Pss_tc = theoretical comparable single-speed
room air conditioner electrical power
input, in watts, calculated for each of the
cooling mode test conditions in Table 1
of this appendix.
P1 = variable-speed room air conditioner
unit’s electrical power input, in watts,
determined in section 4.1.2 of this
appendix for test condition 1 in Table 1
of this appendix.
Mc = adjustment factor to determine the
increased capacity at lower outdoor test
conditions, 0.0099 per °F.
Mp = adjustment factor to determine the
reduced electrical power input at lower
outdoor test conditions, 0.0076 per °F.
95 is the condenser inlet dry-bulb
temperature for test condition 1 in Table
1 of this appendix, 95 °F.
Ttc = condenser inlet dry-bulb temperature
for each of the test conditions in Table
1 of this appendix (in °F).
tc as explained in section 5.3.1 of this
appendix.
5.3.3 Variable-speed room air conditioner
unit’s annual energy consumption for cooling
mode at each cooling mode test condition.
Calculate the annual energy consumption for
cooling mode under each test condition,
AECtc, expressed in kilowatt-hours per year
(kWh/year), as follows:
AECtc = 0.75 × Ptc
Where:
AECtc = variable-speed room air conditioner
unit’s annual energy consumption, in
kWh/year, in cooling mode for each test
condition in Table 1 of this appendix.
Ptc = as defined in section 5.3.1 of this
appendix.
0.75 as defined in section 5.2.1 of this
appendix.
tc as explained in section 5.3.1 of this
appendix.
5.3.4 Variable-speed room air conditioner
weighted annual energy consumption.
Calculate the weighted annual energy
consumption in cooling mode for a variablespeed room air conditioner, AECwt, expressed
in kWh/year.
AECwt = StcAECtc × Wtc
Where:
AECwt = weighted annual energy
consumption in cooling mode for a
variable-speed room air conditioner,
expressed in kWh/year.
AECtc = variable-speed room air conditioner
unit’s annual energy consumption, in
kWh/year, in cooling mode for each test
condition in Table 1 of this appendix,
determined in section 5.3.3 of this
appendix.
Wtc = weighting factors for each cooling
mode test condition: 0.05 for test
condition 1, 0.16 for test condition 2,
0.31 for test condition 3, and 0.48 for test
condition 4.
tc as explained in section 5.3.1 of this
appendix.
5.3.5 Theoretical comparable singlespeed room air conditioner annual energy
consumption in cooling mode at each cooling
mode test condition. Calculate the annual
energy consumption in cooling mode for a
theoretical comparable single-speed room air
conditioner for cooling mode under each test
condition, AECss_tc, expressed in kWh/year.
AECss_tc = 0.75 × Pss_tc
Where:
AECss_tc = theoretical comparable singlespeed room air conditioner annual
energy consumption, in kWh/year, in
cooling mode for each test condition in
Table 1 of this appendix.
Pss_tc = theoretical comparable single-speed
room air conditioner electrical power
input, in watts, in cooling mode for each
test condition in Table 1 of this
appendix, determined in section 5.3.2 of
this appendix.
0.75 as defined in section 5.2.1 of this
appendix.
tc as explained in section 5.3.1 of this
appendix.
5.3.6 Variable-speed room air conditioner
combined energy efficiency ratio at each
cooling mode test condition. Calculate the
variable-speed room air conditioner unit’s
combined energy efficiency ratio, CEERtc, for
each test condition, expressed in Btu/Wh.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:57 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
EP11JN20.010</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
EP11JN20.006</GPH>
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
35742
Where:
CEERtc = variable-speed room air conditioner
unit’s combined energy efficiency ratio,
in Btu/Wh, for each test condition in
Table 1 of this appendix.
Capacitytc = variable-speed room air
conditioner unit’s cooling capacity, in
Btu/h, for each test condition in Table 1
of this appendix, determined in section
4.1.2 of this appendix.
AECtc = variable-speed room air conditioner
unit’s annual energy consumption, in
kWh/year, in cooling mode for each test
condition in Table 1 of this appendix,
determined in section 5.3.3 of this
appendix.
AECia/om = annual energy consumption in
inactive mode of off mode, in kWh/year,
determined in section 5.1 of this
appendix.
0.75 as defined in section 5.2.1 of this
appendix.
tc as explained in section 5.3.1 of this
appendix.
5.3.7 Theoretical comparable singlespeed room air conditioner combined energy
efficiency ratio. Calculate the combined
energy efficiency ratio for a theoretical
comparable single-speed room air
conditioner, CEERss_tc, for each test
condition, expressed in Btu/Wh.
Where:
CEERss_tc = theoretical comparable singlespeed room air conditioner combined
energy efficiency ratio, in Btu/Wh, for
each test condition in Table 1 of this
appendix.
Capacityss_tc = theoretical comparable singlespeed room air conditioner cooling
capacity, in Btu/h, for each test
condition in Table 1 of this appendix,
determined in section 5.3.2 of this
appendix.
AECss_tc = theoretical comparable singlespeed room air conditioner annual
energy consumption, in kWh/year, in
cooling mode for each test condition in
Table 1 of this appendix, determined in
section 5.3.5 of this appendix.
AECia/om = annual energy consumption in
inactive mode or off mode, in kWh/year,
determined in section 5.1 of this
appendix.
0.75 as defined in section 5.2.1 of this
appendix.
tc as explained in section 5.3.1 of this
appendix.
5.3.8 Theoretical comparable singlespeed room air conditioner adjusted
combined energy efficiency ratio. Calculate
the adjusted combined energy efficiency
ratio, for a theoretical comparable singlespeed room air conditioner, CEERss_tc_adj,
with cycling losses considered, for each test
condition, expressed in Btu/Wh.
CEERss_tc_adj = CEERss_tc CEERtc × CLFtc
Where:
CEERss_tc_adj = theoretical comparable singlespeed room air conditioner adjusted
combined energy efficiency ratio, in Btu/
Wh, for each test condition in Table 1 of
this appendix.
CEERss_tc = theoretical comparable singlespeed room air conditioner combined
energy efficiency ratio, in Btu/Wh, for
each test condition in Table 1 of this
appendix, determined in section 5.3.7 of
this appendix.
CLFtc = cycling loss factor for each test
condition; 1 for test condition 1, 0.971
for test condition 2, 0.923 for test
condition 3, and 0.875 for test condition
4.
tc as explained in section 5.3.1 of this
appendix.
5.3.9 Weighted combined energy
efficiency ratio. Calculate the weighted
combined energy efficiency ratio for the
variable-speed room air conditioner unit,
CEERwt, and theoretical comparable singlespeed room air conditioner, CEERss_wt,
expressed in Btu/Wh.
CEERwt = StcCEERtc × Wtc
CEERss_wt = StcCEERss_tc_adj × Wtc
Where:
CEERwt = variable-speed room air conditioner
unit’s weighted combined energy
efficiency ratio, in Btu/Wh.
CEERss_wt = theoretical comparable singlespeed room air conditioner weighted
combined energy efficiency ratio, in Btu/
Wh.
CEERtc = variable-speed room air conditioner
unit’s combined energy efficiency ratio,
in Btu/Wh, at each test condition in
Table 1 of this appendix, determined in
section 5.3.6 of this appendix.
CEERss_tc_adj = theoretical comparable singlespeed room air conditioner adjusted
combined energy efficiency ratio, in Btu/
Wh, at each test condition in Table 1 of
this appendix, determined in section
5.3.8 of this appendix.
Wtc as defined in section 5.3.4 of this
appendix.
tc as explained in section 5.3.1 of this
appendix.
5.3.10 Variable-speed room air
conditioner performance adjustment factor.
Calculate the variable-speed room air
conditioner unit’s performance adjustment
factor, Fp.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
Where:
Fp = variable-speed room air conditioner
unit’s performance adjustment factor.
CEERwt = variable-speed room air conditioner
unit’s weighted combined energy
efficiency ratio, in Btu/Wh, determined
in section 5.3.9 of this appendix.
CEERss_wt = theoretical comparable singlespeed room air conditioner weighted
combined energy efficiency ratio, in Btu/
Wh, determined in section 5.3.9 of this
appendix.
5.3.11 Variable-speed room air
conditioner combined energy efficiency ratio.
Calculate the combined energy efficiency
ratio, CEER, expressed in Btu/Wh, for
variable-speed air conditioners.
CEER = CEER1 × (1 + Fp)
Where:
CEER = combined energy efficiency ratio, in
Btu/Wh.
CEER1 = variable-speed room air conditioner
combined energy efficiency ratio for test
condition 1 in Table 1 of this appendix,
in Btu/Wh, determined in section 5.3.6
of this appendix.
Fp = variable-speed room air conditioner
performance adjustment factor,
determined in section 5.3.10 of this
appendix.
[FR Doc. 2020–11215 Filed 6–10–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM
11JNP2
EP11JN20.008</GPH> EP11JN20.009</GPH>
35743
EP11JN20.007</GPH>
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 113 (Thursday, June 11, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 35700-35743]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-11215]
[[Page 35699]]
Vol. 85
Thursday,
No. 113
June 11, 2020
Part II
Department of Energy
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
10 CFR Parts 429 and 430
Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Room Air Conditioners;
Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 85 , No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 35700]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Parts 429 and 430
[EERE-2017-BT-TP-0012]
RIN 1904-AD47
Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Room Air
Conditioners
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) proposes to amend the test
procedure for room air conditioners (``room ACs'') to address updates
to the industry standards that are incorporated by reference, provide
for the testing of variable-speed room ACs to better reflect their
relative efficiency gains at lower outdoor temperatures as compared to
single-speed room ACs, and to provide specifications and minor
corrections that would improve repeatability, reproducibility, and
overall readability of the test procedure. Because there are no testing
modifications proposed for single-speed room ACs, DOE expects that the
proposed changes will not affect the measured energy use for these
models. For variable-speed room ACs, the proposed changes will improve
the representativeness of the measured energy use of these models. As
part of this proposal, DOE is announcing a public meeting to collect
comments and data on its proposal.
DATES:
Meeting: DOE will hold a webinar on Wednesday, July 8, 2020, from
10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. See section V, ``Public Participation,'' for
webinar registration information, participant instructions, and
information about the capabilities available to webinar participants.
If no participants register for the webinar, then it will be cancelled.
DOE will hold a public meeting on this proposed test procedure if one
is requested by June 25, 2020.
Comments: DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding
this proposal no later than August 10, 2020. See section V, ``Public
Participation,'' for details.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are encouraged to submit comments using
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the instructions for submitting comments. Alternatively, interested
persons may submit comments, identified by docket number EERE-2017-BT-
TP-0012, by any of the following methods:
(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the instructions for submitting comments.
(2) Email: [email protected]. Include the docket number
EERE-2017-BT-TP-0012 or regulatory information number (RIN) 1904-AD47
in the subject line of the message.
(3) Postal Mail: Appliance and Equipment Standards Program, U.S.
Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, Mailstop EE-5B,
1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone:
(202) 287-1445. If possible, please submit all items on a compact disc
(CD), in which case it is not necessary to include printed copies.
(4) Hand Delivery/Courier: Appliance and Equipment Standards
Program, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, 950
L'Enfant Plaza SW, 6th Floor, Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: (202)
287-1445. If possible, please submit all items on a CD, in which case
it is not necessary to include printed copies.
No telefacsimilies (faxes) will be accepted. For detailed
instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the
rulemaking process, see section V of this document.
Docket: The docket, which includes Federal Register notices, public
meeting attendee lists and transcripts (if a public meeting is held),
comments, and other supporting documents/materials, is available for
review at https://www.regulations.gov. All documents in the docket are
listed in the https://www.regulations.gov index. However, some documents
listed in the index, such as those containing information that is
exempt from public disclosure, may not be publicly available.
The docket web page can be found at https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EERE-2017-BT-TP-0012. The docket web page will contain simple
instructions on how to access all documents, including public comments,
in the docket. See section V of this document for information on how to
submit comments through https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Bryan Berringer, U.S. Department
of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building
Technologies Office, EE-5B, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC
20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-0371. Email:
[email protected].
Ms. Sarah Butler, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General
Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121.
Telephone: (202) 586-1777. Email: [email protected].
For further information on how to submit a comment, review other
public comments and the docket, or participate in the webinar, contact
the Appliance and Equipment Standards Program staff at (202) 287-1445
or by email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE proposes to incorporate by reference the
following industry standards into 10 CFR part 430:
(1) American National Standards Institute (ANSI)/Association of
Home Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM) RAC-1-2015, (ANSI/AHAM RAC-1-2015),
``Room Air Conditioners;'' ANSI approved May 13, 2015.
(2) ANSI/American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-
Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Standard 16-2016, (ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
16-2016), ``Method of Testing for Rating Room Air Conditioners,
Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners, and Packaged Terminal Heat Pumps
for Cooling and Heating Capacity;'' ANSI approved October 31, 2016.
(3) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.1-2013, (ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.1),
``Standard Method for Temperature Measurement;'' ANSI approved January
30, 2013.
(4) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.2-1987 (RA 1992), (ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
41.2-1987 (RA 1992)), ``Standard Methods for Laboratory Airflow
Measurement;'' ANSI reaffirmed April 20, 1992.
(5) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.3-2014 (``ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.3-
2014''), ``Standard Methods for Pressure Measurement;'' ANSI approved
July 3, 2014.
(6) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.6-2014, (ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.6-
2014), ``Standard Method for Humidity Measurement;'' ANSI approved July
3, 2014.
(7) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.11-2014, (ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.11-
2014), ``Standard Methods for Power Measurement;'' ANSI approved July
3, 2014.
(8) International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) Standard 62301,
(IEC Standard 62301 Second Edition), ``Household electrical
appliances--Measurement of standby power, (Edition 2.0);''.
Copies of ANSI/AHAM RAC-1-2015 can be obtained from the Association
of Home Appliance Manufacturers at https://www.aham.org/ht/d/Store/.
Copies of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-
[[Page 35701]]
2016, ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.1-2013, ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.2-1987,
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.3-2014, ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.6-2014, and
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.11-2014 can be obtained from the American
National Standards Institute at https://webstore.ansi.org/. Copies of
IEC Standard 62301 can be obtained from https://webstore.iec.ch.
See section IV.N for additional information on these standards.
Table of Contents
I. Authority and Background
A. Authority
B. Background
1. The January 2011 Final Rule
2. The June 2015 Request for Information
3. The August 2017 RFI
4. The LG and Midea Waivers
II. Synopsis of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
III. Discussion
A. Room Air Conditioner Definition
B. Industry Test Standards
1. ANSI/AHAM RAC-1
2. ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16
C. Variable-Speed Room Air Conditioner Test Procedure
1. Methodology
2. Test Conditions
3. Variable-Speed Compressor Operation
4. Capacity and Electrical Power Adjustment Factors
5. Cycling Loss Factors
6. Test Condition Weighting Factors
7. Performance Adjustment Factor
8. Air-Enthalpy Test Alternative
9. Product Specific Reporting Provisions
10. Estimated Annual Operating Cost Calculation
11. Potential Cost Impacts
D. Definitions
E. Active Mode Testing
1. Cooling Mode
2. Heating Mode
3. Off-Cycle Mode
F. Standby Modes and Off Mode
1. Referenced Standby Mode and Off Mode Test Standard
G. Network Functionality
H. Connected Test Procedure
I. Combined Energy Efficiency Ratio
J. Certification and Verification Requirements
K. Reorganization of Calculations Currently in 10 CFR 430.23
L. Test Procedure Costs, Harmonization, and Other Topics
1. Test Procedure Costs and Impact
2. Harmonization With Industry Standards
3. Other Test Procedure Topics
M. Compliance Date and Waivers
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
B. Review Under Executive Orders 13771 and 13777
C. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
E. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
F. Review Under Executive Order 13132
G. Review Under Executive Order 12988
H. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
I. Review Under the Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act, 1999
J. Review Under Executive Order 12630
K. Review Under Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act, 2001
L. Review Under Executive Order 13211
M. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration
Act of 1974
N. Description of Materials Incorporated by Reference
V. Public Participation
A. Participation in the Webinar
B. Submission of Comments
C. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment
VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
I. Authority and Background
Room ACs are included in the list of ``covered products'' for which
DOE is authorized to establish and amend energy conservation standards
and test procedures. (42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(2)) DOE's energy conservation
standards and test procedure for room ACs are currently prescribed at
10 CFR 430.32(b) and 10 CFR 430.23(f), respectively. The following
sections discuss DOE's authority to establish test procedures for room
ACs and relevant background information regarding DOE's consideration
of test procedures for this product.
A. Authority
The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended, (EPCA or the
Act),\1\ authorizes 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. These
products include room ACs, the subject of this document. (42 U.S.C.
6292(a)(2))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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 (Oct. 23, 2018).
\2\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code,
Part B was redesignated 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 the Act specifically include definitions (42 U.S.C.
6291), test procedures (42 U.S.C. 6293), energy conservation standards
(42 U.S.C. 6295), labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6294), 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 those
products (42 U.S.C. 6293(c)). Similarly, DOE must use these test
procedures to determine whether the products comply with relevant
standards promulgated under EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6295(s))
Federal energy efficiency requirements for covered products
established under EPCA generally supersede State laws and regulations
concerning energy conservation testing, labeling, and standards. (See
42 U.S.C. 6297) DOE may, however, grant waivers of Federal preemption
for particular State laws or regulations, in accordance with the
procedures and other provisions of EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6297(d))
Under 42 U.S.C. 6293, EPCA sets forth the criteria and procedures
DOE must follow when prescribing or amending test procedures for
covered products. EPCA requires that any test procedures prescribed or
amended under this section be reasonably designed to produce test
results which measure energy efficiency, energy use or estimated annual
operating cost of a covered product during a representative average use
cycle or period of use and not be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42
U.S.C. 6293(b)(3))
In addition, EPCA requires that DOE amend its test procedures for
all covered products to integrate measures of standby mode and off mode
energy consumption. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A)) Standby mode and off
mode energy consumption must be incorporated into the overall energy
efficiency, energy consumption, or other energy descriptor for each
covered product unless the current test procedures already account for
and incorporate standby and off mode energy consumption or such
integration is technically infeasible. If an integrated test procedure
is technically infeasible, DOE must prescribe a separate standby mode
and off mode energy use test procedure for the covered product, if
technically feasible. (U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A)(ii)) Any such amendment
must consider the most current versions of the IEC Standard 62301 \3\
and IEC Standard
[[Page 35702]]
62087 \4\ as applicable. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ IEC 62301, ``Household electrical appliances--Measurement of
standby power'' (Edition 2.0, 2011-01).
\4\ IEC 62087, ``Methods of measurement for the power
consumption of audio, video, and related equipment'' (Edition 3.0,
2011-04).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
If DOE determines that a test procedure amendment is warranted, it
must publish proposed test procedures and offer the public an
opportunity to present oral and written comments on them. (42 U.S.C.
6293(b)(2)) EPCA also requires that, at least once every 7 years, DOE
evaluate test procedures for each type of covered product, including
room ACs, to determine whether amended test procedures would more
accurately or fully comply with the requirements for the test
procedures to not be unduly burdensome to conduct and be reasonably
designed to produce test results that reflect energy efficiency, energy
use, and estimated operating costs during a representative average use
cycle or period of use. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(1)(A) and (3)) If the
Secretary determines, on his own behalf or in response to a petition by
any interested person, that a test procedure should be prescribed or
amended, the Secretary shall promptly publish in the Federal Register
proposed test procedures and afford interested persons an opportunity
to present oral and written data, views, and arguments with respect to
such procedures. The comment period on a proposed rule to amend a test
procedure shall be at least 60 days and may not exceed 270 days. In
prescribing or amending a test procedure, the Secretary shall take into
account such information as the Secretary determines relevant to such
procedure, including technological developments relating to energy use
or energy efficiency of the type (or class) of covered products
involved. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(2)) If DOE determines that test procedure
revisions are not appropriate, DOE must publish its determination not
to amend the test procedures. DOE is publishing this notice of proposed
rulemaking (NOPR) pursuant to the 7-year review requirement specified
in EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(1)(A))
B. Background
DOE's existing test procedure for room ACs appears at Title 10 of
the CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix F (``Uniform Test Method for
Measuring the Energy Consumption of Room Air Conditioners'' (``appendix
F'')), and the room AC performance metric calculations are codified at
10 CFR 430.23(f). The test procedure for room ACs was established on
June 1, 1977 (hereafter the ``June 1977 final rule'') and was
subsequently redesignated and editorially amended on June 29, 1979. 42
FR 27896 (June 1, 1977); 44 FR 37938 (June 29, 1979).
1. The January 2011 Final Rule
The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (Public Law 110-
140; EISA 2007) directed DOE to amend its energy efficiency test
procedures for all covered products to include measures of standby mode
and off mode energy consumption. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A)) In
compliance with these requirements, on January 6, 2011, DOE published a
final rule (hereafter the ``January 2011 Final Rule''), amending the
room AC test procedure to include measurements of standby mode and off
mode power and to introduce a new combined efficiency metric, Combined
Energy Efficiency Ratio (CEER), that accounts for energy consumption in
active mode, standby mode and off mode. 76 FR 971. DOE also
incorporated into its regulations a new industry test method,
International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) Standard 62301,
``Household electrical appliances--Measurement of standby power (first
edition June 2005)'' (``IEC Standard 62301 First Edition''), to measure
the standby and off mode energy consumption. In addition to IEC
Standard 62301 First Edition, the January 2011 Final Rule updated
references to test methods developed by the American National Standards
Institute (ANSI), the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers
(AHAM) and the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-
Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE). The current room AC test procedure
incorporates by reference three industry test methods: (1) ANSI/AHAM
RAC-1-2008, ``Room Air Conditioners'' (ANSI/AHAM RAC-1-2008),\5\ (2)
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-1983 (RA 2009), ``Method of Testing for Rating
Room Air Conditioners and Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners'' (ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 16-2009),\6\ and (3) IEC Standard 62301 First
Edition.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Copies can be purchased from https://webstore.ansi.org.
\6\ Copies can be purchased from https://www.techstreet.com.
\7\ Copies can be purchased from https://webstore.iec.ch.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. The June 2015 Request for Information
On June 18, 2015, DOE published a request for information (RFI)
(hereafter the ``June 2015 RFI'') regarding the energy conservation
standards and test procedure for room ACs. 80 FR 34843. In addition to
soliciting information regarding the energy conservations standards,
the June 2015 RFI discussed and sought comment on the following aspects
of the room AC test procedure: (1) Potential updates to the energy
efficiency metric that would address performance in additional
operating modes; (2) alternate methods for measuring cooling mode
performance; (3) measuring heating mode performance and any relevant
test methods, temperature conditions, or test burden; (4) methods for
measuring performance at reduced cooling loads and the prevalence of
units on the market with components optimized for efficient operation
at reduced cooling loads; (5) testing and certification of units that
can operate on multiple voltages; and (6) the energy usage associated
with connected functionality. 80 FR at 34846-34848 (June 18, 2015). In
response to the June 2015 RFI, DOE received comments from interested
parties pertaining to the room AC test procedure, which are summarized
throughout this NOPR.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ All public comments are located in the room AC energy
conservation standards rulemaking docket: https://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=EERE-2014-BT-STD-0059.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. The August 2017 RFI
On August 4, 2017, DOE published another RFI (hereafter the
``August 2017 RFI'') regarding the test procedure for room ACs. 82 FR
36349. Following publication of the June 2015 RFI, DOE identified
additional topics and questions for which it sought feedback,
specifically regarding amendments to the room AC test procedure to
harmonize with the recently established portable air conditioner
(``portable AC'') test procedure, to clarify test setup and temperature
conditions, to reference updated industry test procedures for room ACs,
and on any additional topics that might inform DOE's decisions in a
future test procedure rulemaking. DOE also welcomed further comments on
the topics raised in the June 2015 RFI and on other issues relevant to
the conduct of such a rulemaking that were not specifically identified
in that document.
AHAM opposed harmonizing the room AC test procedure with the
portable AC test procedure, claiming that harmonization would not
assist consumers in making purchasing decisions, mainly because the two
products have different consumers and are used for significantly
different applications, based on recent consumer survey data. (AHAM,
No. 3 at pp. 1-4) \9\
[[Page 35703]]
According to AHAM, the survey suggested that room ACs are purchased for
homes without central air conditioning (``central AC''), where cost is
a key factor, and where portability is not. AHAM also stated that room
ACs are typically used for primary cooling, whereas portable ACs are
used for supplemental cooling (i.e., in addition to a central AC). AHAM
claimed that the significant design difference between room ACs and
portable ACs (specifically, that room ACs are installed in the barrier
between the conditioned and unconditioned space, whereas portable ACs
are installed entirely within the conditioned space) leads to
drastically different design decisions on the size, weight, and shape
of the product, impacting available design options for improving
efficiency as well as the physical limitations on testing the products.
Therefore, according to AHAM, harmonizing the test procedures for room
ACs and portable ACs would result in consumer confusion and increased
burden for manufacturers. Id. DOE notes that the proposals in this
document regarding test procedure updates for room ACs were not
considered on the basis of similarities or differences between room ACs
and portable ACs. However, in development of the portable AC test
procedure, DOE relied on data for room ACs in instances in which data
specific to portable ACs were lacking. In the current rulemaking, DOE
considered such data for room ACs during development of the proposed
amendments to the room AC test procedure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ A notation in the form ``AHAM, No. 3 at pp. 1-4'' identifies
a written comment: (1) Made by the Association of Home Appliance
Manufacturers; (2) recorded in document number 3 that is filed in
the docket of the current room AC test procedure rulemaking (Docket
No. EERE-2017-BT-TP-0012) and available for review at https://www.regulations.gov; and (3) which appears on pages 1 through 4 of
document number 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Appliance Standards Awareness Project, Alliance to Save Energy,
American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, Consumer Federation
of America, Natural Resources Defense Council, Northeast Energy
Efficiency Partnerships, Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance, and
Northwest Power and Conservation Council (hereafter the ``Joint
Advocates'') and the Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Southern
California Gas Company, San Diego Gas and Electric, and Southern
California Edison (hereafter the ``California IOUs'') both noted that
harmonizing the room AC and portable AC test procedures would allow for
a comparison between the two products, which they agreed provide a
similar function and consumer utility. (Joint Advocates, No. 6 at p. 1;
California IOUs, No. 5 at p. 2) Nonetheless, neither supported aligning
the room AC test procedure with the current portable AC test procedure.
The California IOUs expressed concern that the benefit of
harmonization might not outweigh the negative impacts of an additional
cooling mode test condition for room ACs; namely, that adding a second
test condition would obscure the determination of peak load energy
consumption and would be detrimental for the effective determination of
room AC energy demand impact during peak usage times, which is of
significant importance to the California IOUs. (California IOUs, No. 5
at p. 2) The Joint Advocates noted that the portable AC test procedure
does not capture part-load performance and thus would not capture the
benefits of technologies that improve part-load performance, such as
variable-speed compressors. In light of this, rather than aligning the
room AC test procedure with the portable AC test procedure, the Joint
Advocates urged DOE to incorporate part-load performance into the room
AC test procedure and the portable AC test procedure. (Joint Advocates,
No. 6 at pp. 1-3) As discussed in sections III.E through III.K of this
document, DOE is not proposing any significant changes to the room AC
test procedure at this time for single-speed room ACs, which represent
the majority of room AC configurations on the market today.
Specifically, as discussed in section III.E.1.e of this document, DOE
considered multiple test conditions as well as constant-cooling-load-
based \10\ or dynamic-cooling-load-based tests \11\ as an alternative
to the existing constant-temperature single outdoor condition room AC
test procedure and has initially determined that such amendments would
not be warranted for single-speed room ACs. However, DOE proposes in
this document to adopt specific testing requirements for room ACs that
use variable-speed compressors (``variable-speed room ACs'') to better
represent their relative efficiency compared to single-speed room ACs,
as described further in section III.C of this document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Constant-cooling-load-based tests fix the amount of heat to
the indoor test room by the reconditioning equipment, generally less
than the test unit's nominal cooling capacity, while the indoor test
room temperature is permitted to change and is controlled by the
test unit according to its thermostat setting, which is fixed
throughout testing.
\11\ Dynamic-cooling-load-based tests vary the amount of heat
added to the indoor test room by the chamber reconditioning
equipment, while the indoor test room temperature is permitted to
change and is controlled by the test unit and fixed thermostat
setting, thereby measuring how a unit reacts to changing load
conditions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. The LG and Midea Waivers
On June 29, 2018, DOE announced receipt of a petition for waiver
and application of an interim waiver from LG Electronic USA, Inc.
(``LG''), in which LG sought an exemption from the DOE test procedure
for room ACs, which appears in appendix F for certain room AC models
with variable-speed capabilities (hereafter the ``LG Petition for
Waiver'').\12\ 83 FR 30717 (June 29, 2018). According to LG, the
current DOE test procedure for room ACs, which provides for testing at
full-load performance only, does not take into account the benefits of
variable-speed room ACs at part-load conditions, and misrepresents
their actual energy consumption. LG suggested an alternate test
procedure for its variable-speed room ACs, which provided for testing
each unit at four different outdoor temperatures instead of a single
outdoor temperature, with the unit compressor speed fixed at each
temperature. LG's approach for the alternate test procedure was derived
from the current DOE test procedure for central ACs (10 CFR part 430,
subpart B, appendix M (``appendix M'')). As discussed in a notice of
petition for waiver and notice of grant of interim waiver (hereafter
the ``Grant of LG Interim Waiver''), DOE initially agreed with LG's
claim that the DOE test procedure evaluates the variable-speed models
listed in the LG Petition for Waiver in a manner that is
unrepresentative of their energy use. 83 FR 30717, 30719. DOE also
reviewed the alternate procedure proposed by LG and based on that
review determined that LG's suggested procedure would allow for the
accurate measurement of the energy use for the listed variable-speed
room ACs. Therefore, DOE granted an interim waiver to LG to use LG's
suggested alternate test procedure for LG's listed variable-speed room
AC models, with an additional specification of how to determine the
intermediate compressor speed. On May, 8, 2019, DOE published a
Decision and Order (hereafter the ``LG Waiver''), granting a waiver for
four variable-speed basic models with the condition that LG must test
and rate these models according to an alternate test procedure that was
substantively consistent with that suggested by LG, and report product-
specific information that reflects the alternate test procedure. 84 FR
2011.
[[Page 35704]]
The alternate test procedure required under the LG Waiver differs from
that required in the Grant of LG Interim Waiver as follows: (1)
Removing the allowance to use a psychrometric chamber (which would be
consistent with an air-enthalpy testing approach) instead of a
calorimeter chamber, (2) adding definitions for each fixed compressor
speed, (3) adjusting the annual energy consumption and operating cost
calculations that provide the basis for the information presented to
consumers on the EnergyGuide Label, and (4) requiring that compressor
speeds be set in accordance with instructions submitted by LG on April
2, 2019.\13\ DOE determined that those changes were necessary to ensure
better repeatability and reproducibility of the LG Waiver test
procedure, as well as representativeness of the results. 84 FR 20111.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ All published documents directly related to the waiver are
available in docket EERE-2018-BT-WAV-0006. (https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2018-BT-WAV-0006.)
\13\ The instructions provided by LG on April 2, 2019 were
marked as confidential and, as such, were treated as confidential.
The document is located in the docket at https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2018-BT-WAV-0006-0010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 25, 2019, GD Midea Air Conditioning Equipment Co. LTD.
(``Midea'') submitted a petition for waiver and application for interim
waiver from the room AC test procedure for six room AC models with
variable-speed capabilities.\14\ Midea sought a test procedure
exemption consistent with the approach DOE allowed in the Grant of LG
Interim Waiver. DOE reviewed Midea's petition and, based on that
review, initially agreed that Midea's suggested procedure, with the
same modifications DOE included in the LG Waiver, would allow for the
accurate measurement of the energy use for the listed variable-speed
room AC models. Therefore, on December 13, 2019, DOE granted Midea an
interim waiver from the room AC test procedure (hereafter the ``Grant
of Midea Interim Waiver'') for the models listed in Midea's petition,
using the alternate test procedure required in the LG Waiver, which
published subsequent to Midea's petition for waiver. 84 FR 68159.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ All published documents directly related to the interim
waiver are available in docket EERE-2019-BT-WAV-0009 (https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EERE-2019-BT-WAV-0009.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to 10 CFR 430.27(l), following the grant of any waiver,
DOE must publish in the Federal Register a notice of proposed
rulemaking to amend its regulations so as to eliminate the need for
continuation of the waiver. As soon thereafter as practicable, DOE must
publish in the Federal Register a final rule. Id. The waiver would then
terminate on the effective date of the final rule. 10 CFR 430.27(h)(2).
II. Synopsis of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
In this NOPR, DOE proposes amendments to the existing test
procedures for room ACs to: (1) Update to the latest versions of
industry test methods that are incorporated by reference; (2) adopt new
testing provisions for variable-speed room ACs that reflect the
relative efficiency gains at reduced cooling loads compared to single-
speed room ACs; (3) adopt new definitions consistent with these two
proposed amendments; and (4) provide specifications and minor
corrections to improve the test procedure repeatability,
reproducibility, and overall readability.
DOE has tentatively determined that the proposed amendments would
both provide more representative efficiency measurements for variable-
speed room ACs and not alter the measured efficiency of single-speed
room ACs, which constitute the large majority of units on the market.
DOE has also tentatively determined that the proposed test procedure
would not be unduly burdensome to conduct. DOE's proposed actions are
summarized in Table II-1 and addressed in detail in section III of this
document.
Table II-1--Summary of Changes in Proposed Test Procedure Relative to Current Test Procedure
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current DOE test procedure Proposed test procedure Attribution
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
References industry standards--.......... Updates references to applicable sections Industry test procedure
of:. updates.
ANSI/AHAM RAC-1-2008, ANSI/AHAM RAC-1-2015,........
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16- ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2016
2009, and (including relevant cross-referenced
industry standards), and.
IEC Standard 62301 First IEC Standard 62301 Second
Edition. Edition..
Testing, calculation of CEER metric, and Testing, calculation of CEER metric, and In response to the LG
certification for all room ACs based on certification for variable-speed room Waiver.
single temperature rating condition. ACs based on additional reduced outdoor
temperature test conditions.
--Definition of ``room air
conditioner'' does not explicitly
include function of providing cool
conditioned air to an enclosed
space, and references ``prime,'' an
undefined term, to describe the
source of refrigeration
--``Cooling mode'' is an undefined
term.
Definitions--........................ --Adds the word ``cooled'' in the Added by DOE
definition of ``room air conditioner'' (clarification).
to describe the conditioned air a room
AC provides and removes ``prime'' from
the definition.
--Adds definition for ``cooling mode''...
Appendix F does not explicitly identify Creates new section indicating the Added by DOE (specifies
the scope of the test procedure. appendix applies to the energy the applicability of the
performance of room ACs. test procedure).
Provides that test unit be installed in a --References ANSI/ASHRAE Standard-2016, Industry test procedure
manner similar to consumer installation. specifying that the perimeter of update and added by DOE
louvered room ACs be sealed to the (additional installation
separating partition, consistent with specifications).
common testing practice.
--Specifies that non-louvered room ACs be
installed inside a compatible wall
sleeve, with the manufacturer-provided
installation materials.
Calculations for average annual energy --Moves calculations for CEER and annual Added by DOE (improve
consumption, combined annual energy energy consumption for each operating readability).
consumption, energy efficiency ratio mode into appendix F.
(EER), and CEER are located in 10 CFR --Removes EER calculation and references
430.23(f). entirely, as it is obsolete..
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 35705]]
III. Discussion
A. Room Air Conditioner Definition
DOE defines a ``room air conditioner'' as a consumer product, other
than a packaged terminal air conditioner, which is powered by a single-
phase electric current and which is an encased assembly designed as a
unit for mounting in a window or through the wall for the purpose of
providing delivery of conditioned air to an enclosed space. It includes
a prime source of refrigeration and may include a means for ventilating
and heating. 10 CFR 430.2.
DOE does not propose any changes to the room AC definition in this
NOPR that would modify the current scope of covered products. However,
as described further below, DOE proposes minor adjustments to the room
AC definition to ensure the definition does not inadvertently apply to
new products introduced on the market. The proposed revised definition
would harmonize with the wording of definitions for other DOE covered
products, which DOE believes will help avoid any potential confusion or
unintentional overlap in scope of coverage between room ACs and any
other products.
In the June 2015 RFI, DOE noted that other consumer products,
including portable ACs and dehumidifiers, are also self-encased,
powered by a single-phase electric current, refrigeration-based, and
deliver conditioned air to an enclosed space, thereby meeting many of
the criteria in the room AC definition. DOE also noted, however, that
the definition of a room AC specifies that the unit is designed to be
mounted in a window or through a wall, which excludes portable ACs and
dehumidifiers. DOE suggested in the June 2015 RFI that explicitly
excluding other products was unnecessary because of the distinction
based on mounting. 80 FR 34843, 34845 (June 18, 2015). AHAM agreed that
the room AC definition need not be updated to explicitly exclude other
products and further suggested that adding these exclusions would be
confusing. (AHAM, June 2015 RFI, No. 5 at p. 2) General Electric
Appliances (GE) supported AHAM's comments. (GE, June 2015 RFI, No. 6 at
p. 1) \15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ GE stated that it supports the comments submitted by AHAM
in response to the June 2015 RFI in their entirety and adopted them
by reference.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on DOE's considerations in the June 2015 RFI, and given that
no commenters objected to DOE's suggestion, DOE does not propose to add
exclusions for other consumer products in the room AC definition.
In the June 2015 RFI, DOE also noted that some room ACs may have
other functions beyond the cooling, heating, and ventilation functions
currently specified in the room AC definition. These additional
functions could include air circulation, where air from within the room
is circulated without bringing air from the outside into the room; and
air cleaning, where electrostatic filtration, ultraviolet radiation, or
ozone generators clean the air as it circulates through the unit. 80 FR
34843, 34845 (June 18, 2015). DOE received no comments related to the
inclusion of other functions in the room AC definition in response to
the June 2015 RFI. DOE understands that these functions do not
represent the key functionality of a room AC, and therefore is not
proposing that these functions be addressed in the room AC definition
at this time.
DOE proposes to add the term ``cooled'' to the room AC definition,
so that it refers to a system that ``. . . delivers cooled, conditioned
air to an enclosed space . . .'' (emphasis added). DOE believes that
this revised wording would better represent the key function of a room
AC, and would avoid any potential for the room AC definition to cover
other indoor air quality systems that could be described as
``conditioning'' the air, but that would not be appropriately included
within the scope of coverage of a room AC.
Additionally, as described previously, the current definition of
room AC specifies that it includes a prime source of refrigeration. DOE
contends that using the word ``prime'' to describe the source of
refrigeration in the current definition is extraneous and could be
construed as referring to a ``primary'' refrigeration system, a
distinction that could inadvertently exclude future products that
implement a different technology as the primary source of air
conditioning, while implementing a refrigeration loop as the
``secondary'' means of cooling or heating. Primary and secondary means
of conditioning air are not uncommon in certain refrigeration products
and chiller systems; in fact, some room ACs with heating functionality
implement a resistance heater as a supplemental form of heating to the
primary heat pump, for use under extreme temperature conditions. DOE
also notes that the recently codified portable AC definition was not
limited to products with a prime source of refrigeration. For these
reasons, DOE proposes to remove the word ``prime'' from the room AC
definition.
DOE proposes to incorporate by reference ASHRAE Standard 16 and
ANSI/AHAM RAC-1. In particular, Section 3 of ASHRAE Standard 16-2016
contains several definitions for terms defined in EPCA and DOE
regulations: Room air conditioner, packaged terminal air conditioner,
and packaged terminal heat pump. Where there is a conflict with the
EPCA definition, the EPCA definition controls. DOE elsewhere proposes
general language to make clear that regulatory text drafted by DOE
takes precedence over conflicting language in a document incorporated
by reference. Therefore, DOE proposes to include a statement in new
Section 0 ``Incorporation by Reference,'' in appendix F as follows:
``If there is any conflict between any industry standard(s) and this
appendix, follow the language of the test procedure in this appendix,
disregarding the conflicting industry standard language.''
DOE also proposes to reorganize the room AC definition to improve
its readability. As noted above, the minor editorial revisions and
specifications discussed in this section are not intended to modify the
scope of the room AC definition.
In summary, DOE proposes to modify the room AC definition in 10 CFR
430.2 to read as follows:
``Room air conditioner means a window-mounted or through-the-wall-
mounted encased assembly, other than a `packaged terminal air
conditioner,' that delivers cooled, conditioned air to an enclosed
space, and is powered by single-phase electric current. It includes a
source of refrigeration and may include additional means for
ventilating and heating.
DOE requests comment on the proposed amendments to the room AC
definition in 10 CFR 430.2.
DOE also proposes to further specify the scope of coverage of
appendix F by adding a new beginning section stating that appendix F
covers the test requirements used to measure the energy performance of
room ACs. In doing so, DOE would clearly limit the scope of products
tested in accordance with appendix F, and would harmonize appendix F
with test procedures for other similar covered products, which also
include similar introductory statements of scope.
DOE requests comment on the proposed new beginning section to
appendix F that would explicitly state the scope of coverage.
B. Industry Test Standards
The DOE room AC test procedure in appendix F references the
following two industry standards as the basis of the cooling mode test:
ANSI/AHAM RAC-
[[Page 35706]]
1-2008 and ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2009. ANSI/AHAM RAC-1-2008 provides
the specific test conditions and associated tolerances, while ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 16-2009 describes the test setup, instrumentation and
procedures used in the DOE test procedure. The cooling capacity,
efficiency metric, and other indicators are then calculated based on
the results obtained through the application of these test methods,
described in appendix F and 10 CFR 430.23(f).
New versions of ANSI/AHAM RAC-1 and ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16 have
been released since the publication of the current DOE test procedure.
DOE assessed the updated versions of these standards to determine if
any updates to the DOE test procedure were warranted.
1. ANSI/AHAM RAC-1
The cooling mode test in appendix F is conducted in accordance with
the testing conditions, methods, and calculations in Sections 4, 5,
6.1, and 6.5 of ANSI/AHAM RAC-1-2008, as summarized in Table III-1.
Table III-1--Summary of ANSI/AHAM RAC-1-2008 Sections Referenced in
Appendix F
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ANSI/AHAM RAC-1-2008 Section Description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4...................................... General test requirements,
including power supply and
test tolerances
5...................................... Test conditions and
requirements for a standard
measurement test
6.1.................................... Determination of cooling
capacity in British thermal
units per hour (Btu/h)
6.5.................................... Determination of electrical
input in watts (W)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since DOE last revised its room AC test procedure in 2011, ANSI/
AHAM RAC-1 has been updated and the current standard was released in
2015 as ANSI/AHAM RAC-1-2015, ``Room Air Conditioners'' (ANSI/AHAM RAC-
1-2015).
In the August 2017 RFI, DOE asserted that the updates to ANSI/AHAM
RAC-1 appear to provide added specificity but would not substantively
impact the results of DOE's cooling mode test. Specifically, ANSI/AHAM
RAC-1-2015 introduced new provisions for the measurement of standby and
off mode power in Section 6.3, as well as the calculations for annual
energy consumption and CEER in Sections 6.4-6.8. Because those updates
do not impact the sections relevant to appendix F, DOE noted that it
expects that updating the references to ANSI/AHAM RAC-1-2015 in
appendix F would not substantively affect test results or test burden.
82 FR 36349, 36353 (Aug. 4, 2017).
Friedrich Air Conditioning (Friedrich) and AHAM supported updating
the reference to ANSI/AHAM RAC-1-2015. (Friedrich, No. 2 at p. 6; AHAM,
No. 3 at p. 6) AHAM encouraged DOE to limit any revisions to the room
AC test procedure to updating the referenced industry test methods to
the most recent versions. (AHAM, No. 3 at p. 2)
Although ANSI/AHAM RAC-1-2015 maintains the same general
organization as ANSI/AHAM RAC-1-2008, ANSI/AHAM RAC-1-2015 adds test
requirements and conditions for standby and off mode, and heating mode
in sections 4 and 5, respectively. Because the DOE test procedure
already addressed standby and off mode testing prior to their inclusion
in the latest version of the ANSI/AHAM RAC standard and the DOE test
procedure does not address heating mode, which is now included in ANSI/
AHAM RAC-1-2015, and to avoid confusion regarding the appropriate
applicability of ANSI/AHAM RAC, DOE proposes to update the existing
references to Sections 4 and 5 of ANSI/AHAM RAC-1-2008 with references
to only to the cooling mode-specific subsections of ANSI/AHAM RAC-1-
2015: Sections 4.1, 4.2, 5.2.1.1, and 5.2.4.
DOE also notes that the provisions in ANSI/AHAM RAC-1-2015 for
measuring electrical power input appear in Section 6.2, rather than
Section 6.5 of ANSI/AHAM RAC-1-2008. To reflect this change in section
numbers, DOE proposes to update appendix F to reference Section 6.2 of
ANSI/AHAM RAC-1-2015 to determine the electrical power input in cooling
mode. Because there is no change in substance, simply adjusting the
section number cannot affect the test conduct, burden, or results.
DOE requests comment on the proposal to incorporate by reference
ANSI/AHAM RAC-1-2015 to adjust the section references in appendix F to
limit references to cooling mode-specific sections (by excluding
standby, off mode, and heat mode sections), and to update the section
reference for measuring electrical power input.
2. ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16
Appendix F currently references the 1983 version of ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 16, which was reaffirmed in 2009, for cooling mode temperature
conditions, methods, and calculations. ANSI/AHAM RAC-1-2015 also
references the 1983 version of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16 reaffirmed in
2009.
In the August 2017 RFI, DOE noted that a new version of ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 16, published in 2016 (ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2016). ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 16-2016 made a number of updates to the industry
standard, including an air-enthalpy test approach as an alternative to
the calorimeter approach, heating mode testing, additional
clarification on placement of air samplers and thermocouples, stability
requirement definitions, and new figures for additional tests and to
also improve previous figures. The general cooling mode methodology,
however, remains unchanged. 82 FR 36349, 36353 (Aug. 4, 2017). The
addition of the air-enthalpy approach provides more flexibility in
conducting the tests, and the heating mode test is based on the tests
previously included in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 58-1986 ``Method of Testing
for Rating Room Air Conditioner and Packaged Terminal Air Conditioner
Heating Capacity.''
AHAM supported updating appendix F to reference ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 16-2016, excluding the adoption of Sections 7.1(b)-(d), which
contain the air-enthalpy method and Section 7.1.2, which contains the
heating mode test). (AHAM, No. 3 at pp. 6-7) AHAM suggested that ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 16-2016 provides additional clarification on placement
of air samplers and thermocouples, adds stability requirement
definitions, adds new figures for additional tests, and fixes old
figures. (Id.) DOE recognizes that the general calorimeter test
methodology is unchanged in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2016 and has
tentatively determined that the additional detail and clarifying
updates would improve the repeatability and reproducibility of test
results. First, ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2016 provides best practices
for thermocouple and air sampler placement, recognizing that the unique
characteristics of each test chamber will result in particular air flow
and temperature gradients in the chamber, influenced by the interaction
of the reconditioning equipment and the test unit. These practices
address the distances for placing the air sampler from the unit
discharge points and thermocouple spacing on the air sampling device.
Second, Figure 1 and Figure 2 of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16 are also
updated with additional details and references. Third, Section 5 of
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2016 includes additional provisions regarding
instrument calibration and accuracy.
[[Page 35707]]
Fourth, ANSI/ASHRARE Standard 16-2016 requires measuring data at more
frequent intervals to minimize the sensitivity of the final average
value to variations in individual data points, resulting in a more
repeatable and reproducible test procedure. DOE expects that requiring
more frequent data measurements will have minimal impact on testing
burden because most testing laboratories are already using a data
acquisition system that has the capability to take more frequent
measurements. For these reasons, DOE contends that the improvements in
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2016 warrant inclusion in the updates to
appendix F.
DOE requests comment on the proposal to incorporate relevant
sections of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2016 into appendix F.
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2016 also updates requirements for the
accuracy of instruments. The 2009 reaffirmation of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
16 requires, in section 5.4.2, accuracy to 0.5 percent of
the quantity measured for instruments used for measuring all electrical
inputs to the calorimeter compartments. ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2016,
in section 5.6.2, includes more specific language (e.g., explicitly
mentioning the power input to the test unit, heaters, and other cooling
load contributors). To ensure that the electrical input for all key
equipment is properly measured, DOE proposes to incorporate these
requirements and maintain the requirement of accuracy to 0.5 percent of the quantity measured for instruments used for
measuring all electrical inputs, to the test unit, all reconditioning
equipment, and any other equipment that operates within the calorimeter
walls.
DOE requests comment on the proposal to incorporate the
requirements of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2016 while maintaining that an
accuracy of 0.5 percent of the quantity measured is
applicable to all devices measuring electrical input for the room AC
test procedure.
3. ANSI/ASHRAE Standards 41.1, 41.2, 41.3, 41.6, and 41.11
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2016 references certain industry standards
in specifying certain test conditions and measurement procedures. DOE
is also proposing to incorporate those industry standards specified in
the relevant sections of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2016. Specifically,
DOE is proposing to incorporate by reference: ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
41.1-2013, ``Standard Method for Temperature Measurement, as referenced
in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2016 section 5.1.1 for all temperature
measurements except for dew-point temperature; ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
41.2-1987 (RA 1992), ``Standard Methods for Laboratory Airflow
Measurement,'' as referenced in Section 5.5.1 of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
16-2016 for airflow measurements; ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.3-2014,
``Standard Methods for Pressure Measurement,'' as referenced in section
5.2.5 of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2016 for the prescribed use of
pressure measurement instruments; ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.6-2014,
``Standard Method for Humidity Measurement,'' as referenced in section
5.1.2 of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2016 for measuring dew-point
temperatures using hygrometers; and ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.11-2014,
``Standard Methods for Power Measurement,'' as referenced in section
5.6.4 of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2016 regarding the use and application
of electrical instruments during tests. Incorporating these standards
will clarify which versions of the standards are required to conduct
tests according to the procedure in appendix F.
DOE requests comment on the proposal to incorporate ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 41.1-2013, ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.2-1987 (RA 1992), ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 41.3-2014, ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.6-2014, and ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 41.11-2014 in appendix F.
C. Variable-Speed Room Air Conditioner Test Procedure
Historically, room ACs have been designed using a single-speed
compressor, which operates at full cooling capacity while the
compressor is on. To match the cooling load of the space, which in most
cases is less than the full cooling power of the compressor, a single-
speed compressor cycles on and off. This cycling behavior introduces
inefficiencies due to the surge in power draw at the beginning of each
``on'' cycle, before the compressor reaches steady-state performance.
Variable-speed room ACs became available on the U.S. market in 2018.
These units employ an inverter compressor that can reduce its speed to
match the observed cooling load. Accordingly, a variable-speed
compressor runs continuously, adjusting its speed up or down as
required, thereby avoiding compressor cycling.
The current DOE test procedure measures the performance of a room
AC while operating under a full cooling load; i.e., the compressor is
operated continuously in its ``on'' state. As a result, the DOE test
does not capture any inefficiencies due to compressor cycling.
Consequently, the efficiency gains that can be achieved by variable-
speed room ACs due to the avoidance of cycling losses are not measured
by the current test procedure. DOE proposes to amend its room AC test
procedure to include a methodology for determining and applying a
``performance adjustment factor'' for variable-speed room ACs to
reflect the avoidance of cycling losses that would be experienced in a
representative consumer installation.
DOE conducted investigative testing comparing the performance of a
variable-speed room AC with a single-speed room AC under reduced
cooling load conditions. DOE installed each room AC in a calorimeter
test chamber, set the unit thermostat to 80 degrees Fahrenheit
([deg]F), and applied a range of fixed cooling loads to the indoor
chamber.16 17 The calorimeter chamber was configured so that
the indoor chamber temperature could vary, thereby allowing the test
unit to maintain the target indoor chamber temperature by adjusting its
cooling operation in response to the changing temperature of the indoor
chamber.\18\ Figure III-1 shows the efficiency gains and losses for the
range of reduced cooling loads tested for each unit, relative to the
performance of each unit as tested using appendix F under a full
cooling load.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ A cooling load is ``applied'' by adjusting and fixing the
rate of heat added to the indoor test chamber to a level at or below
that of the nominal cooling capacity of the test unit.
\17\ This approach aims to represent a consumer installation in
which the amount of heat added to a room may be less than the rated
cooling capacity of the room AC (e.g., electronics or lighting
turned off, people or pets leaving the room, and external factors
such as heat transfer through walls and windows reducing with
outdoor temperature).
\18\ DOE notes that this test chamber configuration differs from
the configuration used in appendix F. Appendix F uses a constant-
temperature configuration, in which the indoor chamber temperature
is held fixed (i.e., the indoor temperature does not drop while the
room AC is operational).
\19\ For single-speed room ACs under appendix F, the thermostat
is typically set as low as possible to ensure that the unit does not
cycle on and off during the cooling mode test period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 35708]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP11JN20.000
In Figure III-1, the distance of each data point from the x-axis
represents the change in efficiency relative to the full-load
efficiency for each unit. (The data points at 100-percent cooling load
correspond to the appendix F test conditions.) The single-speed room AC
efficiency decreases in correlation with a reduction in cooling load,
reflecting cycling losses that become relatively larger as the cooling
load decreases. In contrast, the efficiency of the variable-speed room
AC increases as the cooling load decreases, reflecting the lack of
cycling losses and inherent improvements in compressor efficiency
associated with lower compressor speeds. These results demonstrate that
the current test procedure does not account for significant efficiency
gains that variable-speed room ACs can achieve under reduced
temperature conditions.
1. Methodology
To measure the efficiency gains for variable-speed room ACs that
are not captured by the current DOE test procedure, DOE considered the
alternate test procedure provided in the LG Waiver and the Grant of
Midea Interim Waiver (collectively, ``the waivers'') for specified
basic models of variable-speed room ACs. 84 FR 20111 (May 8, 2019) and
84 FR 68159 (December 13, 2019). The alternate test procedure provides
a methodology for obtaining a CEER value by adjusting the CEER value as
tested at the 95 [deg]F test condition according to appendix F using a
``performance adjustment factor'' (PAF).
Conceptually, the approach for variable-speed room ACs involves
measuring performance over a range of four test conditions with fixed
compressor speeds, which collectively comprise representative use.
These temperature conditions were derived from the DOE test procedure
for central ACs with variable-speed compressors and include three
reduced-temperature test conditions--under which variable speed room
ACs perform more efficiently than single-speed room ACs--and the test
condition specified in the current test procedure. The single-speed
room AC test procedure, however, does not factor in the reduced-
temperature test conditions under which single-speed units also will
perform more efficiently (although not as well as variable-speed room
ACs). As a result, comparing variable-speed performance at all test
conditions against a single-speed unit at the highest-temperature test
condition would not yield a fair comparison. The PAF represents the
average relative benefit of variable-speed over single-speed across the
whole range of test conditions. It is applied to the measured variable-
speed room AC performance only at the high-temperature test condition
to provide a comparison to the single-speed existing CEER metric based
on representative use.
The steps for determining a variable-speed room AC's PAF are
summarized as follows:
Measure the capacity and energy consumption of the sample
unit at the single test condition used for single-speed room ACs (95
[deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature), with the compressor speed fixed
at the maximum (full) speed.
Measure the capacity and energy consumption of the sample
unit at three additional test conditions (92 [deg]F, 87 [deg]F, and 82
[deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature),\20\ with compressor speed fixed
at full, intermediate, and minimum (low) speed, respectively.\21\ Using
theoretically determined adjustment factors,\22\ calculate the
equivalent performance of a single-speed room AC with the same cooling
capacity and electrical power input at the 95 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor
temperature, with no cycling losses (i.e., a ``theoretical comparable
single-speed'' room AC) for each of the three test conditions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ The additional reduced-temperature conditions are described
further in section III.C.2 of this document.
\21\ The compressor speeds are described further in section
III.C.3 of this document.
\22\ These adjustment factors are described further in section
III.C.4 of this document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Calculate the annual energy consumption in cooling mode at
each of the four cooling mode test conditions for a variable-speed room
AC, as well as for a theoretical comparable single-speed room AC with
no cycling losses. This theoretical single-speed room AC would perform
the same as the variable-speed test unit at the 95 [deg]F test
[[Page 35709]]
condition, but perform differently at the other test conditions.
Calculate an individual CEER value at each of the four
cooling mode test conditions for the variable-speed room AC, as well as
for a theoretical comparable single-speed room AC with no cycling
losses.
Using cycling loss factors derived from an industry test
procedure,\23\ calculate an adjusted CEER value at each of the four
cooling mode test conditions for a theoretical comparable single-speed
room AC, which includes cycling losses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ The derivation of these cycling loss factors is described
in more detail in section III.C.5 of this document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using weighting factors \24\ representing the fraction of
time experienced at each test condition in representative real-world
operation, calculate a weighted-average CEER value (reflecting the
weighted-average performance across the four test conditions) for the
variable-speed room AC, as well as for a theoretical comparable single-
speed room AC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ These ``fractional temperature bin'' weighting factors are
described in more detail in section III.C.6 of this document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using these weighted-average CEER values for the variable-
speed room AC and a theoretical comparable single-speed room AC,
calculate the PAF as the percent improvement of the weighted-average
CEER value of the variable-speed room AC compared to a theoretical
comparable single-speed room AC.\25\ This PAF represents the
improvement resulting from the implementation of a variable-speed
compressor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ The performance adjustment factor is described in more
detail in section III.C.7 of this document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE's proposed approach to addressing the performance improvements
associated with variable-speed room ACs is consistent with the test
procedures required in the waivers. The following sections of this
document describe each aspect of the proposal in greater detail.
2. Test Conditions
As discussed previously, variable-speed room ACs provide improved
performance at reduced cooling loads by reducing the compressor speed
to match the load, thereby avoiding compressor cycling and associated
cycling inefficiencies. DOE recognizes that throughout the cooling
season, room ACs operate under various outdoor temperature conditions.
DOE also asserts that these varying outdoor conditions present a range
of reduced cooling loads in the conditioned space, under which a
variable-speed room AC would perform more efficiently than a
theoretical comparable single-speed room AC.
To measure this improved performance, DOE proposes a test procedure
for variable-speed room ACs that adds three test conditions (92 [deg]F,
87 [deg]F, and 82 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature) to the current
95 [deg]F, consistent with the test conditions in the waivers. DOE
notes that these temperatures represent potential outdoor temperature
conditions between the current 95 [deg]F test condition and the indoor
setpoint of 80 [deg]F (below which no active cooling would be
necessary). These additional test conditions are also consistent with
the representative temperatures for bin numbers 6, 5, and 4 in Table 19
of DOE's test procedure for central ACs at appendix M.
DOE requests comment on the proposal to adopt for all variable-
speed room ACs these additional test conditions from test procedures
required in the waivers for variable-speed room ACs.
3. Variable-Speed Compressor Operation
The DOE test procedure maintains fixed test conditions in the
indoor chamber and requires configuring the test unit settings to
achieve maximum cooling capacity. As a result, units under test
constantly operate at their full cooling capacity, even at the reduced
outdoor temperature test conditions described in section III.C.2 of
this document, without the compressor cycling (for single-speed units)
or compressor speed reduction (for variable-speed units) that would be
expected under real-world operation. Therefore, DOE proposes additional
test procedure adjustments, beyond reduced outdoor temperature test
conditions, to fully represent the potential efficiency gains
associated with variable-speed room ACs at reduced cooling loads.
As described previously, in a typical consumer installation,
reduced outdoor temperatures would result in reduced indoor cooling
loads. A test that would provide constant reduced cooling loads could
be considered, but as discussed below in section III.E.1.e of this
document, DOE concludes such a test would not be feasible at this time.
Therefore, to better represent what would occur in typical consumer
usage at reduced outdoor temperatures, DOE proposes to test variable-
speed room ACs by fixing a particular compressor speed at each of the
outdoor test conditions, as described further in the following
sections.
a. Compressor Speeds
To ensure the compressor speeds are representative of actual speeds
at the expected cooling loads at each of the outdoor test conditions,
DOE proposes to require that the compressor speed be set to full speed
at the two highest outdoor temperature test conditions (based on test
AFull at 95 [deg]F and test BFull at 92 [deg]F),
at intermediate compressor speed at the 87 [deg]F test condition (based
on test EInt), and at low compressor speed at the 82 [deg]F
test condition (based on test DLow), consistent with the
tests and requirements in Table 8 of the 2017 version of Air-
Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) Standard 210/
240, (AHRI Standard 210/240), ``Performance Rating of Unitary Air-
conditioning & Air-source Heat Pump Equipment,'' which specifies
representative test conditions and the associated compressor speeds for
variable-speed unitary air conditioners. DOE also proposes to add
definitions for ``full compressor speed'', ``intermediate compressor
speed'', and ``low compressor speed'', which specify how each speed
would be determined, as described further in section III.D of this
document.
DOE requests comment on the proposal to require fixing the
compressor speed settings for variable-speed room ACs to full speed at
the 95 [deg]F and 92 [deg]F test conditions, intermediate speed at the
87 [deg]F test condition, and low speed at the 82 [deg]F test
condition, in accordance with the requirements in Table 8 of AHRI
Standard 210/240.
b. Instructions for Fixing Compressor Speeds
DOE understands that setting and maintaining a specific room AC
compressor speed is not typically possible without special control
instructions from manufacturers. Therefore, because maintaining fixed
compressor speeds is critical to the repeatability of the variable-
speed room AC test procedure, DOE proposes that manufacturers provide
in each certification report for a variable-speed room AC basic model
all necessary instructions to maintain the compressor speeds required
for each test condition when testing that basic model. These include
the compressor frequency set points at each test condition,
instructions necessary to maintain the compressor speeds required for
each test condition, and the control settings used for the variable
components.
DOE requests comment on the proposal to require that manufacturers
provide in their certification reports the
[[Page 35710]]
control settings for each variable-speed room AC basic model required
to achieve the fixed compressor speed for each test condition.
c. Boost Compressor Speed
DOE is aware that a variable-speed room AC's full compressor speed
may not be its fastest speed. In particular, the fastest compressor
speed may be one that is automatically initiated and used for a brief
period of time to rapidly reduce the indoor temperature to within
typical range of the set point. This compressor speed is referred to as
``Boost Compressor Speed'' in AHRI Standard 210/240 and is defined as a
speed faster than full compressor speed, at which the unit will operate
to achieve increased capacity. DOE understands that boost compressor
speed operation is typically limited in duration and would not
significantly contribute to annual energy consumption, as manufacturers
have described it as used for limited periods of time on occasions
where the indoor room temperature is far out of normal operating range
of the set point. Once the indoor room temperature is within the
typical operating range of the setpoint, the room AC returns to the
``Full Compressor Speed,'' as defined in AHRI Standard 210/240. AHRI
Standard 210/240 does not measure boost compressor speed energy use,
and in a final rule published on June 8, 2016, DOE declined to include
provisions for measuring boost compressor speed energy use in the
central AC test procedure. 81 FR 36992, 37029. Accordingly, DOE does
not propose to measure boost compressor speed performance and energy
consumption in appendix F at this time because of the expected
insignificant impact on annual energy consumption and performance, to
harmonize with the industry approach for variable-speed compressor
testing, and because DOE has previously opted to forgo including it for
other air conditioning products. Id.
DOE requests comment on the proposal not to address boost
compressor speed performance and energy consumption in appendix F at
this time.
4. Capacity and Electrical Power Adjustment Factors
In the proposed approach, a capacity adjustment factor is used to
estimate the increased cooling capacity of a room AC at lower outdoor
temperature conditions, using a linear extrapolation based on the
measured capacity at the 95 [deg]F test condition. Similarly, an
electrical power adjustment factor is used to estimate the reduced
electrical power draw of a room AC at lower outdoor temperature
conditions, using a linear extrapolation based on the measured
electrical power draw at the 95 [deg]F test condition. To determine
these two adjustment factors, DOE used the MarkN model to model room AC
performance at reduced outdoor temperature conditions. These modeling
results suggested linear capacity and electrical power adjustment
factors of 0.0099 per [deg]F and 0.0076 per [deg]F, respectively.
To confirm the validity of these modeled adjustment factors, DOE
tested a sample of 14 single-speed room ACs at a range of reduced
outdoor temperature test conditions (92 [deg]F, 87 [deg]F, and 82
[deg]F) and compared the predicted values of cooling capacity and
electrical power with the measured values at each test condition. Table
III-2 and Table III-3 summarize the results for cooling capacity and
electrical power, respectively.
Table III-2--Comparison Between Modeled and Tested Cooling Capacity
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
92 [deg]F 87 [deg]F 82 [deg]F
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit Model (Btu/ Tested (Btu/ Model (Btu/ Tested (Btu/ Model (Btu/ Tested (Btu/
h) h) Diff. (%) h) h) Diff. (%) h) h) Diff. (%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.................................. 5,890 5,850 -0.6 6,170 6,070 -1.8 6,460 6,300 -2.5
2.................................. 10,920 10,810 -0.9 11,440 11,060 -3.4 11,970 11,330 -5.4
3.................................. 12,160 12,340 +1.5 12,740 12,880 +1.1 13,330 13,320 -0.1
5.................................. 12,430 12,320 -0.9 13,030 12,640 -3.0 13,620 12,890 -5.7
6.................................. 8,660 8,490 -2.0 9,070 8,570 -5.9 9,490 8,680 -9.3
7.................................. 12,400 12,180 -1.8 13,000 12,310 -5.6 13,590 12,360 -10.0
8.................................. 5,360 5,410 +0.8 5,620 5,590 -0.6 5,880 5,770 -1.9
9.................................. 5,760 5,640 -2.0 6,030 5,850 -3.2 6,310 6,000 -5.3
10................................. 5,440 5,530 +1.6 5,700 5,730 +0.6 5,960 5,790 -3.0
11................................. 6,520 6,410 -1.7 6,830 6,490 -5.2 7,140 6,520 -9.6
12................................. 6,350 6,320 -0.5 6,650 6,500 -2.4 6,960 6,820 -2.0
13................................. 8,150 8,180 +0.4 8,540 8,530 -0.1 8,930 9,080 +1.6
14................................. 8,830 8,630 -2.3 9,260 8,960 -3.2 9,680 9,090 -6.5
15................................. 21,860 22,440 +2.6 22,920 23,270 +1.5 23,970 24,260 +1.2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average............................ ........... ........... -0.4 ........... ........... -2.2 ........... ........... -4.2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Unit 4 was not included because it is a variable-speed unit and the modeling factors are only applicable to single-speed units that do not adjust
performance at reduced outdoor temperature conditions.
Table III-3--Comparison Between Modeled and Tested Electrical Power Draw
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
92 [deg]F 87 [deg]F 82 [deg]F
Unit --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Model (W) Tested (W) Diff. (%) Model (W) Tested (W) Diff. (%) Model (W) Tested (W) Diff. (%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.................................. 414 412 +0.6 398 393 +1.3 382 375 +1.9
2.................................. 894 887 +0.8 859 846 +1.6 825 807 +2.2
3.................................. 989 984 +0.5 950 938 +1.3 912 895 +2.0
5.................................. 1,080 1,073 +0.7 1,038 1,024 +1.4 996 978 +1.8
6.................................. 705 701 +0.6 677 668 +1.4 650 636 +2.2
7.................................. 1,116 1,106 +0.9 1,073 1,046 +2.6 1,030 993 +3.7
8.................................. 433 430 +0.7 416 412 +1.0 399 394 +1.3
9.................................. 435 430 +1.1 418 413 +1.2 401 392 +2.3
10................................. 435 435 +0.2 418 417 +0.2 401 403 -0.4
11................................. 537 535 +0.5 517 510 +1.3 496 483 +2.6
12................................. 514 514 0.0 494 492 +0.4 474 470 +0.9
13................................. 643 638 +0.8 618 610 +1.3 593 584 +1.5
[[Page 35711]]
14................................. 647 646 +0.2 622 615 +1.1 597 585 +1.9
15................................. 2,074 2,068 +0.3 1,993 2,006 -0.6 1,912 1,935 -1.2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average............................ ........... ........... +0.6 ........... ........... +1.1 ........... ........... +1.6
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Unit 4 was not included because it is a variable-speed unit and the modeling factors are only applicable to single-speed units that do not adjust
performance at reduced outdoor temperature conditions.
The results in Table III-2 generally indicate close agreement
(i.e., less than 5 percent difference on average) between the modeled
cooling capacity (based on an adjustment factor of 0.0099 per [deg]F)
and the measured capacity at each test condition. On average, the
tested cooling capacity was within 0.4 percent of the modeled value at
the 92 [deg]F test condition, 2.2 percent at the 87 [deg]F test
condition, and 4.2 percent at the 82 [deg]F test condition.
Similarly, the results in Table III-3 generally indicate close
agreement between the modeled electrical power draw (based on an
adjustment factor of 0.0076 per [deg]F) and the measured electrical
power draw at each test condition. On average, the tested electrical
power draw was within 0.6 percent of the modeled value at the 92 [deg]F
test condition, 1.1 percent at the 87 [deg]F test condition, and 1.6
percent at the 82 [deg]F test condition.
DOE has tentatively determined that the average difference of less
than 5 percent between the modeled values and the experimental values
confirms the validity of these modeled adjustment factors. Therefore,
DOE proposes using the modeled adjustment factors of 0.0099 per [deg]F
and 0.0076 per [deg]F for capacity and electrical power, respectively,
to calculate the theoretical comparable single-speed room AC
performance at reduced outdoor temperature test conditions.
DOE requests comment on the proposal to use the capacity and
electrical power adjustment factors of 0.0099 per [deg]F and 0.0076 per
[deg]F, respectively.
5. Cycling Loss Factors
To represent the cycling losses of a theoretical comparable single-
speed room AC at reduced outdoor temperature test conditions and
expected reduced cooling loads, DOE identified cycling loss factors to
apply to the interim CEER values at each of the four cooling mode test
conditions for a theoretical comparable single-speed room AC. Table
III-4 shows the proposed cycling loss factors for each of the four
proposed test conditions.
Table III-4--Proposed Cycling Loss Factors
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Evaporator inlet air, [deg]F Condenser inlet air, [deg]F
Test condition ---------------------------------------------------------------- Cycling loss
Dry bulb Wet bulb Dry bulb Wet bulb factor
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Test Condition 1................ 80 67 95 75 1.0
Test Condition 2................ 80 67 92 72.5 0.971
Test Condition 3................ 80 67 87 69 0.923
Test Condition 4................ 80 67 82 65 0.875
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
These cycling loss factors are based on the default cycling loss
factors in Section 11.2 of AHRI Standards 210/240. The cycling loss
factor at the 82 [deg]F test condition for a theoretical comparable
single-speed room AC is consistent with 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. The remaining cycling loss factors for the other test conditions
are consistent with linear interpolation between the cycling loss
factor of 0.875 at the 82 [deg]F test condition and the cycling loss
factor of 1.0 at the 95 [deg]F test condition, at which no cycling is
expected.
DOE requests comment on the proposal to implement cycling loss
factors consistent with AHRI Standard 210/240 to represent the expected
performance of a theoretical comparable single-speed room AC at reduced
outdoor temperature test conditions.
6. Test Condition Weighting Factors
In the proposed approach, the four interim CEER values representing
each of the four cooling mode test conditions are combined, using four
weighting factors, into a single weighted-average CEER value. The
resulting weighted-average CEER value represents the weighted-average
performance across the range of outdoor test conditions. DOE calculated
weighting factors based on the fractional temperature bin hours in
Table 19 of DOE's test procedure for central ACs at appendix M. DOE
identified the fractional temperature bin hours representing the four
test conditions in the proposed approach, and normalized these four
values from appendix M so that they sum to 1.00.
Table III-5 shows the proposed weighting factors for each of the
four proposed test conditions.
Table III-5--Proposed Temperature Condition Weighting Factors
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Evaporator inlet air, [deg]F Condenser inlet air, [deg]F
Test condition ---------------------------------------------------------------- CEER weighting
Dry bulb Wet bulb Dry bulb Wet bulb factor
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Test Condition 1................ 80 67 95 75 0.05
Test Condition 2................ 80 67 92 72.5 0.16
[[Page 35712]]
Test Condition 3................ 80 67 87 69 0.31
Test Condition 4................ 80 67 82 65 0.48
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE requests comment on the proposed weighting factors associated
with each of the outdoor test conditions.
7. Performance Adjustment Factor
The final step in the proposed approach is to calculate the PAF,
representing the improvement over a theoretical comparable single-speed
room AC resulting from the implementation of a variable-speed
compressor. The PAF would be calculated as the percent improvement of
the weighted-average CEER value of the variable-speed room AC compared
to the weighted-average CEER value of a theoretical comparable single-
speed room AC under the four defined test conditions.
After calculating the PAF, it would be multiplied by the CEER value
of the variable-speed unit when tested at the 95 [deg]F test condition
according to appendix F, resulting in the final CEER metric for the
variable-speed room AC.
DOE expects that the variable-speed room AC CEER values would be
comparable to single-speed room AC CEER values as a result of applying
the adjustment factor to the variable-speed room AC CEER value
determined in accordance with the current single-speed test method in
appendix F. By adjusting the variable-speed room AC CEER values to be
comparable to single-speed room AC CEER values, consumers will have the
information they need to understand the relative efficiency of both
types of room AC.
DOE requests comment on the proposed calculations to determine a
PAF, which would adjust the CEER of a variable-speed room AC to
appropriately account for its efficiency improvements relative to a
theoretical comparable single-speed room AC under varying operating
conditions.
8. Air-Enthalpy Test Alternative
DOE recognizes the additional test burden associated with testing
variable-speed room ACs at multiple test conditions as proposed. In an
effort to minimize that additional test burden, the Grant of LG Interim
Waiver test procedure provided that LG could optionally test its
variable-speed room ACs using the air-enthalpy method. Following the
publication of the Grant of LG Interim Waiver, DOE conducted
investigative testing to further analyze the air-enthalpy method and
its suitability for testing room ACs. As described below, this testing
demonstrated that this method was unrepresentative and inconsistent,
and remedying these deficiencies would be unduly burdensome.
DOE tested nine room ACs according to the air-enthalpy procedure
prescribed by ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 37-2009, ``Methods of Testing for
Rating Electrically Driven Unitary Air-Conditioning and Heat Pump
Equipment.'' DOE constructed plenums to match the cross sectional area
of each room AC evaporator and condenser exhaust, with instrumented
ducts connected to each. A variable-speed fan at the end of each duct
was used to maintain a zero static pressure at the test unit exhaust.
Tests were conducted in accordance with the indoor and outdoor test
conditions specified in appendix F, and the instrumentation in the duct
measured the psychrometric characteristic of the air in addition to the
air flow rate to obtain the cooling capacity. To determine whether
there was reasonable correlation between the two sets of results and,
thus, whether the air-enthalpy procedure would be a viable alternative
approach, DOE compared the cooling capacities measured according to
this air-enthalpy method to the capacities obtained via the calorimeter
method currently specified in appendix F. Table III-6 shows the
measured cooling capacity and efficiency obtained for each of these
eight test units using the air-enthalpy and calorimeter methods, and
highlights the differences in results between the two approaches.
Table III-6--Cooling Capacity and Efficiency Using the Air-Enthalpy Method and the Calorimeter Method
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Calorimeter Air-enthalpy
Unit # Indoor air capacity (Btu/ capacity (Btu/ Capacity Calorimeter Air-enthalpy EER
flow (CFM) h) h) difference (%) EER (Btu/Wh) EER (Btu/Wh) difference (%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8....................................... 131 5,210 4,803 -7.8 11.8 10.6 -9.7
9....................................... 161 5,591 5,059 -9.5 12.6 11.3 -10.1
10...................................... 126 5,284 4,908 -7.1 11.9 10.9 -8.0
11...................................... 147 5,228 4,715 -9.8 10.8 9.7 -10.7
12...................................... 152 6,164 5,650 -8.3 11.7 10.6 -9.4
13...................................... 197 7,914 7,814 -1.3 12.0 11.8 -1.8
14...................................... 227 8,576 8,165 -4.8 13.0 12.4 -4.1
15...................................... 459 2,1233 2,1626 +1.8 10.0 10.1 +0.7
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The results in Table III-6 indicate a range of differences between
the air-enthalpy method and the calorimeter methods, for both cooling
capacity and efficiency, which appears to correlate with the evaporator
exhaust, or indoor, air flow rate from each unit. Five of the eight
units (Units 8 through 12) demonstrated relatively poor agreement
between the two methods, with an average decrease in cooling capacity
of 8.5 percent and an average decrease in efficiency of 9.4 percent
when using the air-enthalpy method. These units all had indoor air flow
rates at or below 161 cubic feet per minute (CFM). Conversely, the unit
with the largest air flow rate of 459 CFM (Unit 15) showed a small
increase in capacity and efficiency when tested using the air-enthalpy
method. The remaining two units (Units 13 and 14) had air flow rates
between 161 CFM and 459 CFM, and showed only a modest decrease of
[[Page 35713]]
less than 5 percent in both capacity and efficiency.
DOE asserts that these results depend on the measurement apparatus
available to the testing laboratory for the air-enthalpy method. DOE
understands that air-enthalpy test equipment currently used by testing
laboratories is not typically designed to accurately measure air
conditioning products with airflow rates lower than approximately 200
CFM because typical test equipment is optimized for larger air
conditioners with significantly higher airflow rates. The results for
Units 8 through 12 support this assertion: All of these had evaporator
airflows substantively below 200 CFM, and the performance for each unit
measured using the air-enthalpy and calorimeter approaches differed by
more than five percent on average. DOE is aware that air-enthalpy
equipment that is optimized to measure units with airflow between 50
and 500 CFM exists. However, such equipment may be costly to design,
develop, and produce, because it is not readily available and may
require custom manufacturing. In addition, the air-enthalpy method does
not measure any heat transfer within and through the unit chassis,
while the calorimeter test does. Because of the unrepresentative and
inconsistent results obtained with the air-enthalpy test equipment that
testing laboratories are likely to already own, as well as the higher
cost and limited availability of equipment that would be necessary to
obtain consistent results for all room ACs of differing airflow rates,
DOE contends that the air-enthalpy test method would be unduly
burdensome for testing laboratories to implement for room ACs at this
time. DOE further notes that, in the waivers, DOE did not allow the
air-enthalpy test method as an alternative to the calorimeter test
method due to the concerns outlined above. 84 FR 20111 (May 8, 2019),
84 FR 68159 (Dec. 13, 2019). Therefore, DOE is not proposing in this
NOPR to allow testing of variable-speed room ACs using the air-enthalpy
test method.
DOE seeks comment on the proposal to not include an optional
alternative air-enthalpy test method for variable-speed room ACs in
appendix F.
9. Product Specific Reporting Provisions
As described, the proposed amendment to Appendix F to test
variable-speed room ACs at multiple cooling mode test conditions would
require testing each unit with a fixed compressor speed at each test
condition. To ensure test reproducibility, DOE is proposing to require,
in 10 CFR 429.15, manufacturers to provide DOE all necessary
instructions to maintain the compressor speeds required for each test
condition for a variable-speed basic model, as additional product-
specific information pursuant to 10 CFR 429.12 (b)(13). DOE expects
that this requirement would add a de minimis incremental burden to the
existing reporting requirements.
DOE requests comment on the proposal to include in 10 CFR 429.15
compressor frequencies and control settings as additional product-
specific information for certification of each variable-speed room AC
basic model.
10. Estimated Annual Operating Cost Calculation
In conjunction with the proposed amendments for testing variable-
speed room ACs, DOE is proposing corresponding amendments to the
calculation that provides the basis of the annual energy consumption
and operating cost information presented to consumers on the
EnergyGuide Label. These changes would allow for an appropriate
comparison of the annual energy consumption and operating costs between
single-speed room ACs and variable-speed room ACs. As such, DOE
proposes that for variable-speed room ACs, the average annual energy
consumption used in calculating the estimated annual operating cost in
10 CFR 430.23(f) would be a weighted average of the annual energy
consumption at each of the four test conditions in newly added Table 1
of appendix F and the annual energy consumption in inactive mode or off
mode. DOE proposes, however, that the electrical power input reported
for variable-speed room ACs for purposes of certification in 10 CFR
429.15(b)(2) would be the value measured at the 95 [deg]F rating
condition, to maintain consistency with the cooling capacity measured
at the same condition.
DOE requests comment on the proposal to calculate estimated annual
operating cost for variable-speed room ACs using a weighted-average
annual energy consumption based on the four cooling mode test
conditions in the proposed, new Table 1 of appendix F. DOE also
requests comment on the proposal to report variable-speed room AC input
power for certification purposes using the value measured at the 95
[deg]F rating condition.
11. Potential Cost Impacts
The test procedure amendments proposed above would result in
additional test burden and cost for testing variable-speed room ACs,
mainly due to the additional time associated with testing cooling mode
performance of variable-speed room ACs under four total test
conditions, compared to the single cooling mode test currently required
in appendix F. Under the LG Waiver, LG is already testing its variable-
speed room ACs using the proposed approach and accordingly would incur
no additional cost due to the proposed test procedure amendments.
Likewise, under the Grant of Midea Interim Waiver, Midea is also
already testing its variable-speed room ACs using the proposed approach
and so would not incur any additional cost either due to the proposed
test procedure amendments. DOE is not aware of other manufacturers of
variable-speed room ACs, although the additional burden described above
would be applicable to any entities that begin manufacturing a
variable-speed room AC and introduce it to the U.S. market. Given that
variable-speed room ACs are not available in the U.S. market from any
other manufacturers besides LG and Midea, the proposed test procedure
amendments in this NOPR regarding variable-speed room ACs would not
result in any additional cost to manufacturers.
D. Definitions
DOE proposes to add a number of definitions to appendix F to
accompany the proposed amendments described in this document. None of
these proposed definitions would modify the current scope of covered
products. The following sections describe each proposed definition in
detail.
DOE proposes to define three key terms that currently appear in
Appendix F but have no definitions: cooling mode, cooling capacity, and
combined energy efficiency ratio. Although room ACs may sometimes
operate in other modes as discussed further in section III.E of this
proposed rule, the room AC CEER metric determined in appendix F is
based primarily on performance in cooling mode, and several of the
proposed amendments also reference ``cooling mode.'' DOE proposes to
establish the following definitions for cooling mode, cooling capacity,
and combined energy efficiency ratio in appendix F:
``Cooling mode'' means an active mode in which a room air
conditioner has activated the main cooling function according to the
thermostat or temperature sensor signal or switch (including remote
control).
``Cooling capacity'' means the amount of cooling, in Btu/h,
provided to an indoor conditioned space, determined in Section 4.1 of
appendix F.
``Combined energy efficiency ratio'' is the energy efficiency of a
room air conditioner as measured in Btu/Wh and
[[Page 35714]]
determined in Section 5.2.2 of appendix F for single-speed room air
conditioners and Section 5.3.12 of appendix F for variable-speed room
air conditioners.
To accompany the proposed amendments affecting variable-speed basic
models, DOE proposes to define single-speed and variable-speed room ACs
as follows:
``Single-speed room air conditioner'' means a type of room AC that
cannot automatically adjust the compressor speed based on detected
conditions.
``Variable-speed room air conditioner'' means a type of room AC
that can automatically adjust compressor speed based on detected
conditions.
In addition, DOE proposes to establish definitions for the three
compressor speeds required for variable-speed testing. DOE proposes to
refer to these compressor speeds as ``full,'' ``intermediate,'' and
``low'' based on the test procedure terminology of AHRI Standard 210/
240. The proposed definitions are as follows:
``Full compressor speed (full)'' means the compressor speed at
which the unit operates at full load test conditions, achieved by
following the instructions certified by the manufacturer.
``Intermediate compressor speed (intermediate)'' means a compressor
speed higher than the low compressor speed by one third of the
difference between low compressor speed and full compressor speed with
a tolerance of plus 5 percent (designs with non-discrete speed stages)
or the next highest inverter frequency step (designs with discrete
speed steps), achieved by following the instructions certified by the
manufacturer.
``Low compressor speed (low)'' means the compressor speed at which
the unit operates at low load test conditions, achieved by following
the instructions certified by the manufacturer, such that
Capacity4, the measured cooling capacity at test condition 4
in Table 1 of appendix F, is not less than 47 percent and not greater
than 57 percent of Capacity1, the measured cooling capacity
with the full compressor speed at test condition 1 in Table 1 of
appendix F.
DOE is proposing a definition for low compressor speed based on the
definition in AHRI Standard 210/240. To ensure that the low and
intermediate compressor speeds result in representative cooling
capacity under reduced loads, as explained in the following paragraphs,
DOE is additionally proposing that the low compressor speed definition
require that the test unit's measured cooling capacity at Test
Condition 4, specified in Table III-5 of this document, be not less
than 47 percent and not greater than 57 percent, of the measured
cooling capacity when operating at the full compressor speed at Test
Condition 1, also specified in Table III-5 of this document.
DOE developed this range based on the Building Load Calculation,
Equation 11.60, in AHRI Standard 210/240, which relates the building
load to an AC's full-load cooling capacity and outdoor temperature. DOE
adapted this calculation for the room AC test procedure by normalizing
Equation 11.60 so that full-load operation is assumed to occur at a 95
[deg]F outdoor temperature, consistent with the outdoor test condition
defined in the current room AC test procedure, rather than 98 [deg]F as
assumed by Equation 11.60. DOE used the normalized equation to
determine the representative cooling load at an outdoor temperature of
82 [deg]F as a percentage of the full-load cooling capacity at an
outdoor temperature of 95 [deg]F. Based on this analysis, an outdoor
temperature of 82 [deg]F would result in a cooling load of 57 percent
of full-load cooling capacity. Therefore, DOE proposes that the
representative cooling load at the low compressor speed and outdoor
temperature of 82 [deg]F (i.e. the temperature represented by Test
Condition 4 in Table III-5), is 57 percent of the unit's cooling
capacity when operating at 95 [deg]F (i.e., Test Condition 1 in Table
III-5).
DOE recognizes that variable-speed room ACs may use compressors
that vary their speed in discrete steps and may not be able to directly
operate at a speed that provides 57 percent cooling capacity precisely;
therefore, the defined cooling capacity associated with the low
compressor speed is best presented as a range rather than a single
value. DOE proposes that a 10-percent range would accommodate
compressors that vary their speed in discrete steps.
DOE further proposes using 57 percent cooling load as the upper
bound of the 10-percent range to define the cooling capacity associated
with the lower compressor speed (i.e., the range would be defined as 47
to 57 percent). The justification for using 57 percent as an upper
bound, rather than as a midpoint in the 10-percent range, is as
follows. Defining the upper bound of the 10-percent cooling load range
as 57 percent would ensure that a variable-speed room AC is capable of
matching the representative cooling load (57 percent of the maximum) at
the 82 [deg]F outdoor test 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, 52 to 62 percent
(with 57 percent as the midpoint), a variable-speed room AC could be
tested at 60 percent, for example, without demonstrating the capability
to maintain variable-speed performance down to 57 percent.
In summary, DOE proposes in newly added section 2.16 of appendix F
to define ``low compressor speed (low)'' as the compressor speed
specified by the manufacturer at which the unit operates at low load
test conditions, such that the measured cooling capacity at the 82
[deg]F outdoor test condition shall be no less than 47 percent and no
greater than 57 percent of the unit's cooling capacity when operating
at the 95 [deg]F test condition.
DOE requests comment on the proposal to add new definitions for
cooling mode, cooling capacity, combined energy efficiency ratio,
single-speed room air conditioner, variable-speed room air conditioner,
variable-speed compressor, full compressor speed (full), intermediate
compressor speed (intermediate), and low compressor speed (low) in
appendix F.
E. Active Mode Testing
The following sections describe proposed amendments and other
considerations regarding the active mode testing provisions of appendix
F.
1. Cooling Mode
a. General Test Approach
The current DOE room AC test procedure uses a calorimeter test
method to determine the cooling capacity and associated electrical
power input of a room AC. Under this approach, the test unit is
installed between two chambers, one representing the indoor side and
the other representing the outdoor side, which are both maintained at
constant conditions by reconditioning equipment. The room AC operates
in cooling mode, transferring heat from the indoor side to the outdoor
side, while the reconditioning equipment counteracts the effects of the
room AC to maintain constant test chamber conditions. The room AC
cooling capacity is determined by measuring the required energy inputs
to the reconditioning equipment.
In response to the June 2015 RFI, AHAM noted that it planned to
conduct a round-robin test to identify sources of potential variation
in the room AC test procedure. AHAM stated that because it believes
that the current room AC standards are stringent, and that slight
variation in the test procedure would
[[Page 35715]]
have a significant impact in meeting standards, any DOE test procedure
amendments should address potential sources of variation. (AHAM, June
2015 RFI, No. 5 at p. 5) In this NOPR, DOE is proposing various test
procedure modifications intended to improve repeatability and
reproducibility and mitigate potential areas of variation. While DOE
has not quantified the cost impacts of these proposed changes, based on
its analysis described in section III.L.1 of this document, DOE
believes that they would serve to reduce test burden by reducing the
potential need for tests to be re-run due to variation. DOE welcomes
AHAM's round-robin test data to identify areas of variation in the room
AC test procedure and encourages other interested parties to provide
comment and feedback on this issue.
b. Test Setup and Air Sampling
In the August 2017 RFI, DOE noted that Section 4.2.7 of ANSI/ASHRAE
16-2009, which is incorporated by reference in the DOE test procedure,
requires the calorimeter chamber conditions to be verified by air
sampled from a location that is representative of the temperatures
surrounding the unit and that simulate the conditions in which the unit
operates in the field. As DOE stated, there is no procedure to verify
whether the measured chamber temperature reading is representative of
conditions at the test unit condenser and evaporator inlet, which may
be affected by recirculation from the condenser and evaporator exhaust,
respectively, thereby potentially reducing test repeatability and
reproducibility. 82 FR 36349, 36353. In the August 2017 RFI, DOE
requested data on more specific requirements for air sampling devices
within the calorimeter test chambers to improve test repeatability. Id.
Friedrich asserted that the positioning of the air samplers impacts
test repeatability, especially for through-the-wall units which intake
and exhaust condenser air on the same plane. Friedrich recommended that
the air sampler measurements be verified using a thermocouple grid at
the evaporator and condenser air inlets. (Friedrich, No. 2 at p. 5)
AHAM stated that it does not currently have information that the
thermocouple placement as prescribed in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2009
affects test repeatability and suggested that a balanced temperature is
achieved throughout the calorimeter chamber. AHAM further noted that,
unlike in a psychrometric test approach, the current calorimeter test
approach takes into account any recirculation that would occur in the
field. (AHAM, No. 3 at p. 6)
DOE is aware that the size, capability, and orientation of
components within calorimeter test chambers may vary significantly, and
that third-party laboratories extensively analyze their chambers and
testing apparatus to maintain consistent and accurate air sampling
measurements. DOE also understands that temperature gradients and
unique airflow patterns can result from the interaction of a chamber
reconditioning apparatus and the room AC under test, and that these
interactions are particular to and dependent upon factors such as
chamber size and shape, chamber equipment arrangement, size of
reconditioning apparatus, and others, as noted in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
16-2016 Section 8.2.7. Therefore, DOE contends that universal
requirements for air sampling instrumentation and thermocouple
placement could potentially reduce test accuracy and reproducibility.
As discussed in section III.B.2 of this document, DOE is proposing to
update the reference to ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16 to the most current
2016 version, which includes additional clarification on best practices
for air sampler and thermocouple placement.
c. Air-Enthalpy Test
As discussed in section III.B.2 of this document, DOE is proposing
to use the calorimeter test method specified in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
16-2016 for determining the cooling mode performance in appendix F.
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2016 additionally contains an air-enthalpy test
method (also referred to as a psychrometric test method), in which a
technician places instruments in or near the evaporator air stream to
measure the rate of cooled air added to the conditioned space. In the
June 2015 RFI and the August 2017 RFI, DOE discussed the potential
differences in accuracy and test burden associated with the two test
methods and requested comment on the air-enthalpy method, specifically
its applicability, accuracy, and associated test burden. 80 FR 34843,
34847 (July 18, 2015) and 82 FR 36349, 36353 (Aug. 4, 2017).
AHAM opposed the use of the air-enthalpy method as an alternative
to the calorimeter method, stating that the calorimeter method is
supported by historical data and is repeatable, while the repeatability
of the air-enthalpy method for room ACs had not yet been assessed.
According to AHAM, implementing this alternative test method would
likely increase variation in testing and cause challenges for third-
party verification and enforcement testing. (AHAM, June 2015 RFI, No. 5
at p. 3; AHAM, No. 3 at p. 7)
Friedrich also opposed the use of the air-enthalpy method for room
ACs, based on internal testing that it stated showed a 2 to 3-percent
variation in test results for the calorimeter method. Friedrich
suggested that the variability of a psychrometric method for room ACs
would be greater than the current variability associated with the
calorimeter method. Friedrich added that psychrometric testing: (1)
would not represent actual installation conditions, (2) would add
uncertainty to the exhaust air wet-bulb temperature measurements, and
(3) would fail to capture cooling from the portion of the room AC
chassis installed in the room. Friedrich supported not updating the
reference of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2009 in the DOE test procedure
until further round-robin investigation is completed. (Friedrich, No. 2
at pp. 6-7)
DOE recognizes that installing test ducts on the evaporator and
condenser exhausts to measure the air-enthalpy and calculate cooling
capacity may impact the air flow, particularly on the evaporator side
where room ACs typically locate the inlet and outlet in close
proximity, and thus produce results that may not be representative of
typical installations. The calorimeter method requires no test ducts or
instrumentation that might impede or redirect airflow. DOE also agrees
with Friedrich that, unlike the calorimeter method, the air-enthalpy
method does not capture heat loss through the chassis to the room and
further notes that the air-enthalpy method also may not capture
possible heat transfer due to internal air leakage through the chassis
between the indoor and outdoor test chambers.
As discussed in section III.C.8 of this document, DOE conducted
testing to investigate any differences in test results between the air-
enthalpy and calorimeter approaches. That testing showed a wide range
of discrepancies between the air-enthalpy method and the calorimeter
method, for both cooling capacity and efficiency. The largest
differences were observed for units with evaporator airflows below 200
CFM, suggesting that the air-enthalpy test method as typically
conducted with existing instrumentation does not produce results
representative of actual room AC performance or comparable to measured
performance in a calorimeter chamber. DOE expects that obtaining more
accurate results would require specialized test equipment that is
[[Page 35716]]
limited in availability and costly to design, develop, and produce.
Finally, DOE notes that the results of AHAM's round-robin testing
results are not yet available to further evaluate the repeatability and
reproducibility of the air-enthalpy method.
For these reasons, DOE is not proposing to allow the use of the
air-enthalpy method for determining room AC cooling mode performance at
this time.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ Although DOE is proposing to reference ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
16-2016, which includes an optional air-enthalpy method, DOE
proposes to only reference those sections in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
16-2016 that apply to the calorimeter method.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE seeks comment on the proposal not to include an air-enthalpy
test approach for determine cooling mode performance of room ACs.
d. Side Curtain Heat Leakage and Infiltration Air
DOE considered the installation requirements for room ACs during
testing and the impact of installation on efficiency performance, as
described in the following sections.
Room ACs are designed to be installed in a window opening or
through a wall, with the compressor and condenser outside the
conditioned space and the evaporator inside the conditioned space, as
shown in Figure III-2.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP11JN20.001
The unit's outer case (i.e., ``chassis'') provides a boundary
between the outdoor and indoor sides, leading to potential air leakage
(and therefore, heat leakage) into or out of the conditioned space.
This leakage can occur within the room AC chassis (i.e., internal heat
leakage) or around the chassis (i.e., external heat leakage), and may
negatively impact the performance of the room AC. External heat leakage
consists of two main forms: (1) Infiltration of outdoor air into the
conditioned space; and (2) heat leakage through and around non-chassis
installation components, designed to secure the room AC and prevent air
leakage.
Section 4.2.2 of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2009, referenced by the
current DOE room AC test procedure, directs that the test unit be
installed with no efforts made to seal the internal construction of the
unit.\27\ Consequently, any internal heat leakage through the room AC
that would occur in a typical consumer installation is accounted for in
the current room AC test procedure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ Note that the same requirements are retained in Section
6.1.1.4 of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regarding the external sealing to avoid heat leakage, section 4.2.2
of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2009 requires that the test unit be
installed in a way that is similar to its normal installation. DOE is
aware that common industry practice for testing louvered room ACs is to
install the room AC using a sealed setup, i.e., the area around the
test unit is sealed. This sealing prevents any inclusion of air leakage
around the unit chassis. Any remaining gaps are typically insulated
with tape to ensure a complete seal around the test unit. Consequently,
any external heat leakage around the unit that may occur in a typical
consumer installation is not typically accounted for by laboratories
when conducting the room AC test procedure. DOE considered whether to
clarify the installation instructions for room ACs to account for
external heat leakage. In the following subsections, DOE describes the
proposed additional direction intended to further account for the
external heat leakage in a typical consumer installation.
Non-Louvered (Through-The-Wall) Room ACs
Non-louvered room ACs, (i.e., those intended for through-the-wall
installations) are installed inside a wall sleeve. Although the wall
sleeve is designed to fit snugly within the wall, there is usually a
small gap between the wall sleeve and the room AC, leading to potential
air leakage into the conditioned space. Also, the room AC and wall
sleeve represent a break in the building envelope through which thermal
bridging \28\ may occur, thereby transferring unwanted heat into the
conditioned space. The air and heat leakage mechanisms for through-the-
wall installations are shown in Figure III-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ Thermal bridging refers to the conductive heat transfer
that can occur through the room AC chassis and wall sleeve, which
are usually made of metal. The metal acts as an ``easy'' path for
heat transfer between the indoor side and the outdoor side of the
building, reducing the effective insulation of the building and
leading to heat gain, which is undesirable when a consumer seeks to
cool an indoor space.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 35717]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP11JN20.002
DOE is aware that many manufacturers currently test non-louvered
room ACs with compatible wall sleeves, in accordance with the existing
requirement in the DOE test procedure that no effort be made to seal
the unit internally before cooling mode testing. Regarding external
sealing to avoid heat leakage, DOE is also aware that manufacturers
typically test non-louvered room ACs with the included trim frame and
other manufacturer-provided installation materials. As the non-louvered
room ACs are installed in accordance with the manufacturer instructions
provided to consumers, this setup would be similar to its normal
installation.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ Note that Section 6.1.1.4 of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2016
requires the air conditioner be installed per the manufacturer
instructions, which DOE contends is consistent with the normal
installation requirements in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some test laboratories have requested additional direction
regarding the general setup--specifically, whether a wall sleeve is
required when testing non-louvered room ACs, and if so, which wall
sleeve must be used. Therefore, DOE proposes to specify in a new
section 3.1.1 of appendix F that room ACs designed for through-the-wall
installation (i.e., non-louvered room ACs) must be installed inside a
compatible wall sleeve (in accordance with the installation
instructions provided to consumers), with the trim frame and other
manufacturer-provided installation materials that are included in the
retail package when purchasing the unit, where applicable. DOE believes
that this proposed instruction would improve the representativeness and
the reproducibility of test results. Because these supplemental
instructions are consistent with the current requirement to install the
test unit in a way that is similar to its normal installation and with
DOE's understanding of current testing practice, these proposed
amendments are not expected to increase test burden or change the test
conduct from appendix F.
DOE requests comment on the proposal to specify in appendix F that
non-louvered room ACs, which are designed for through-the-wall
installation, must be installed using a compatible wall sleeve (per
manufacturer instructions), with the provided or manufacturer-required
rear grille, and with the included trim frame and other manufacturer-
provided installation materials.
Louvered (Window) Room ACs
Louvered room ACs, designed for window installation, are typically
installed using manufacturer-provided side curtains to cover the area
of the window opening that is not covered by the unit itself. Side
curtains reduce, but generally do not eliminate, air leakage between
the conditioned and unconditioned space. Some heat leakage is also
possible through the side curtains themselves and surrounding
installation materials.
For hung-sash windows,\30\ the top sash can be positioned in direct
contact with the top side of the chassis. Two side curtains extend
horizontally from the sides of the chassis. For this type of
installation, the air leakage pathways are: (1) Through the gap between
the surface of the chassis and the edges of the window opening, which
are usually covered with side curtains (described below); and (2)
through the gap between the two sashes. Manufacturers typically provide
weather stripping to reduce air leakage between the window sashes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ A sash is a window panel that usually holds one or more
panes of glass. In hung-sash windows, the sashes can be moved
vertically along a rail in order to open or close the window.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For sliding windows,\31\ the sash can be positioned in direct
contact with the left or right side of the chassis. One curtain is
typically provided that extends upward from the chassis to the top edge
of the window opening. With this type of installation, the air leakage
pathways are: (1) Through the gap between the surface of the chassis
and top edge of the window opening, which is usually covered with a
curtain; and (2) through the gap between the two sashes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ In sliding windows, the sashes can be moved horizontally
along a rail.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For casement windows, which have no sliding sashes, the window
panels are attached to hinges and rotate to open or close the window.
Consequently, the width and height of the window opening cannot be
adjusted to match the size of the room AC chassis. Because of this,
casement-type room ACs are usually designed for a narrow range of
window widths. With this type of installation, the gaps between the
surface of the chassis and the edges of the window opening represent
significant leakage pathways.
Figure III-4 and Figure III-5 show the various air infiltration and
heat leakage pathways for louvered room ACs.
[[Page 35718]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP11JN20.003
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP11JN20.004
As described previously, Section 4.2.2 of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-
2009 requires that the test unit be installed in a way that is similar
to its normal installation. No further direction is provided as to what
constitutes normal installation. DOE is aware that common industry
practice is to set up a louvered room AC for testing so that all air
leakage around the unit chassis is precluded. DOE understands that
current industry practice is to snugly install the room AC in the test
chamber partition wall using insulating material to approximate the
insulating properties of the fixed part of the separating partition, as
shown in Figure III-6. Any remaining gaps are typically insulated with
tape to ensure a complete seal around the test unit. Under those
conditions, the test measures energy needed to compensate for internal
heat leakage through the unit and the thermal bridging, but any
external leakage (i.e., infiltration air leakage around the unit
chassis or heat leakage through the manufacturer-provided installation
materials) is eliminated, neglecting any effect external air leakage
may have on energy efficiency.
[[Page 35719]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP11JN20.005
The current U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ENERGY STAR
Product Specification for Room Air Conditioners Version 4.1 (ENERGY
STAR V4.1), \32\ requires that window units be provided with weather
stripping and/or gasket materials appropriate for all window size(s)
for which the unit is designed. Furthermore, the criteria require that
the side curtains be tight fitting to minimize air leaks and contain
insulation in the panel with a minimum insulation value of R1.\33\
ENERGY STAR-qualified room ACs, with R1 side curtains, comprised 26
percent of basic models on the market as of September 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ The ENERGY STAR Certification Criteria V4.1 is available at
https://www.energystar.gov/sites/default/files/ENERGY%20STAR%20Version%204.0%20Room%20Air%20Conditioners%20Program%20Requirements.pdf
\33\ The insulation value is determined by the Federal Trade
Commission's (FTC) Labeling and Advertising of Home Insulation
regulations, 16 CFR part 460.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discussion of Comments
In the August 2017 RFI, DOE noted that, when conducting the
calorimeter test prescribed in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2009 and
referenced by appendix F, the test unit is installed so that all air
and heat leakage around the unit that would normally be present in a
typical installation is precluded by means of sealing. DOE requested
comment on testing room ACs in accordance with the manufacturer-
provided installation materials. 82 FR 36349, 36352 (Aug. 4, 2017).
Friedrich opposed the use of manufacturer-provided installation
materials that are included in the retail package when purchasing the
unit for room AC testing. Friedrich noted that DOE has not specified a
required side curtain surface area for testing, which Friedrich stated
could result in laboratories using varying side curtain surface areas,
leading to significant test result variability and potential consumer
confusion. Friedrich also suggested that laboratories may not be
capable of testing with side curtains in place without significant test
apparatus modifications. Friedrich further noted that, if the
psychrometric method specified in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2016 were
adopted, the heat loss between rooms would not be captured even when
using manufacturer-provided side curtains. Friedrich also suggested
that manufacturer-provided installation materials are not necessary
because the existing test requirement of no more than 0.005 inches of
water column pressure difference between the indoor and outdoor test
chambers limits the effects of heat and air loss between the test
chambers. (Friedrich, No. 2 at pp. 3-4) DOE agrees that requiring the
use of side curtains may introduce additional variability in the test
procedure, specifically regarding the size of the test chamber
partition wall openings used by labs, leading to differing side curtain
extensions and thus different air and heat leakage impacts. DOE further
recognizes the additional test burden associated with modifying the
partition wall and installing side curtains and believes that this
burden outweighs the benefit of measuring the potentially minimal air
and heat leakage due to the small pressure differential limit between
the two test chambers.
AHAM noted that heat loss through the installation materials is
already accounted for in Section 4.2.2 of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2009,
referenced in appendix F, which requires that the room AC be installed
in a manner similar to its normal installation with no effort to seal
the internal construction of the unit to prevent air leakage, other
than specifically provided by the manufacturer's consumer installation
instructions. AHAM asserted that any modification to the instructions
in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2009 would provide little additional value
and is not necessary to ensure the test procedure is representative of
an average use cycle. According to AHAM, doing so would increase test
variation due to varying test lab window sizes and would require
laboratories to stock different sizes of insulated partitions.
AHAM noted that window kits are not used in the portable AC test
procedure, and that the portable AC test procedure only measures duct
heat loss and infiltration air heat transfer because portable ACs draw
condenser air from the conditioned space, which AHAM believes is not
applicable to room ACs. AHAM claimed that the test burden increase from
requiring the use of installation materials would not be justified by
the minimal benefit to consumers. (AHAM, No. 3 at p. 5) As discussed
above, DOE is aware that common laboratory practice is to forgo the use
of manufacturer-provided installation materials included in the retail
package and instead to seal to prevent air and heat leakage around the
unit. DOE is also aware that laboratories typically modify the chamber
partition wall to fit each test unit by adding or removing partition
wall insulating materials. DOE also notes that, as discussed later in
this section, Sections 6.1.1.4 and Section 8.4.2 of ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 16-2016 require that the perimeter of the AC under test must
be sealed to the separating partition, which is consistent with common
practice when testing room ACs and ensures repeatability and
reproducibility. Therefore, DOE recognizes that an alteration to the
common practice by requiring the use of all manufacturer-provided
installation materials, including side curtains, may present additional
test burden.
[[Page 35720]]
The California IOUs and Joint Advocates commented that room ACs
should be installed with manufacturer-provided installation materials.
(California IOUs, No. 4 at p. 4; Joint Advocates, No. 6 at p. 3) The
California IOUs believe that the current test setup does not reflect
real-world room AC operation and thus is contrary to EPCA's
representative use requirements. According to the California IOUs, room
ACs are typically installed in windows and secured with side curtains,
wall sleeves, and other manufacturer-provided materials that are
included in the retail package when purchasing the unit and are usually
poorly insulated and allow for air infiltration, unlike the insulated
wall in a calorimeter chamber. The California IOUs, therefore,
encouraged DOE to capture the efficiency impacts of air infiltration,
heat leakage, and pressure differentials in the room AC test procedure
by requiring the use of all manufacturer-provided installation
materials. (California IOUs, No. 4 at p. 4) The Joint Advocates
asserted that the current DOE test procedure for room ACs does not
represent actual unit efficiency for consumers, and therefore the Joint
Advocates believe that testing room ACs with manufacturer-provided
installation materials would incentivize improvements for installation
materials to reduce infiltration air leakage. The Joint Advocates
stated that reducing infiltration air would save energy and improve
consumer comfort by reducing hot air entering from outdoors. (Joint
Advocates, No. 6 at p. 3)
As discussed previously, DOE recognizes that the common practice
for installing room ACs for testing does not necessarily utilize all
manufacturer-provided installation materials. However, DOE recognizes
the potentially significant variability and additional test burden
associated with the use of side curtains and other manufacturer-
provided installation materials that are not currently used. Further,
DOE notes that Sections 6.1.1.4 and Section 8.4.2 of ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 16-2016 require that the perimeter of the AC under test must
be sealed to the separating partition, which is consistent with common
practice when testing room ACs. This requirement represents a change
from the instructions in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2009, which in Section
4.2.2, as discussed, requires that the room AC be installed in a manner
similar to its normal installation.
DOE conducted testing to investigate the inherent air infiltration
and conductive heat transfer effects associated with manufacturer-
provided installation materials included in the retail package when
purchasing the unit. DOE tested 13 room ACs both with and without
manufacturer-provided installation materials, otherwise following the
appendix F test procedure and conditions. DOE installed each room AC in
accordance with both ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2009 and manufacturer
instructions in a 34-inch wide window opening of the calorimeter test
chamber partition wall. Because room AC chassis vary in width and
height, the area filled by side curtains varied from unit to unit in
the 34-inch wide window opening, and the height of the window opening
was adjusted to match the height of each unit. Table III-7 displays the
results of testing with and without manufacturer-provided installation
materials under appendix F conditions.
Table III-7--Impact of Manufacturer-Provided Installation Materials on Room Air Conditioner Cooling Capacity
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Measured cooling capacity Measured cooling capacity
-------------------------------- change with installation
Energy star Without With materials
Unit No. rated installation installation -------------------------------
materials materials
(Btu/h) (Btu/h) (Btu/h) (%)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1............................. Yes............. 5720 5450 -270 -4.7
2............................. No.............. 10600 10530 -70 -0.7
3............................. Yes............. 11750 11950 +210 +1.8
4............................. Yes............. 20630 20470 -150 -0.7
8............................. No.............. 5210 5260 +50 +1.0
9............................. Yes............. 5590 5580 -10 -0.2
10............................ No.............. 5280 5420 +130 +2.5
11............................ Yes............. 5240 5270 +30 +0.6
12............................ No.............. 6160 6050 -110 -1.8
13............................ Yes............. 7910 7940 +30 +0.4
14............................ Yes............. 8580 8340 -230 -2.7
15............................ Yes............. 21230 21200 -40 -0.2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE expected that the measured cooling capacity with installation
materials would be consistently lower (worse) than the measured cooling
capacity without installation materials (for which the unit is tightly
sealed during testing to prevent air and heat leakage). However, as
shown in Table III-7, DOE observed no consistent change in cooling
capacity when using manufacturer-provided installation materials
included in the retail package when purchasing the unit, with capacity
impacts ranging from a reduction of 4.7 percent to an increase of 2.5
percent relative to the measured capacity without installation
materials. Additionally, DOE found that the magnitude and direction
(positive or negative) of the measured capacity impacts did not
correlate with the presence of insulated side-curtains (i.e., units
that ship with minimum R1 side curtains were measured as having both
higher and lower cooling capacity when tested with the side curtains
installed). Nor did the magnitude and direction of the measured cooling
capacity change correlate with the rated cooling capacity. Instead, the
unexpected presence of positive cooling capacity changes suggests that
the observed variations are driven more by measurement uncertainty than
heat transfer losses.
Regardless of the source of the variation, however, all capacities
measured while using manufacturer-provided installation materials were
within 5 percent of those measured without installation materials.
Because the variation in test results was minimal, DOE expects that any
potential
[[Page 35721]]
benefits of more representative cooling capacity measurements by
testing with manufacturer-provided installation materials included in
the retail package when purchasing the unit would be small and would be
outweighed by the burden associated with such a testing configuration.
Therefore, DOE is not proposing to require the use of manufacturer-
provided installation materials in appendix F for louvered room ACs at
this time.
DOE requests comment on the proposal, consistent with ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 16-2016, Sections 6.1.1.4 and Section 8.4.2, not to require
installing louvered room ACs with the manufacturer-provided
installation materials, including side curtains, and instead to require
testing with the partition wall sealed to the unit.
e. Test Conditions
In the June 2015 RFI, DOE noted that the current room AC test
procedure measures performance only under full-cooling-load outdoor
test conditions of 95 [deg]F dry-bulb and 75 [deg]F wet-bulb, and
therefore, technologies that improve performance under less extreme
part-load conditions, such as variable-speed compressors and variable-
opening expansion devices, would not improve rated performance under
the current test procedure. DOE noted that for central ACs and heat
pumps, the seasonal energy efficiency ratio (SEER) accounts for various
annual conditions by testing at multiple rating conditions. DOE
therefore requested comment on the merits of revising the current room
AC test procedure to account for the benefit of technologies that
improve performance under multiple cooling mode temperature conditions.
80 FR 34843, 34848 (June 18, 2015).
The Natural Resources Defense Council, Appliance Standards
Awareness Project, Alliance to Save Energy, National Consumer Law
Center, and Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance (hereafter the ``Joint
Commenters'') stated that measuring part-load performance in the DOE
room AC test procedure would encourage manufacturers to develop
products with variable-speed capabilities and other part-load
technologies not available as of 2015 in room ACs available on the
market. The Joint Commenters suggested that a metric that captures
part-load performance could result in additional energy savings because
room ACs are often used as the primary air conditioning source, either
for a single room or an entire house, and thus are used more frequently
than just for supplemental air conditioning on the hottest days and
would likely benefit from part-load efficiency improvements. (Joint
Commenters, June 2015 RFI, No. 7 at pp. 1-2)
The California IOUs commented that the effective and efficient use
of part-load operation can be useful in maintaining a more constant
room temperature while reducing overall energy consumption. However,
they noted that the impact of part-load efficiency would depend on the
number of operating hours associated with part-load operation in the
overall performance metric. Therefore, the California IOUs suggested
that DOE assess the potential efficiency benefits of part-load
technologies and the number of operating hours under part-load
conditions per year, claiming that including part-load efficiency in
the regulated metric would only be effective if part-load operation
represents a significant part of the annual operating hours. The
California IOUs suggested that the part-load operating hours should not
include hours during the summer, when room ACs typically operate at
full-load conditions, nor should the inclusion of part-load operation
result in a reduction of overall room AC operating efficiencies or an
increase in peak demand. If DOE finds that part-load efficiency has a
minimal impact on overall performance, the California IOUs expressed
continued support for the current test condition. (California IOUs,
June 2015 RFI, No. 8 at p. 3)
AHAM opposed part-load performance measurements, based on DOE's
conclusion in the January 2011 Final Rule that such measurements would
result in significant effort and additional test burden with minimal
energy savings. (AHAM, June 2015 RFI, No. 5 at p. 4) In the January
2011 Final Rule, DOE stated that sufficient information was not
available at the time to assess whether technologies that improve part-
load efficiency would be cost effective, and that many of the
technology options that could improve full-load efficiency would also
improve part-load efficiency, so the current test conditions were
indicative of the efficiency at a range of conditions. Thus, DOE
decided to not amend the test procedure to measure part-load
performance at that time. Nevertheless, DOE noted in the January 2011
Final Rule that it could consider amendments if additional information
on this subject were to become available for future rulemakings. 76 FR
971, 1016 (Jan. 6, 2011). DOE notes that the market has developed since
the January 2011 Final Rule, and that at least three variable-speed
room ACs are now on the market. DOE expects that manufacturers will
continue to introduce variable-speed room ACs to the market in the near
term, because, on December 28, 2017, EPA released its ENERGY STAR 2018
Emerging Technology Award Criteria for Room ACs with Efficient Variable
Output, which recognizes room ACs with variable-speed compressors that
are more than 25 percent more efficient than a similar room AC with a
single-speed compressor.\34\ DOE expects that the introduction of these
ENERGY STAR award criteria will incentivize manufacturers to further
adopt variable-speed compressors in room ACs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ Additional information on the ENERGY STAR Emerging Award
for Industry Stakeholders is available at https://www.energystar.gov/about/awards/energy-star-emerging-technology-award/energy-star-emerging-technology-award-industry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Multiple Test Conditions
On June 1, 2016, DOE established a test procedure for portable ACs
that assesses cooling performance under two cooling mode test
conditions, representative of typical conditions and extreme conditions
(hereafter the ``June 2016 Portable AC Final Rule''). 81 FR 35241,
35249-35250. As discussed, room ACs are currently tested at a single
outdoor test condition, 95 [deg]F dry-bulb and 75 [deg]F wet-bulb
temperature, which aligns with only one of the two cooling mode test
conditions for portable ACs. Considering the many similarities between
the two products (i.e., consumer utility, usage patterns, internal
components), DOE requested comment in the August 2017 RFI on whether it
would be appropriate to harmonize the two test procedures by including
an additional test condition for room AC cooling mode testing
(specifically, 83 [deg]F dry-bulb and 67.5 [deg]F wet-bulb outdoor
temperature). 82 FR 36349, 36351-36352 (Aug. 4, 2017).
Friedrich opposed an additional cooling mode test condition for
room ACs, stating that room ACs are optimized for the current 95 [deg]F
test condition and any changes to the test procedure would require
system and component design changes. For example, Friedrich asserted
that less expensive and more reliable capillary tube expansion devices
would likely need to be replaced with more expensive and complex
thermostatic expansion valves or variable orifice metering devices.
Friedrich stated that just one component change could increase
manufacturing cost by more than 15 percent as well as increase repair
and installation complexity, and that the current room AC chassis may
not have sufficient space to accommodate such devices. (Friedrich, No.
2 at pp. 1-2) DOE recognizes that
[[Page 35722]]
optimizing performance at any test condition likely would require
design and component modifications, which may include adjusting the
expansion device, blower motor, compressor, and other performance-
related modification. DOE understands that any time a design change is
initiated, significant engineering and manufacturing costs are
incurred, for example, to fit larger and more complex components into
size-restricted chassis. However, although an amended test procedure
requiring testing room ACs at additional cooling mode test conditions
would necessitate a corresponding amendment to the energy conservation
standards for room ACs, the design and manufacturing costs incurred to
redesign units to perform optimally at these conditions are outside of
the scope of a test procedure rulemaking analysis. DOE notes that it
would analyze in an energy conservation standards rulemaking any design
and manufacturing costs potentially incurred to improve the efficiency
of products.
AHAM and Friedrich opposed the proposed additional cooling mode
test condition, saying that it would add significant test burden by
effectively doubling the number of tests needed to certify a room AC,
lengthening test time, and resulting in less laboratory availability,
which could significantly slow time to market and disrupt production
schedule. (AHAM, No. 3 at p. 4; Friedrich, No. 2 at p. 2) DOE agrees
that an additional cooling mode test condition would increase test
burden, though it would not require an adjustment in test unit
installation and would instead necessitate adjusting only the outdoor
test chamber conditions, since the indoor conditions remain the same
for both cooling mode test conditions. DOE expects the total additional
burden associated with testing a reduced operating test would be 4 to 5
hours. This reflects the time required to adjust the outdoor test
chamber test conditions (about 2 hours for the chamber to reach a lower
outdoor temperature test condition), and the additional test time,
which is estimated to be 2 to 3 hours (approximately 1 to 2 hours for
chamber and unit stabilization and 1 hour for the rating test period,
as specified by ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2009).
AHAM further stated that if DOE did consider an additional cooling
mode test condition it would be inappropriate to consider an additional
cooling mode test condition comparable to that which is established for
dual-duct portable ACs (i.e., the most similar portable AC
configuration to room ACs). AHAM cited a September 2016 AHAM Home
Comfort Survey that indicated the vast majority of portable ACs on the
market are a single-duct configuration. As a result, most portable ACs
would be tested with a single outdoor cooling mode test condition. AHAM
therefore suggested it would be inappropriate to select test conditions
for room ACs that align with the type of portable AC that a minority of
consumers own and would not result in a comparable rating between all
portable ACs and room ACs. (AHAM, No. 3 at p. 4) DOE notes that the
additional cooling mode test condition that was adopted for dual-duct
portable ACs was developed using room AC ownership data and a climate
analysis; and, because the supporting data were derived from room ACs,
DOE asserts that the previous analysis conducted in support of the
portable AC test procedure applies to room ACs.
AHAM and Friedrich also contended that including a second test
condition could confuse consumers, suggesting that adding a cooler test
condition would result in a larger Seasonally Adjusted Cooling Capacity
(SACC) compared to the cooling capacity as measured under the current
conditions, which could result in consumers purchasing units that have
too little capacity and are unable to meet cooling needs during peak
periods. Friedrich further commented that if DOE were to proceed with
these changes to the test procedure, it should coordinate with EPA and
the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to harmonize metrics across
efficiency programs. (AHAM, No. 3 at p. 4; Friedrich, No. 2 at p. 2)
DOE agrees that introducing a second cooling mode test condition for
all room ACs would result in a general increase in the reported cooling
capacities for all units, which may cause confusion for consumers who
have become familiar with the typical capacity values in this well-
established market.\35\ Under the Memorandum of Understanding that EPA
and DOE signed on September 30, 2009, DOE is responsible for the test
methods and metrics to be used in the ENERGY STAR program when
qualifying products. Therefore, if DOE were to modify the energy
efficiency metric for room ACs in appendix F, EPA would accordingly
consider revised ENERGY STAR qualification criteria based upon the
amended DOE test procedure. Additionally, EPCA requires that any
revisions to the labels for room ACs, for which the FTC is responsible,
include disclosure of the estimated annual operating cost (determined
in accordance with DOE's test procedures prescribed under section 6293
of EPCA), unless the Secretary determines that disclosure of estimated
annual operating cost is not technologically feasible, or the FTC
determines that such disclosure is not likely to assist consumers in
making purchasing decisions or is not economically feasible. (42 U.S.C.
6294(c)(1)) Were DOE to amend the room AC test procedure to include an
additional test condition, DOE understands that the FTC would develop
any revised labeling requirements to disclose a revised annual energy
cost calculation based on any modified energy efficiency metric.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ DOE notes that consumer confusion about the number of
temperature conditions was not a concern for portable ACs because
DOE only recently established a test procedure for portable ACs that
requires multiple cooling mode test conditions. Before that there
was no DOE test procedure; the DOE test procedure for portable ACs
has always required multiple cooling mode temperature conditions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The California IOUs opposed an additional cooling mode test
condition, suggesting it would not be representative of actual usage
conditions in California, where room ACs operate at peak capacity or
close to it (i.e., at conditions represented by the 95 [deg]F dry-bulb
test condition) for longer than 750 hours per year and are typically
purchased in reaction to heatwaves, when peak cooling is required. The
California IOUs cautioned that allocating less weight to the 95 [deg]F
dry-bulb cooling mode test condition may devalue the cooling mode
operating performance that is most valued by consumers and is the basis
for their purchase decisions. (California IOUs, No. 5 at p. 2) AHAM
added that the current room AC test procedure tests the ``worst case''
energy use scenario and there is no reason to test room ACs under new
test conditions that would result in less energy use. (AHAM, No. 3 at
p. 4) Friedrich stated that room ACs optimized for a new reduced-
temperature test condition would not have enough capacity to meet the
cooling load at the existing higher-temperature condition. (Friedrich,
No. 2 at p. 2) The California IOUs also claimed that an additional
cooling mode test condition would interfere with calculating a room
AC's peak demand power draw, which can have a large impact on peak load
operation and is often the basis for future program development, rate
structure, and overall power needs. (California IOUs, No. 5 at pp. 2-3)
The California IOUs and Joint Advocates commented that if DOE were
to include an additional part-load cooling mode test condition, the
test procedure would likely capture the benefits of technologies, such
as variable-speed compressors, that enable
[[Page 35723]]
improved part-load performance. These commenters further stated that,
in addition to improving part-load performance and efficiency by
reducing compressor cycling and improving heat exchanger effectiveness,
variable-speed compressors would provide more consistent room
temperature and humidity control, improved dehumidification, and
reduced noise levels. They suggested that adding variable-speed
compressors would enable utilities to create incentives for consumers
to use more intelligently controlled and connected room ACs with little
impact on consumer comfort and would enable more flexible demand side
resources to integrate increasing amounts of intermittent renewable
energy sources into the grid. (California IOUs, No. 5 at p. 3; Joint
Advocates, No. 6 at p. 2) However, the California IOUs suggested that
further data are necessary prior to modifying the room AC test
procedure to measure room AC performance and efficiency at part-load
test conditions and to identify an appropriate alternative test
condition and operating hours that would effectively capture part-load
operation. (California IOUs, No. 5 at p. 4) Friedrich suggested that
variable-speed compressors would not be feasible for room ACs due to
increased installation and controls costs, as well as chassis space
constraints. (Friedrich, No. 2 at p. 2) AHAM urged DOE to wait until
variable-speed compressors are available in a number of products that
would be sufficient to evaluate the impacts of a test procedure change
before considering a test procedure change to account for them. (AHAM,
No. 3 at p. 5)
DOE agrees with some, but not all, of these comments. The inclusion
of additional cooling mode test conditions would better reflect
operation under multiple temperature conditions, and product
information based on testing using such conditions may create an
incentive to increase the proportion of variable-speed room ACs on the
market. Use of variable-speed compressors, in turn, may be beneficial
to both consumers and utilities, because room ACs would operate more
effectively and efficiently under multiple indoor and outdoor
temperature conditions. However, DOE also recognizes that a test
procedure that measures performance at both peak temperature conditions
and a less extreme temperature condition would require a new overall
weighted metric that would combine the performance under both
temperature conditions because it would change measured energy
consumption. DOE further recognizes that room AC performance has
historically been based on peak performance under elevated outdoor
temperature test conditions, which is the condition under which
consumers most expect their room ACs to perform, and that peak
performance would no longer be clearly portrayed by a weighted
metric.\36\ Furthermore, DOE notes information about variable-speed
room ACs is limited: There are few variable-speed products on the
market, and data about them is limited. DOE does not believe that the
benefits of measuring performance at reduced outdoor temperature test
conditions for all room ACs would outweigh the expected substantial
increase in test burden, utility impacts, and consumer confusion that
would result. Therefore, DOE is proposing to continue using a single
test condition for testing single-speed room ACs, with no changes to
the current CEER metric. However, as discussed in section III.C.2 of
this document, DOE is proposing to require testing multiple test
conditions for variable-speed room ACs, in order to capture the
relative efficiency improvements associated with variable-speed
operation. The test procedure would represent the performance of
variable-speed room ACs using adjustments to the CEER calculations to
obtain the same metric, which is based on performance at the maximum 95
[deg]F outdoor rating condition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ This understanding is based on discussion in the June 2010
Room AC Test Procedure Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
and comments from the California IOUs discussed above. 75 FR 37633-
37634 (June 29, 2010). (California IOUs, No. 5 at p. 2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE requests comment on the proposal not to include additional
cooling mode test conditions for single-speed room ACs.
Cooling Test Alternatives
The current DOE test procedures for room ACs and packaged terminal
air conditioners (PTACs) involve fixed temperature and humidity tests
in a calorimeter at full-load or part-load conditions, during which
specific dry-bulb and wet-bulb temperatures are maintained throughout
the cooling mode test period. The DOE test procedure for central ACs
requires testing at multiple cooling mode test conditions, with fixed
temperature and humidity at each condition, similar to the current room
AC test procedure, which has one test condition with a fixed
temperature and humidity.
The Joint Advocates stated that the lower-temperature test
condition discussed in the August 2017 RFI is a fixed temperature and
humidity test and would not capture single-speed compressor cycling
losses that would occur in typical temperature conditions. By
comparison, a dynamic-cooling-load test, such as that being developed
by the Canadian Standards Association, during which the compressor
would cycle off when the setpoint is reached, may capture such cycling
losses. The Joint Advocates suggested that the most representative room
AC test procedure (i.e., a dynamic-cooling-load test that measures
part-load performance) would spur adoption of variable-speed
compressors and adjustable fan speeds because it would capture cycling
losses in single-speed units and increased efficiency from these
technologies. (Joint Advocates, No. 6 at pp. 2-3)
DOE is aware of two approaches to measure part-load performance of
a room AC, constant-cooling-load testing and dynamic-cooling-load
testing. In a constant-cooling load test, a cooling load is applied to
the indoor room using reconditioning equipment, and this cooling load
does not change throughout the test. In a dynamic-cooling-load test,
the cooling load applied to the indoor room follows a load profile
which approximates how the cooling load on a typical unit would change
throughout the day. In both the dynamic-cooling-load test suggested by
the Joint Advocates and a constant-cooling-load test explored in DOE
investigative testing, the chamber indoor cooling load is provided at a
specified rate or value throughout testing instead of maintaining
specific temperature conditions within the test chamber. In theory,
this approach would be most representative of actual usage, where
cooling loads are constant or variable due to external factors (e.g.,
weather, door/window openings) and internal factors (e.g., room
occupants, appliance operation). Under a constant-cooling-load or
dynamic-cooling-load test, a room AC with a single-speed compressor
would cycle the compressor as the setpoint is reached, thereby
introducing efficiency losses, whereas a variable-speed compressor
could maintain constant operation at reduced speeds to match the
cooling load with no cycling losses. As explained below, DOE explored
this approach but is not proposing it because an increased test burden
and reduced repeatability and reproducibility outweigh potential
benefits.
DOE investigated the status of test data and uniform procedures to
test with a specified constant or dynamic cooling load but found no
widely adopted and industry-accepted test procedure for room ACs or
other AC
[[Page 35724]]
products that uses a constant-cooling-load or dynamic-cooling-load
test. DOE is aware of investigative efforts to test central ACs under
varying cooling load conditions, but those have yielded only
preliminary results which did not involve room ACs and did not provide
sufficient evidence to show that a constant or dynamic load test would
be repeatable and reproducible and not overly burdensome to
conduct.37 38
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ The Canadian Standards Association has conducted dynamic-
load testing for heat pumps. A summary is available at https://neep.org/sites/default/files/NEEPCSAHarley2017-06-28.pdf.
\38\ Researchers at the University of Tokyo investigated the
operation of split-type ACs under constant-load conditions in 2012.
https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1article=2335context=iracc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Due to the limited data available regarding constant-cooling-load
testing, DOE conducted investigative testing to better understand the
benefits and potential challenges associated with a constant-cooling-
load test for room ACs. These tests were conducted using a variable-
speed room AC rated at 18,000 Btu/h and a conventional single-speed
room AC rated at 12,100 Btu/h. The single-speed room AC was selected
because it was the louvered unit in the test sample closest in capacity
to the variable-speed unit. DOE installed each room AC in a calorimeter
test chamber, set the unit thermostat to 80 [deg]F to match the indoor
temperature specified in the appendix F test procedures, and then
applied a fixed cooling load to the indoor room that was below the
nominal rated cooling capacity of the test unit. The calorimeter
chamber was configured to permit the indoor chamber temperature to
vary, thereby allowing the test unit to eventually reach its thermostat
set point and to adjust its cooling in response to the cooling load
demands on the indoor room, as opposed to the constant-temperature
test, which results in unvarying cooling operation. Table III-8 shows
the results of these tests. All percentages are displayed are relative
to full-cooling-load values measured during constant-temperature tests.
Table III-8--Fixed Cooling-Load-Based Test Single-Speed Room Air Conditioner
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chamber-
Outdoor test condition ([deg]F imposed Compressor on Percent of Percent of
dry-bulb) cooling load time (%) full-load EER (Btu/Wh) full-load EER
(%) power (%) (%)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
95.............................. 49 53 62 9.2 79
76 80 84 10.6 91
78 82 86 10.6 91
79 82 86 10.7 91
80 84 88 10.6 91
82.............................. 46 48 58 11.8 79
48 50 60 12.0 80
67 69 77 13.1 88
70 72 78 13.3 89
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed previously in section III.C of this document, and
shown in Figure III-1, when tested under these same test conditions,
the variable-speed room AC adjusted its compressor speed to match the
applied cooling load, resulting in increased efficiency of between 9
percent and 25 percent at decreased cooling loads of 85 percent and 45
percent of the full-load cooling capacity, respectively, compared to
the tested cooling capacity of the variable-speed room AC under the
appendix F test procedure.
When tested according to the same constant-cooling-load test, the
single-speed unit operated continuously until the unit thermostat
setpoint was satisfied, at which time the unit cycled off the
compressor. When the chamber temperature rose above the thermostat
setpoint, the single-speed room AC activated the compressor. This off-
and-on compressor cycling process continued throughout the rating test
period. As shown in Table III-8, the fractional time the compressor was
on (``compressor on time'') for a single compressor cycle during the
test ranged from 84 percent to 48 percent as the cooling load decreased
from 80 percent to 46 percent, respectively, of the tested cooling
capacity. DOE also observed during testing that the total compressor
cycle time (i.e., the sum of a single period of compressor on time and
compressor off time) decreased as cooling loads reduced, resulting in
more frequent cycling and subsequent increased cycling losses.
As shown in Table III-8, DOE observed that the single-speed room AC
was able to provide cooling that closely matched the chamber-imposed
cooling load by cycling the compressor (i.e., the percentage of
compressor on time approximated the cooling load percentage). However,
the single-speed room AC average input power during those same tests
did not decrease at the same rate as the cooling capacity, which was
indicative of the fan or blower remaining on when the compressor cycled
off, as well as the significant additional power necessary to start up
the compressor at the beginning of each compressor on cycle (i.e., the
percent of full-load power consumption during the same test was
consistently higher than the cooling load percentage, as shown in Table
III-8). As a result of the disproportionate cooling capacity and power
decreases at reduced cooling loads, the overall efficiency of a single-
speed room AC in terms of EER at reduced cooling loads decreased by up
to 20 percent at a reduced load of about 50 percent of the full-load
cooling capacity, as shown in Table III-8.\39\ The overall efficiency
of the variable-speed room AC in terms of EER increased by about 24
percent under similar reduced load conditions, as shown in Figure III-
1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ EER, is defined as the ratio of cooling capacity to unit
power, in contrast to CEER, which additionally includes inactive
mode or off mode power. Because the investigative testing did not
include inactive mode or off mode testing, the investigative testing
results are reported in EER.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Constant-cooling load tests have initially confirmed behavior that
would be expected of room ACs in the field under conditions associated
with partial loads (i.e., lower outdoor temperatures at which the
cooling load is typically smaller). During the constant-cooling-load
test, single-speed room ACs cycle in proportion to the cooling load,
and variable-speed room ACs adjust the compressor speed to match the
measured cooling load in the room. Therefore, DOE would expect that
[[Page 35725]]
cycling losses decrease the efficiency of single-speed room ACs at
lower outdoor temperature conditions, an effect which variable-speed
room ACs avoid. However, DOE contends that load-based tests, for
reasons presented below, are currently not feasible for room ACs.
DOE is concerned that the constant-cooling-load test would reduce
repeatability and reproducibility. Based on investigative testing, DOE
found that conducting a constant-cooling-load test in an ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 16-2009-compliant calorimeter test chamber would impact
repeatability and reproducibility. Table III-9 shows the results of
indoor wet-bulb temperatures for the cooling-load-based tests conducted
by DOE.
Table III-9--Indoor Wet-Bulb Temperatures for Cooling-Load-Based Tests
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average Difference
Outdoor test indoor from rating
Tested unit condition Cooling load temperature condition
([deg]F dry- (%) ([deg]F wet- ([deg]F wet-
bulb) bulb) bulb)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Single-Speed.................................... 95 49 67.6 0.6
.............. 76 67.2 0.2
.............. 78 67.0 0.0
.............. 79 67.1 0.1
.............. 80 67.1 -0.1
---------------------------------------------------------------
82 46 67.5 0.1
.............. 48 66.5 0.5
.............. 67 66.8 -0.5
.............. 70 67.1 -0.2
---------------------------------------------------------------
Average 67.1 0.1
---------------------------------------------------------------
Variable-Speed.................................. 95 49 67.9 0.9
.............. 73 68.0 1.0
.............. 74 67.0 0.0
.............. 85 67.0 0.0
.............. 86 67.0 0.0
---------------------------------------------------------------
87 45 67.0 0.0
.............. 46 67.0 0.0
.............. 63 67.0 0.0
.............. 64 67.0 0.0
.............. 85 67.0 0.0
---------------------------------------------------------------
Average 67.2 0.2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As shown in Table III-9, at cooling loads less than 75 percent of
the tested unit cooling capacity, the indoor wet-bulb temperature
variation sometimes exceeded the 0.3 [deg]F arithmetic average
tolerance required by ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2009. DOE believes this
is because the test chamber lacks a dehumidifier and instead relies on
the test unit to remove moisture from the indoor chamber and assist in
maintaining the wet-bulb temperature. The single-speed and variable-
speed room ACs were unable to remove sufficient water vapor from the
indoor-side chamber while cycling on and off or while operating at
reduced compressor speed, respectively, causing the indoor chamber wet-
bulb temperature to vary from 67 [deg]F up to 0.6 [deg]F for the
single-speed unit, and up to 1.0 [deg]F for the variable-speed unit.
Also, because the chamber used for testing was not designed to
accommodate constant-cooling-load testing, the chamber controls were
not capable of automatically achieving a specific cooling load
condition. Instead, an iterative process was necessary to manually
program and adjust the heating, cooling, and humidification inputs to
the room to achieve the desired cooling load. This difficulty in
automatically achieving specific loading conditions contributed
significant increased testing time and test burden arising from the
need to ensure uniform test chamber dimensions. In addition, the
chamber size and particular conditioning equipment may affect the rate
at which the indoor chamber temperature and relative humidity decrease
in response to the room AC operation, or increase after a single-speed
unit cycles off, thus affecting cycle time and frequency, which in turn
impact cycling losses and measured performance.
DOE notes that constant-cooling-load tests may not be reproducible
because ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16 does not specify chamber dimensions and
reconditioning equipment characteristics which affect heat transfer
capabilities within the chamber, and thus they likely are not uniform
across the industry. DOE expects that cooling-load-based test
reproducibility could increase with test chamber modifications to
improve cooling load-setting controls, standardizing or normalizing for
test chamber size, and adding a dehumidifier to the indoor chamber,
although these would place some additional test burden on
manufacturers. Furthermore, because existing calorimeter chambers rely
on steady-state operation to ensure accuracy and precision, dynamic-
cooling-load testing in a calorimeter test chamber would require
extraordinarily slow cooling load changes, which DOE estimates would be
on the order of about one percent of the tested unit cooling capacity
every two hours to maintain chamber stability, requiring an
impractically long test to measure a full range of cooling load
conditions (e.g., it would require an estimated 86 hours to reduce the
cooling load from 100 percent to 57 percent of full load to reach the
expected cooling load at an outdoor test condition of 82 [deg]F, as
discussed in section III.D of this document, compared to the 2 hours
typically required to conduct the current test procedure). Because of
the
[[Page 35726]]
current lack of industry consensus on a constant-cooling-load or
dynamic-cooling-load test procedure and the uncertainty regarding the
repeatability of such tests, DOE judges that the potential benefits of
constant-cooling-load or dynamic-cooling-load tests do not justify the
increase in test burden in the form of test time and changes to test
equipment. For these reasons, DOE is not proposing a constant-cooling-
load or dynamic-cooling-load test for room ACs at this time.
f. Power Factor
In response to the June 2015 RFI, the California IOUs suggested
that DOE should identify the power factor \40\ at each operating
voltage, provided that the market size for multiple-voltage units
warrants that kind of coverage. (California IOUs, June 2015 RFI, No. 8
at p. 4) DOE measured power factor for a sample of 23 room ACs of
varying product classes, capacities, and efficiencies and found that
power factor results ranged from 0.93 to 0.99, with an average power
factor of 0.97. Because the range of power factors was small and all
measurements were close to a value of 1, DOE's testing suggests that
there is no significant difference between the actual power drawn by a
room AC and the apparent power supplied to the unit. Based on this, DOE
expects that the metrics proposed in this document accurately described
the power consumption of a room AC and therefore, the additional burden
of measuring and reporting the power factor would outweigh any benefits
this information would provide. Therefore, DOE does not propose to
establish requirements for measuring and reporting the power factor for
room ACs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ The power factor of an alternating current electrical power
system is defined as the ratio of the real power flowing to the load
to the apparent power in the circuit. A load with a low power factor
draws more electrical current than a load with a high power factor
for the same amount of useful power transferred. The higher currents
associated with low power factor increase the amount of energy lost
in the electricity distribution system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE seeks comment on the proposal to not establish requirements for
measuring and reporting the power factor for room ACs.
2. Heating Mode
In the June 2015 RFI, DOE requested comment on appropriate test
methods, industry test standards, and temperature conditions for
measuring room AC reverse-cycle heating performance. DOE also requested
information on the burdens associated with testing heating performance
and whether they would disproportionately impact certain businesses. 80
FR 34843, 34847-34848.
The California IOUs supported measuring room AC heating mode
performance in the DOE test procedure, but noted that with a combined
performance metric, consumers would be unable to determine performance
in individual active modes. According to the California IOUs, consumers
could thus be confused when comparing units with and without heating,
and might incorrectly assume that a high CEER necessarily represents
efficient performance in both cooling and heating modes. The California
IOUs also suggested that a combined efficiency metric could allow
manufacturers to improve efficiency in heating mode while maintaining
or even reducing cooling mode efficiency. Therefore, the California
IOUs suggested that DOE implement separate cooling mode and heating
mode metrics. (California IOUs, June 2015 RFI, No. 8 at pp. 2-3)
AHAM asserted that a heating mode test method is not necessary for
room ACs, and that DOE should not adopt any metric for heating, whether
separate or combined with cooling mode performance. AHAM stated that
there is a trade-off between cooling and heating performance, so it
would be difficult to optimize performance for both modes. Therefore,
AHAM believes that including heating performance in the efficiency
metric could increase prices while reducing product availability and
consumer utility. AHAM also commented that a CEER metric that combines
cooling and heating would confuse consumers, limit comparisons between
room ACs with only cooling and those with both heating and cooling, and
would diverge from the approach adopted for similar products. (AHAM,
June 2015 RFI, No. 5 at pp. 3-4; AHAM, No. 3 at p. 7)
DOE agrees that combining cooling mode and heating mode performance
into a single metric may limit a consumer's ability to recognize the
mode-specific performance and compare performance with room ACs that
only provide cooling. DOE also recognizes that a combined metric may
lead to a reduction in cooling mode efficiency, if heating mode
efficiency increases but the overall metric remains the same. DOE
considered the approach taken for similar products and notes that PTACs
and central ACs have separate metrics for heating and cooling
performance while the test procedure for portable ACs does not consider
heating performance. Further, DOE is not aware of data suggesting that
heating mode is a significant operating mode for room ACs. Based on the
lack of data of room ACs used for heating, and given the potential
concerns raised by commenters, DOE is not proposing a test procedure to
measure room AC heating mode in the room AC test procedure at this
time.
DOE requests comment on the proposal not to establish a heating
mode test procedure for room ACs at this time.
3. Off-Cycle Mode
Single-speed room ACs typically operate with a compressor on-off
control strategy, where the compressor runs until the room temperature
drops below a consumer-determined setpoint, then ceases to operate
(i.e., the unit operates in off-cycle mode \41\) until the room
temperature rises above the setpoint, at which time the compressor
starts again. The points at which the compressor stops and restarts
depend on the setpoint temperature defined by the user and the deadband
\42\ programmed by the manufacturer. During the period in which the
compressor remains off (i.e., off-cycle mode), the fan may operate in
different ways depending on manufacturer implementation: (1) The fan
ceases operation entirely; (2) the fan continues to operate for a short
period of time after the setpoint is reached and then stops until the
compressor is reactivated; (3) the fan continues to operate
continuously for a short period of time, after which it cycles on and
off periodically until the compressor is reactivated; or (4) the fan
continues to operate continuously until the compressor is
reactivated.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ ``Off-cycle mode'' is distinct from ``off mode,'' in which
a room AC not only ceases compressor and fan operation but also and
may remain in that state for an indefinite time, not subject to
restart by thermostat or temperature sensor signal.
\42\ The term ``deadband'' refers to the range of ambient air
temperatures around the setpoint for which the compressor remains
off, and above which cooling mode is triggered on.
\43\ Unlike air circulation mode, off-cycle mode is not user-
initiated and only occurs when the ambient temperature has satisfied
the setpoint.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the June 2015 RFI, DOE requested comment on the merits and
limitations of including a requirement to measure off-cycle mode in the
room AC test procedure. 80 FR 34843, 34846 (June 18, 2015). AHAM
commented that DOE had previously concluded in a test procedure
supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNOPR) published for room
ACs on June 29, 2010 (hereafter the ``June 2010 SNOPR''), that the
benefit of incorporating the energy use of the off-cycle mode into the
overall energy efficiency metric is outweighed by the additional test
burden for manufacturers. 75 FR 37954, 37604. AHAM asserted that
nothing has changed since those determinations that
[[Page 35727]]
would justify changing them. (AHAM, June 2015 RFI, No. 5 at pp. 2-3)
In the June 2010 SNOPR, DOE considered a definition for off-cycle
mode that it proposed in a NOPR published in the Federal Register on
December 9, 2008 (73 FR 74639), namely that off-cycle mode is a standby
mode in which a room AC: (1) Has cycled off its main function by
thermostat or temperature sensor, (2) does not have its fan or blower
operating, and (3) will reactivate the main function according to the
thermostat or temperature sensor signal. DOE notes that the 2010 off-
cycle mode definition proposal only addressed a low-power state,
excluding the possibility of fan or blower operation. By excluding the
periods of fan operation from off-cycle mode, the definition for off-
cycle mode considered in the June 2010 SNOPR would not have accounted
for potentially significant room AC energy consumption. Unlike that
definition, off-cycle mode as considered in this NOPR could include
periods of potentially significant fan or blower energy use.
AHAM also noted DOE's conclusion in the January 2011 Final Rule
that off-cycle mode does not persist for an indefinite time and
therefore would not be considered a standby mode. (AHAM, June 2015 RFI,
No. 5 at pp. 2-3; AHAM, No. 3 at p. 6) DOE agrees that, because off-
cycle mode is terminated when the compressor reactivates, it would not
be classified as a standby mode even if no fan or blower operation
occurs. Regardless, such classification would not preclude any
determination as to whether off-cycle mode should be incorporated in
the energy efficiency metric.
In response to the August 2017 RFI, AHAM stated that the room AC
industry recently adjusted to the CEER metric that was implemented in
June 1, 2014, and that the metric has yet to be included on the
EnergyGuide label. Therefore, AHAM suggested that including off-cycle
mode in the room AC test procedure would prematurely adjust the
performance metric, resulting in another burdensome redesign and
testing process and potentially causing confusion with the test
procedure. (AHAM, No. 3 at p. 6)
Friedrich also opposed including off-cycle mode testing for room
ACs, stating that the portable AC off-cycle mode test requires an
additional 2 hours in the test chamber after the cooling mode test,
which is not an efficient use of test chamber time and which delays the
manufacturer test and development timeline. (Friedrich, No. 2 at p. 4)
DOE agrees that including an off-cycle mode test for room ACs would
likely increase testing by 2 hours, in addition to a short period to
adjust the test unit control settings.
The California IOUs noted that, in a previous test procedure
rulemaking for room ACs, DOE discussed, but did not describe, a test
procedure to measure fan-only energy use, and requested clarification
regarding how off-cycle mode would address fan energy consumption. The
California IOUs cited a Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory study,
which found that portable ACs consume 102 W when only operating the
fan,\44\ and suggested that room AC fan-only operation may similarly
consume a significant amount of power and thus should be captured in
the room AC test procedure. (California IOUs, No. 5 at p. 1) The Joint
Advocates supported measuring off-cycle mode power consumption in the
room AC test procedure, stating that it would provide better
representation of actual use and efficiency, more information to
consumers, and encourage manufactures to introduce more efficient fans
and fan motors. The Joint Advocates commented that capturing fan
operation outside of cooling mode would be consistent with the test
procedures for portable ACs, dehumidifiers, and dishwashers. (Joint
Advocates, No. 6 at pp. 3-4)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ Burke, Thomas et al. ``Using Field-Metered Data to Quantify
Annual Energy Use of Portable Air Conditioners'' Environmental
Energy Technologies Division Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
December 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To investigate the merits of including off-cycle mode in the DOE
test procedure, DOE conducted investigative testing of off-cycle mode
for a sample of 27 room ACs.\45\ The results of the testing are
presented in Table III-10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ Room AC off-cycle mode investigative testing was consistent
with the portable AC off-cycle mode test methodology.
Table III-10--Room AC Off-Cycle Mode Testing
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average power
Fan operation scheme in off- Off-cycle for fan
Unit No. cycle mode average power operating
(W) scheme (W)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OC-1.......................................... Continuous...................... 253.3 270.1
OC-2.......................................... Continuous...................... 286.9
OC-3.......................................... Cyclical--Indefinite............ 17.0 10.7
OC-4.......................................... Cyclical--Indefinite............ 2.2
OC-5.......................................... Cyclical--Indefinite............ 15.9
OC-6.......................................... Cyclical--Indefinite............ 15.3
OC-7.......................................... Cyclical--Indefinite............ 22.3
OC-8.......................................... Cyclical--Indefinite............ 20.2
OC-9.......................................... Cyclical--Indefinite............ 5.3
OC-10......................................... Cyclical--Indefinite............ 8.6
OC-11......................................... Cyclical--Indefinite............ 7.8
OC-12......................................... Cyclical--Indefinite............ 9.9
OC-13......................................... Cyclical--Indefinite............ 4.8
OC-14......................................... Cyclical--Indefinite............ 5.3
OC-15......................................... Cyclical--Indefinite............ 6.7
OC-16......................................... Cyclical--Indefinite............ 7.0
OC-17......................................... Cyclical--Indefinite............ 22.6
OC-18......................................... Cyclical--Indefinite............ 4.8
OC-19......................................... Cyclical--Indefinite............ 11.7
OC-20......................................... Cyclical--Indefinite............ 7.0
OC-21......................................... Cyclical--Indefinite............ 3.8
OC-22......................................... Cyclical--Indefinite............ 15.3
[[Page 35728]]
OC-23......................................... Cyclical--Limited............... 3.5 2.7
OC-24......................................... Cyclical--Limited............... 2.6
OC-25......................................... Cyclical--Limited............... 2.5
OC-26......................................... Cyclical--Limited............... 2.2
OC-27......................................... No Fan Operation................ 1.8 1.8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As shown in Table III-10, two of the units operated the fan
continuously in off-cycle mode and consumed 270.1 W on average. Of the
remaining 25, one did not operate the fan at all during off-cycle mode
and consumed 1.8 W; four disabled the fan after a few fan cycles (shown
as ``cyclical-limited'') and consumed 2.7 W on average; and the
remaining 20 units continued cycling the fan throughout the test period
(shown as ````cyclical-indefinite''), 10.7 W on average. The cyclical
fan behavior that DOE observed was generally consistent with the ENERGY
STAR V4.1 specification, which as discussed in section III.C.3 of this
document, requires that all ENERGY STAR-certified room ACs ship with an
energy saver mode enabled by default that minimizes energy consumption
by limiting fan operation to: (1) While the compressor is operating
(i.e., cooling mode); (2) a period not exceeding 5 minutes after the
compressor is switched off (i.e., following cooling mode and prior to
off-cycle mode); and (3) up to 17 percent of the total compressor off
cycle time following the initial 5-minute period (i.e., off-cycle
mode), equivalent to 1 minute of fan-on time for every 5 minutes of
fan-off time.
As discussed in a NOPR for the portable AC test procedure published
on February 25, 2015, DOE tentatively determined that the benefits of
measuring off-cycle mode power for portable ACs outweighed the
additional test burden because all models tested from a market-
representative sample operated the fan continuously in off-cycle mode
with an average off-cycle mode power of 93 W. 80 FR 10211, 10231.
However, based on the results described above, which indicate
relatively low (i.e., approximately 10 percent or less) average power
use in off-cycle mode compared to the average power used in cooling
mode, DOE has tentatively determined that the additional 2-hour test
burden that would be required would outweigh the benefits of measuring
off-cycle mode power for room ACs. Therefore, DOE is not proposing to
define off-cycle mode or establish means for measuring off-cycle mode
average power for room ACs in appendix F.
DOE requests comment on the proposal to not establish a definition
or test procedure for off-cycle mode.
F. Standby Modes and Off Mode
Section 1.7 of appendix F defines standby mode as any mode where a
room AC is connected to a mains power source and offers one or more of
the following user-oriented or protective functions which may persist
for an indefinite time: (a) To facilitate the activation of other modes
(including activation or deactivation of active mode) by remote switch
(including remote control), internal sensor, or timer; or (b)
continuous functions, including information or status displays
(including clocks) or sensor-based functions. Section 1.5 of appendix F
defines inactive mode as a mode that facilitates the activation of
active mode by remote switch (including by remote control) or internal
sensor, or provides continuous status display. Section 1.6 of appendix
F defines off mode as a mode distinct from inactive mode in which a
room AC is connected to a mains power source and is not providing any
active or standby mode function and where the mode may persist for an
indefinite time. An indicator that only shows the user that the product
is in the off position is included within the classification of an off
mode.
1. Referenced Standby Mode and Off Mode Test Standard
In the January 2011 Final Rule, DOE amended the room AC test
procedure by incorporating provisions from IEC Standard 62301 First
Edition for measuring standby mode and off mode power. 76 FR 971, 979-
980 (Jan. 6, 2011). At that time, DOE reviewed the IEC Standard 62301
First Edition and concluded that it would generally apply to room ACs,
with some clarifications, including allowance for testing standby mode
and off mode in either the test chamber used for cooling mode testing,
or in a separate test room that meets the specified standby mode and
off mode test conditions. 76 FR 971, 986.
On January 27, 2011, IEC published IEC Standard 62301 Second
Edition, an internationally accepted test procedure for measuring
standby power in residential appliances, which included various
clarifications to IEC Standard 62301 First Edition. Provisions from IEC
Standard 62301 Second Edition are currently referenced in DOE test
procedures for multiple consumer products for which standby mode and
off mode energy use are measured (e.g., dehumidifiers, portable ACs,
dishwashers, clothes washers, clothes dryers, conventional cooking
products, microwave ovens).
Based on its previous determinations for similar consumer products,
DOE expects that the use of IEC Standard 62301 Second Edition for
measuring the standby mode and off mode energy use for room ACs would
improve the accuracy and representativeness of the test measurements
and would not be unduly burdensome, compared to IEC Standard 62301
First Edition. Accordingly, DOE proposes to incorporate by reference
relevant paragraphs of IEC Standard 62301 Second Edition in appendix F
in place of those from IEC Standard 62301 First Edition, as follows.
a. Power Measurement Uncertainty
Section 4.4 of IEC Standard 62301 Second Edition introduces a more
comprehensive specification for power measurement accuracy, which
depends on the crest factor \46\ and power factor of the input power,
and the resulting calculated maximum current ratio (MCR). DOE notes
that the allowable uncertainty is the same or less stringent than the
allowable uncertainty specified in the First Edition, depending on the
value of MCR and the power level being measured. In a final rule
published in the Federal Register on October 31,
[[Page 35729]]
2012 (hereafter the ``October 2012 Final Rule''), regarding test
procedures for consumer dishwashers, dehumidifiers, and conventional
cooking products, DOE determined that this change in the allowable
uncertainty would maintain sufficient accuracy of measurements under a
full range of possible measured power levels while minimizing test
burden associated with high instrumentation accuracy. 77 FR 65942,
65948. Because DOE understands that the standby power characteristics
of room ACs are similar to those of dishwashers, dehumidifiers, and
conventional cooking products and were tested using the same standard
until the publication of the October 2012 Final Rule, DOE relies on
that analysis and adopts it for room ACs. Therefore, DOE proposes to
reference the power equipment specifications from Section 4.4 of IEC
Standard 62301 Second Edition for determining standby mode and off mode
power in appendix F.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ The crest factor is the measured peak current drawn by the
product divided by the measured root mean square current drawn by
the product.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE requests comment on the proposal to reference the power
equipment specifications from Section 4.4 of IEC Standard 62301 Second
Edition for determining standby mode and off mode power in appendix F.
b. Power Consumption Measurement Procedure
Section 4.2 of appendix F requires measuring standby mode and off
mode power according to Section 5, Paragraph 5.3 of IEC Standard 62301
First Edition, as modified by Appendix F.\47\ Paragraph 5.3 specifies a
direct meter reading method. If the power varies over a cycle, as
described in Section 5, Paragraph 5.3.2 of IEC Standard 62301 First
Edition, testing must follow the average power approach for power that
varies over a cycle in Section 5, Paragraph 5.3.2(a). This approach
requires a measurement period long enough to include one or more
complete cycles, and then calculating the average power over the
measurement period is calculated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ Appendix F provides additional direction requiring the
product to stabilize for 5 to 10 minutes and using an energy use
measurement period of 5 minutes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IEC Standard 62301 Second Edition defines three different mode
stability types (stable, cyclic, and irregular) and provides three
methods to measure power consumption of an appliance: (1) Sampling, (2)
average reading, and (3) direct meter reading. The direct meter reading
method and average reading method are similar to the options in IEC
Standard 62301 First Edition for stable and non-stable (cyclic or
irregular) standby modes, respectively, that are currently referenced
in the room AC test procedure. The following paragraphs describe the
three methods in IEC Standard 62301 Second Edition to determine power
consumption.
(1) The sampling method requires different approaches for stable,
cyclic, and irregular power consumption modes. For stable modes, it
requires a test period of at least 15 minutes, with power data recorded
at least once every second. The first third of the total period is
discarded, and the other two-thirds of the period are used to determine
stability. Stability is achieved when the slope of a linear regression
of the data is within tolerances listed in Section 5.3.2 of IEC
Standard 62301 Second Edition. Once the stability criteria are
satisfied, the result is the average power consumed during the latter
two thirds of the total test period. For cyclic modes, the method
requires two test periods, each not less than 10 minutes, and not less
than two cycles each. Stability for a cyclic mode is achieved when the
power difference between the two test periods is within tolerance. The
representative average power is the average power consumed over both
comparison periods. For irregular modes, or cyclic modes where the
cycles never meet stability criteria, IEC Standard 62301 Second Edition
requires collecting data sufficient to characterize the power
consumption of the mode and recommends measuring a minimum of ten
cycles.
(2) The direct meter reading method may only be used for stable
modes, and requires a 30-minute stabilization period, which is extended
if stability cannot be achieved. Once stability has been achieved, two
instantaneous measurements are taken not less than 10 minutes apart.
The average of these two readings is the result, as long as the two
measurements agree within the tolerances specified in Section 5.3.4 of
IEC Standard 62301 Second Edition. If the measurements do not agree
sufficiently or stability cannot be achieved, testing must follow a
different method.
(3) The average reading method may only be used for stable modes.
This is a change from the first edition of IEC Standard 62301, which
also allowed use for non-stable modes. After a 30-minute stabilization
period, average power measurements are taken over two equal comparison
periods, each not less than 10 minutes in duration. If the two
measurements agree within the tolerances specified in Section 5.3.3 of
IEC Standard 62301 Second Edition, the result is determined by the
average of readings from both comparison periods. If the measurements
do not agree within the specified tolerances or stability cannot be
achieved, testing must follow the sampling method.
According to IEC Standard 62301 Second Edition, the sampling method
is preferred for all cases and is specified for all units in which the
power varies over the mode, or the mode to be measured is of limited
duration. Thus, IEC Standard 62301 Second Edition specifies the
sampling method to be used for modes when the power is cyclic or
irregular and suggests that it is the fastest test method for stable
modes.
DOE expects that adopting a single test method from IEC Standard
62301 Second Edition would ensure that the standby power test procedure
for room ACs is uniform and repeatable because allowing multiple test
methods may affect reproducibility if systematic differences exist
between the test methods. DOE does not expect that proposing the
sampling method for all standby mode and off mode testing would
increase test burden, because power meters that can measure, store, and
output readings at the required proposed sampling rate and accuracy for
the sampling method are already widely used by test laboratories. DOE
also does not anticipate that the power consumption measured with the
sampling method would substantively vary from that measured with the
direct meter or average reading methods. DOE notes that other covered
products, such as dehumidifiers and portable ACs, require using the
sampling method to measure standby mode and off mode average power. For
these reasons, DOE proposes to adopt the sampling method from Section
5.3.2 of IEC Standard 62301 Second Edition to determine standby mode
and off mode average power in appendix F.
DOE requests comment on the proposal to adopt and reference the
sampling method from Section 5.3.2 of IEC Standard 62301 Second Edition
to determine standby mode and off mode average power in appendix F.
G. Network Functionality
Network functionality on room ACs may enable functions such as
communicating with the network to provide real-time information on the
temperature conditions in the room or receiving commands via a remote
user interface such as a smartphone. DOE has observed that network
features on room ACs are designed to operate in the background while
the room AC performs other functions. These network functions may
operate continuously during all operating modes, and therefore may
impact the
[[Page 35730]]
power consumption in all operating modes.
In the June 2010 SNOPR, DOE considered whether it should adopt
amendments to the room AC test procedure to measure energy consumption
when network functionality is enabled. DOE noted that a draft version
of IEC Standard 62301 Second Edition described network mode as a mode
where the energy using product is connected to a main power source and
at least one network function is activated (such as reactivation via
network command or network integrity communication) but where the
primary function is not active. 75 FR 37594, 37605 (June 29, 2010). Due
to the lack of information about room ACs with network functionality,
in the January 2011 Final Rule, DOE did not adopt provisions to account
for energy consumption associated with network functionality. 76 FR
971, 983-984 (Jan. 6, 2011).
DOE investigated the network-enabled units currently available in
the market to assess whether an amendment to room AC test procedure to
measure network functionality would be appropriate. DOE did not find
network-capabilities to be common at this time and found that to the
extent offered, in most cases, such units are sold network-ready or
with the necessary hardware included. However, at least one
manufacturer does not include the necessary hardware with the original
purchase, instead selling a connectivity module separately. Based on
these findings, and as discussed further in section III.H of this
document, DOE is not proposing provisions to specifically measure and
account for energy consumption associated with network functionality.
However, to provide further direction and simplify the test setup and
configuration settings, DOE proposes to specify in section 3.1.4 of
appendix F that units with network capabilities must be tested with the
network settings disabled, and that those network settings remain
disabled for all tested operating modes (i.e., cooling mode, standby
mode, and off mode).
DOE also recently published an RFI on the emerging smart technology
appliance and equipment market. 83 FR 46886 (Sept. 17, 2018). In that
RFI, DOE sought information to better understand market trends and
issues in the emerging market for appliances and commercial equipment
that incorporate smart technology. DOE's intent in issuing the RFI was
to ensure that DOE did not inadvertently impede such innovation in
fulfilling its statutory obligations in setting efficiency standards
for covered products and equipment. In this NOPR, DOE seeks comment on
the same issues presented in the RFI as they may be applicable to room
ACs.
DOE requests comment on the proposal to specify that all network or
connectivity settings must be disabled during testing.
H. Connected Test Procedure
ENERGY STAR V4.1 specifies optional criteria for room ACs designed
to provide additional functionality to consumers, such as alerts and
messages, remote control and energy information, as well as demand
response (DR) capabilities, which support the inclusion of room ACs in
smart grid applications (hereafter ``connected room ACs''). These
capabilities are all considered network functionality, as they require
the room AC maintain communication continuously or intermittently with
a server; however, DR functionality is a unique subset that enables
smart grid communication and active modified operation in response to
DR signals from an electric utility.
In the June 2015 RFI, DOE noted that the ENERGY STAR V4.0 criteria
\48\ may increase the market penetration of connected room ACs and that
the operation of connected functions may require a significant amount
of energy. Thus, DOE requested input on whether the test procedure
should be amended to account for the energy consumed while the room AC
performs connected functions. Specifically, DOE requested information
on the connected features available in the market and the energy
consumption of those features. Furthermore, DOE requested information
on the current and anticipated market penetration of connected room
ACs. 80 FR 34843, 34848 (June 18, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ The optional criteria for connected room air conditioners
contained in ENERGY STAR V4.0 are identical to those contained in
the currently applicable V4.1 version.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Joint Advocates stated that there were already seven
``connected'' models in the ENERGY STAR list of certified room ACs as
of August 29, 2017, and as more are introduced into the market, there
may be significant and continuous additional energy consumption due to
the connected functionality operating in an ``always on'' standby mode.
The Joint Advocates suggested that the test procedure for room ACs
should capture any power consumption associated with connected features
to encourage manufacturers to provide connected functionality with low
power consumption. (Joint Advocates, No. 6 at p. 4) DOE reiterates its
request for comment on network connectivity issues in light of the
September 17, 2018 RFI.
The Joint Commenters and California IOUs encouraged DOE to consider
amending the existing room AC test procedure to include the energy
consumption of connected features for connected room ACs. These
commenters expect that connected room ACs, which can support smart grid
interconnection, would become more common with the publication of the
ENERGY STAR V4.0. The California IOUs noted that room ACs typically
operate during peak hours, so the connected functionalities are
particularly beneficial to both utilities and consumers by reducing the
overall load and providing better-informed user control. The California
IOUs also stated that as the market continues to grow for these
features, it is important to understand how to measure, capture, and
monitor the energy consumption and energy reduction that results from
implementing the connected features. The California IOUs urged DOE to
include the connected functions in the test procedure if the energy
impacts are significant. (Joint Commenters, June 2015 RFI, No. 7 at p.
2; California IOUs, June 2015 RFI, No. 8 at p. 4; California IOUs, No.
5 at p. 1)
AHAM stated that an ENERGY STAR test method to evaluate DR
capabilities had not yet been published, and therefore the market
penetration for connected room ACs was still minimal. AHAM also stated
that connected products offer consumers and utilities a unique energy
savings opportunity by improving grid energy efficiency and allowing
for peak-load shifting and implementation of renewable power sources).
Therefore, AHAM suggested that DOE should not revise the room AC test
procedure to account for the energy consumption associated with
connected functionality because that would negate the potential
benefits these products provide. (AHAM, June 2015 RFI, No. 5 at pp. 4-
5)
On June 7, 2017, DOE and EPA published the final ENERGY STAR
Program Requirements Product Specification for Room Air Conditioners:
Test Method to Validate Demand Response (hereafter the ``June 2017
ENERGY STAR Test Method''). This test method validates that a unit
complies with ENERGY STAR's DR requirements, which are designed to
reduce energy consumption upon receipt of a DR signal. However, DOE
notes that the June 2017 ENERGY STAR Test Method does not measure the
total energy consumption or average power
[[Page 35731]]
while a unit responds to a DR signal. Further, DOE notes that no
connected room ACs are currently available on the market that comply
with the full set of ENERGY STAR V4.1 connected criteria, and
therefore, the energy consumption cannot be determined for a range of
products and manufacturers. There is also little available information
indicating the frequency of received DR signals that are specified in
the ENERGY STAR connected criteria. As a result, it is not possible to
determine annual energy use attributed to DR signals. Therefore, given
the issues raised in the September 17, 2018 RFI and the lack of
available connected room ACs on the market and lack of energy
consumption and usage data regarding the DR signals, DOE does not
propose to amend its room AC test procedure in this rulemaking to
measure energy consumption while a connected room AC is responding to a
DR signal.
DOE requests comment on the proposal not to amend the DOE test
procedure for room ACs to include energy consumption while a connected
room AC responds to a DR signal.
I. Combined Energy Efficiency Ratio
The current room AC energy efficiency metric, CEER, accounts for
the cooling provided by the room AC in cooling mode as a function of
the total energy consumption in cooling mode and inactive mode or off
mode. In the June 2015 RFI, DOE requested comment on the merits and
limitations of revising the room AC test procedure and efficiency
metric to account for energy consumption in various modes, such as
cooling mode, heating mode, off-cycle mode, inactive mode, and off
mode. 80 FR 34843, 34846 (June 18, 2015).
AHAM opposed adding additional energy metrics for room ACs, noting
that the industry recently implemented product redesigns adding standby
and off mode energy consumption in the overall efficiency metric, in
response to the CEER established in the January 2011 Final Rule. As
previously discussed in section III.E.3 of this document for off-cycle
mode specifically, AHAM suggested that an additional metric would
require another burdensome redesign and any new mode definitions and
metrics would complicate the test procedure and increase the test
burden. (AHAM, June 2015 RFI, No. 5 at p. 2) As discussed in section
III.E.2 and section III.E.3 of this document, respectively, DOE is not
proposing a heating mode or off-cycle mode test in appendix F. Further,
although DOE is proposing a new test procedure for variable-speed room
ACs that requires testing at additional outdoor test conditions, the
new variable-speed room AC test procedure calculations produce a CEER
value comparable to the existing CEER metric for single-speed units.
The new calculations would not change the procedure for single-speed
units.
DOE requests comment on the proposal to maintain the current CEER
calculations for single-speed room ACs.
J. Certification and Verification Requirements
In a direct final rule published on April 22, 2011 (hereafter the
``April 2011 Direct Final Rule''), DOE published amended energy
conservation standards for room ACs, with a compliance date of June 1,
2014. 76 FR 22454. The amended standards reflect performance in standby
mode or off mode, based on a new performance metric, CEER, expressed in
Btu/Wh. However, the sampling plan and certification reporting
requirements in 10 CFR 429.15(a)(2)(ii) and (b)(2) were not updated in
the April 2011 Direct Final Rule. DOE proposes in this NOPR to update
those requirements to conform to the current metric by requiring the
reporting of the CEER metric and to remove references to the previous
performance metric, EER. For variable-speed room ACs, DOE proposes to
require the additional reporting of cooling capacity and electrical
input power for each of the three additional test conditions as part of
a supplemental PDF that would be referenced within the manufacturer's
certification report.
Friedrich urged DOE to examine the enforcement procedure for room
AC standards, noting that CEER measurements can differ by 2 to 3
percent from laboratory to laboratory, especially for units rated below
12,000 Btu/h. Friedrich expressed the view that the current enforcement
methodology fails to account for this variation. (Friedrich, No. 2 at
p. 7)
DOE appreciates the comment by Friedrich, although it is outside
the scope of this rulemaking. DOE may consider this information in the
future if DOE conducts a rulemaking that would address certification
and enforcement procedures and encourages Friedrich to submit its
comment in any such rulemaking.
K. Reorganization of Calculations Currently in 10 CFR 430.23
Currently, 10 CFR 430.23(f) contains instructions for determining a
room AC's estimated annual operating cost, with calculations described
for the average annual energy consumption, combined annual energy
consumption, EER, and CEER.
DOE proposes to move the formula for a unit's CEER from 10 CFR
430.23(f) to appendix F, to mitigate potential confusion, harmonize
with the approach used for other products, and improve the readability
of the calculations currently in 10 CFR 430.23(f) and appendix F.
Similarly, DOE proposes to remove the formulas for average annual
energy consumption in cooling mode and combined annual energy
consumption from 10 CFR 430.23(f) and instead add formulas for annual
energy consumption for each operating mode in appendix F.
Because the EER performance metric is does not apply to either
current or future manufacturing, DOE proposes removing the EER formula
from 10 CFR 430.23(f), and also proposes to remove the formulas for
overall annual energy consumption in that section (i.e., a combined
annual energy consumption as well as an average annual energy
consumption). Instead, DOE proposes to update the estimated annual
operating cost calculation in 10 CFR 430.23(f) to reference energy
consumption values calculated in appendix F.
Finally, DOE proposes to include in 10 CFR 429.15(a)(3) through (5)
and (b)(3) and 10 CFR 430.23(f) instructions to round cooling capacity
to the nearest 100 Btu/h, electrical input power to the nearest 10 W,
and CEER to the nearest 0.1 Btu/Wh, to provide consistency in room AC
capacity, electrical input power, and efficiency representations.
DOE requests comment on the proposed rounding instructions in
appendix F for cooling capacity, electrical input power, and CEER and
to revise the estimated annual operating cost calculation to now
reference the annual energy consumption for each operating mode as
calculated in appendix F, as opposed to the annual energy consumption
calculation currently located in 10 CFR 430.23.
L. Test Procedure Costs, Harmonization, and Other Topics
1. Test Procedure Costs and Impact
EPCA requires that test procedures proposed by DOE not be unduly
burdensome to conduct. In this NOPR, DOE proposes to amend the existing
test procedure for room ACs by (1) updating industry standard
references to the current versions; (2) adopting procedures for
variable-speed room ACs that reflect the relative efficiency gains
compared to single-speed room ACs; (3) adopting new definitions
consistent with the proposed amendments; and (4) providing
specifications and minor corrections to improve the test procedure
repeatability, reproducibility,
[[Page 35732]]
and overall readability. DOE has tentatively determined that these
proposed amendments would not be unduly burdensome for manufacturers to
conduct.
Based on review of the Compliance Certification Database in DOE's
Compliance Certification Management System, DOE has identified 812
basic models of room ACs, representing 31 manufacturers.\49\ However,
this number likely is artificially high. DOE frequently finds that
manufacturers fail to report a model as discontinued. DOE's analysis of
this proposal indicates that, if finalized, the only cost savings or
additional costs to manufacturers would be those already being incurred
for variable-speed room ACs under the LG Waiver and Grant of Midea
Interim Waiver.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ https://www.regulations.doe.gov/certification-data/CCMS-4-Air_Conditioners_and_Heat_Pumps_-_Room_Air_Conditioners.html.
Accessed October 8th, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
a. Variable-Speed Test Impact
As discussed in section III.C.1 of this document, DOE proposes to
add three additional cooling mode test conditions to the appendix F
test procedure for variable-speed room ACs to better reflect the
relative efficiency improvements of variable-speed ACs compared to
single-speed room ACs. DOE estimates that the proposed amendments for
variable-speed room AC would require a total of 14 hours of test
chamber time, while the current test procedure requires approximately
two hours of test chamber time. However, as discussed previously, all
ten basic models (four from LG and six from Midea) currently on the
market are subject to either the LG Waiver or the Grant of Midea
Interim Waiver and are generally being tested consistent with the
proposed amendments in this NOPR. 84 FR 20111 and 84 FR 68159.
Therefore, the ten variable-speed room AC basic models identified by
DOE would not need to be re-tested or re-certified if DOE adopts the
amendments as proposed in this document. Although no other
manufacturers are currently producing variable-speed room ACs that are
sold in the United States, the additional testing time described above
would be applicable to any entities that begin manufacturing a
variable-speed room AC for introduction to the U.S. market.
DOE has tentatively concluded that the proposed test procedure in
this NOPR would not add any industry test burden and that the minimal
costs associated with the LG Waiver and Grant of Midea Interim Waiver
test procedure are already being incurred.
DOE requests comment on the understanding of the estimated impact
and associated costs to room AC manufacturers of the proposed amendment
to test variable-speed room ACs.
b. Additional Amendments
DOE affirms that manufacturers of single-speed room ACs can rely on
data generated under the current test procedure for single-speed room
ACs should any of these additional proposed amendments be finalized.
Therefore, the remainder of the amendments proposed in this NOPR for
single-speed room ACs would not impact test costs.
2. Harmonization With Industry Standards
DOE is proposing that the test procedure for room ACs at appendix F
incorporate by reference certain provisions of ANSI/AHAM RAC-1-2015 and
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2016 for active mode testing conditions,
methods, and calculations, and IEC Standard 62301 Second Edition for
measuring standby and off mode power consumption.
DOE seeks comment on the degree to which the DOE test procedure
should consider and be harmonized further with the most recent relevant
industry standards for room ACs and whether any changes to the Federal
test method would provide additional benefits to the public. DOE also
requests comment on the benefits and burdens of, or any other comments
regarding adopting any industry or voluntary consensus-based or other
appropriate test procedure, without modification.
DOE notes that current industry test procedures, ANSI/AHAM RAC-1-
2015 and ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2016 do not include test procedures
for variable-speed units, such as the multiple test conditions proposed
in this NOPR. DOE requests comment on whether the industry is
considering updating its standards for room AC testing to include
provisions for testing variable-speed room ACs.
3. Other Test Procedure Topics
In addition to the issues identified earlier in this document, DOE
welcomes comment on any other aspect of the existing test procedure for
room ACs not already addressed by the specific areas identified in this
document. DOE particularly seeks information that would improve the
representativeness of the test procedure, as well as information that
would help DOE create a procedure that would limit manufacturer test
burden. Comments regarding repeatability and reproducibility are also
welcome.
DOE also requests information that would help DOE create procedures
that would limit manufacturer test burden through streamlining or
simplifying testing requirements. In particular, DOE notes that under
Executive Order 13771, ``Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory
Costs,'' Executive Branch agencies such as DOE must manage the costs
associated with the imposition of expenditures required to comply with
Federal regulations. See 82 FR 9339 (Feb. 3, 2017). Consistent with
that Executive Order, DOE encourages the public to provide input on
measures DOE could take to lower the cost of its regulations applicable
to room ACs consistent with the requirements of EPCA.
M. Compliance Date and Waivers
EPCA prescribes that, if DOE amends a test procedure, all
representations of energy efficiency and energy use, including those
made on marketing materials and product labels, must be made in
accordance with that amended test procedure, beginning 180 days after
publication of such a test procedure final rule in the Federal
Register. (42 U.S.C. 6293(c)(2)) If DOE were to publish an amended test
procedure for room ACs, EPCA provides an allowance for individual
manufacturers to petition DOE for an extension of the 180-day period if
the manufacturer would experience undue hardship in meeting the 180-day
deadline. (42 U.S.C. 6293(c)(3)) To receive such an extension, a
manufacturer must file a petition with DOE no later than 60 days before
the end of the 180-day period and detail how the manufacturer will
experience undue hardship. (Id.)
Upon the compliance date of an amended test procedure, if DOE
issues such an amendment, any waivers that had been previously issued
and are in effect that pertain to issues addressed by the amended test
procedure terminate. 10 CFR 430.27(h)(2). Recipients of any such
waivers would be required to test products subject to the waiver
according to the amended test procedure as of the effective date of the
amended test procedure. There is currently one waiver from the test
procedure for room ACs for four variable-speed models manufactured by
LG. In a decision and order published on May 8, 2019, DOE granted this
waiver from DOE's room AC test procedure. 84 FR 20111. Additionally,
there is one interim waiver from the room AC test procedure for six
variable-speed models, manufactured by Midea, that DOE
[[Page 35733]]
granted on December 13, 2019 (84 FR 68159) that would also terminate
upon the compliance date of such an amended test procedure.
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
The Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
determined that the proposed regulatory action is a significant
regulatory action under section (3)(f) of Executive Order 12866.
Accordingly, this action was reviewed by OIRA in the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB).
B. Review Under Executive Orders 13771 and 13777
On January 30, 2017, the President issued Executive Order (E.O.)
13771, ``Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs.'' See 82
FR 9339 (Feb. 3, 2017). E.O. 13771 stated the policy of the executive
branch is to be prudent and financially responsible in the expenditure
of funds, from both public and private sources. E.O. 13771 stated it is
essential to manage the costs associated with the governmental
imposition of private expenditures required to comply with Federal
regulations.
Additionally, on February 24, 2017, the President issued E.O.
13777, ``Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda.'' 82 FR 12285 (March
1, 2017). E.O. 13777 required the head of each agency designate an
agency official as its Regulatory Reform Officer (RRO). Each RRO
oversees the implementation of regulatory reform initiatives and
policies to ensure that agencies effectively carry out regulatory
reforms, consistent with applicable law. Further, E.O. 13777 requires
the establishment of a regulatory task force at each agency. The
regulatory task force is required to make recommendations to the agency
head regarding the repeal, replacement, or modification of existing
regulations, consistent with applicable law. At a minimum, each
regulatory reform task force must attempt to identify regulations that:
(i) Eliminate jobs, or inhibit job creation;
(ii) Are outdated, unnecessary, or ineffective;
(iii) Impose costs that exceed benefits;
(iv) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with
regulatory reform initiatives and policies;
(v) Are inconsistent with the requirements of Information Quality
Act, or the guidance issued pursuant to that Act, in particular those
regulations that rely in whole or in part on data, information, or
methods that are not publicly available or that are insufficiently
transparent to meet the standard for reproducibility; or
(vi) Derive from or implement Executive Orders or other
Presidential directives that have been subsequently rescinded or
substantially modified.
DOE initially concludes that this rulemaking is consistent with the
directives set forth in these executive orders. This proposed rule
would not yield any cost savings or additional costs to manufacturers
other than those already being incurred for variable-speed room ACs
under the LG Waiver and the Grant of Midea Interim Waiver.
C. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires
preparation of an initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IFRA) for
any rule that by law must be proposed for public comment, unless the
agency certifies that the rule, if promulgated, will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
As required by Executive Order 13272, ``Proper Consideration of Small
Entities in Agency Rulemaking,'' 67 FR 53461 (Aug. 16, 2002), DOE
published procedures and policies on February 19, 2003, to ensure that
the potential impacts of its rules on small entities are properly
considered during the DOE rulemaking process. 68 FR 7990. DOE has made
its procedures and policies available on the Office of the General
Counsel's website: https://energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel.
DOE reviewed this proposed rule under the provisions of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act and the procedures and policies published on
February 19, 2003. The proposed rule prescribes amended test procedures
to measure the energy consumption of room ACs in cooling mode, standby
modes, and off mode. DOE tentatively concludes that this proposed rule
would not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small
entities, and the factual basis for this certification is set forth in
the following paragraphs.
The Small Business Administration (SBA) considers a business entity
to be small business, if, together with its affiliates, it employs less
than a threshold number of workers specified in 13 CFR part 121. These
size standards and codes are established by the North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS) and are available at https://www.sba.gov/document/support--table-size-standards. Room AC manufacturing is
classified under NAICS 333415, ``Air-Conditioning and Warm Air Heating
Equipment and Commercial and Industrial Refrigeration Equipment
Manufacturing.'' The SBA sets a threshold of 1,250 employees or fewer
for an entity to be considered as a small business for this category.
DOE used DOE's Compliance Certification Database \50\ to create a
list of companies that sell room ACs covered by this rulemaking in the
United States. Additionally, DOE surveyed the AHAM member directory to
identify manufacturers of room ACs. DOE then consulted other publicly
available data, purchased company reports from vendors such as Dun and
Bradstreet, and contacted manufacturers, where needed, to determine if
they meet the SBA's definition of a ``small business manufacturing
facility'' and have their manufacturing facilities located within the
United States. Based on this analysis, DOE is unable to identify any
small businesses that currently manufacture room ACs in the United
States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\50\ https://www.regulations.doe.gov/certification-data.
Accessed October 5, 2018
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because DOE identified no small businesses that manufacture room
ACs in the United States, DOE tentatively concludes that the impacts of
the test procedure amendments proposed in this NOPR would not have a
``significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities,'' and that the preparation of an IRFA is not warranted. DOE
will transmit the certification and supporting statement of factual
basis to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration for review under 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
DOE seeks comment on the finding that there are no small businesses
that manufacture room ACs.
D. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
Manufacturers of room ACs must certify to DOE that their products
comply with any applicable energy conservation standards. To certify
compliance, manufacturers must first obtain test data for their
products according to the DOE test procedures, including any amendments
adopted for those test procedures. DOE has established regulations for
the certification and recordkeeping requirements for all covered
consumer products and commercial equipment, including room ACs. (See
generally 10 CFR part 429.) The collection-of-information requirement
for the certification and recordkeeping is
[[Page 35734]]
subject to review and approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA). This requirement has been approved by OMB under OMB control
number 1910-1400. Public reporting burden for the certification is
estimated to average 35 hours per response, including the time for
reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the
collection of information.
Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is
required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty
for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the PRA, unless that collection of information displays
a currently valid OMB Control Number.
E. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
DOE is analyzing this proposed regulation in accordance with the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and DOE's NEPA
implementing regulations (10 CFR part 1021). DOE's regulations include
a categorical exclusion for rulemakings interpreting or amending an
existing rule or regulation that does not change the environmental
effect of the rule or regulation being amended. 10 CFR part 1021,
subpart D, Appendix A5. DOE anticipates that this rulemaking qualifies
for categorical exclusion A5 because it is an interpretive rulemaking
that does not change the environmental effect of the rule and otherwise
meets the requirements for application of a categorical exclusion. See
10 CFR 1021.410. DOE will complete its NEPA review before issuing the
final rule.
F. Review Under Executive Order 13132
Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism,'' 64 FR 43255 (Aug. 4, 1999)
imposes certain requirements on agencies formulating and implementing
policies or regulations that preempt State law or that have federalism
implications. The Executive Order requires agencies to examine the
constitutional and statutory authority supporting any action that would
limit the policymaking discretion of the States and to carefully assess
the necessity for such actions. The Executive Order also requires
agencies to have an accountable process to ensure meaningful and timely
input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have federalism implications. On March 14, 2000, DOE
published a statement of policy describing the intergovernmental
consultation process it will follow in the development of such
regulations. 65 FR 13735. DOE has examined this proposed rule and has
determined that it would not have a substantial direct effect on the
States, on the relationship between the national government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. EPCA governs and prescribes Federal
preemption of State regulations as to energy conservation for the
products that are the subject of this proposed rule. States can
petition DOE for exemption from such preemption to the extent, and
based on criteria, set forth in EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6297(d)) No further
action is required by Executive Order 13132.
G. Review Under Executive Order 12988
Regarding the review of existing regulations and the promulgation
of new regulations, section 3(a) of Executive Order 12988, ``Civil
Justice Reform,'' 61 FR 4729 (Feb. 7, 1996), imposes on Federal
agencies the general duty to adhere to the following requirements: (1)
Eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity, (2) write regulations to
minimize litigation, (3) provide a clear legal standard for affected
conduct rather than a general standard, and (4) promote simplification
and burden reduction. Section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988
specifically requires that Executive agencies make every reasonable
effort to ensure that the regulation (1) clearly specifies the
preemptive effect, if any, (2) clearly specifies any effect on existing
Federal law or regulation, (3) provides a clear legal standard for
affected conduct while promoting simplification and burden reduction,
(4) specifies the retroactive effect, if any, (5) adequately defines
key terms, and (6) addresses other important issues affecting clarity
and general draftsmanship under any guidelines issued by the Attorney
General. Section 3(c) of Executive Order 12988 requires Executive
agencies to review regulations in light of applicable standards in
sections 3(a) and 3(b) to determine whether they are met or it is
unreasonable to meet one or more of them. DOE has completed the
required review and determined that, to the extent permitted by law,
the proposed rule meets the relevant standards of Executive Order
12988.
H. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
requires each Federal agency to assess the effects of Federal
regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal governments and the
private sector. Public Law 104-4, sec. 201 (codified at 2 U.S.C. 1531).
For a proposed regulatory action likely to result in a rule that may
cause the expenditure by State, local, and Tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector of $100 million or more in any one
year (adjusted annually for inflation), section 202 of UMRA requires a
Federal agency to publish a written statement that estimates the
resulting costs, benefits, and other effects on the national economy.
(2 U.S.C. 1532(a), (b)) The UMRA also requires a Federal agency to
develop an effective process to permit timely input by elected officers
of State, local, and Tribal governments on a proposed ``significant
intergovernmental mandate,'' and requires an agency plan for giving
notice and opportunity for timely input to potentially affected small
governments before establishing any requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. On March 18, 1997,
DOE published a statement of policy on its process for
intergovernmental consultation under UMRA. 62 FR 12820; also available
at https://energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel. DOE examined this
proposed rule according to UMRA and its statement of policy and
determined that the rule contains neither an intergovernmental mandate,
nor a mandate that may result in the expenditure of $100 million or
more in any year, so these requirements do not apply.
I. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act,
1999
Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105-277) requires Federal agencies to issue a Family
Policymaking Assessment for any rule that may affect family well-being.
This proposed rule would not have any impact on the autonomy or
integrity of the family as an institution. Accordingly, DOE has
concluded that it is not necessary to prepare a Family Policymaking
Assessment.
J. Review Under Executive Order 12630
DOE has determined, under Executive Order 12630, ``Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights,'' 53 FR 8859 (March 18, 1988), that this regulation would not
result in any takings that might require compensation under the Fifth
Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
K. Review Under Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act,
2001
Section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C. 3516 note) provides
[[Page 35735]]
for agencies to review most disseminations of information to the public
under guidelines established by each agency pursuant to general
guidelines issued by OMB. OMB's guidelines were published at 67 FR 8452
(Feb. 22, 2002), and DOE's guidelines were published at 67 FR 62446
(Oct. 7, 2002). DOE has reviewed this proposed rule under the OMB and
DOE guidelines and has concluded that it is consistent with applicable
policies in those guidelines.
L. Review Under Executive Order 13211
Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,'' 66 FR 28355
(May 22, 2001), requires Federal agencies to prepare and submit to OMB,
a Statement of Energy Effects for any proposed significant energy
action. A ``significant energy action'' is defined as any action by an
agency that promulgated or is expected to lead to promulgation of a
final rule, and that (1) is a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866, or any successor order; and (2) is likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy; or (3) is designated by the Administrator of OIRA as a
significant energy action. For any proposed significant energy action,
the agency must give a detailed statement of any adverse effects on
energy supply, distribution, or use should the proposal be implemented,
and of reasonable alternatives to the action and their expected
benefits on energy supply, distribution, and use.
The proposed regulatory action to amend the test procedure for
measuring the energy efficiency of room ACs is not a significant
regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. Moreover, it would not
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy, nor has it been designated as a significant energy action by
the Administrator of OIRA. Therefore, it is not a significant energy
action, and, accordingly, DOE has not prepared a Statement of Energy
Effects.
M. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration Act of
1974
Under section 301 of the Department of Energy Organization Act
(Public Law 95-91; 42 U.S.C. 7101), DOE must comply with section 32 of
the Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974, as amended by the
Federal Energy Administration Authorization Act of 1977. (15 U.S.C.
788; ``FEAA'') Section 32 essentially provides in relevant part that,
where a proposed rule authorizes or requires use of commercial
standards, the notice of proposed rulemaking must inform the public of
the use and background of such standards. In addition, section 32(c)
requires DOE to consult with the Attorney General and the Chairman of
the FTC concerning the impact of the commercial or industry standards
on competition.
The proposed modifications to the test procedure for room ACs
adopted in this final rule incorporates testing methods contained in
certain sections of the following commercial standards: ``Room Air
Conditioners,'' ANSI/AHAM RAC-1-2015, ``Method of Testing for Rating
Room Air Conditioners, Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners, and Packaged
Terminal Heat Pumps for Cooling and Heating Capacity,'' ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 16-2016, and ``Household electrical appliances--Measurement of
standby power,'' IEC 62301 Edition 2.0, 2011-01. DOE has evaluated
these standards and is unable to conclude whether they fully comply
with the requirements of section 32(b) of the FEAA (i.e., whether they
were developed in a manner that fully provides for public
participation, comment, and review.) DOE will consult with both the
Attorney General and the Chairman of the FTC concerning the impact of
these test procedures on competition, prior to prescribing a final
rule.
N. Description of Materials Incorporated by Reference
In this NOPR, DOE proposes to incorporate by reference the test
standard published by AHAM, titled ``Room Air Conditioners,'' ANSI/AHAM
RAC-1-2015. ANSI/AHAM RAC-1-2015 is an industry-accepted test procedure
that measures room AC performance in cooling mode, in addition to other
modes. ANSI/AHAM RAC-1-2015 specifies testing conducted in accordance
with other industry-accepted test procedures (already incorporated by
reference) and determines energy efficiency metrics for various room AC
operating modes. The proposed amendments in this NOPR include updating
references to various sections in ANSI/AHAM RAC-1-2015 that address
test setup, instrumentation, test conduct, calculations, and rounding.
ANSI/AHAM RAC-1-2015 is reasonably available at https://www.aham.org/ht/d/Store/.
In this NOPR, DOE also proposes to incorporate by reference the
test standard published by ASHRAE, titled ``Method of Testing for
Rating Room Air Conditioners and Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners,''
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2016. ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2016 is an
industry-accepted test procedure that provides means for testing and
determining the cooling and heating capacities of room ACs and packaged
terminal air conditioners (PTACs), using either a calorimeter method or
air-enthalpy method. The proposed amendments in this NOPR include
updated general references to ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2016, that
address all areas of testing including installation, test setup,
instrumentation, test conduct, data collection, and calculations. ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 16-2016 is reasonably available at https://webstore.ansi.org/.
In this NOPR, DOE also proposes to incorporate by reference several
test standards published by ASHRAE: ``Standard Method for Temperature
Measurement,'' ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.1-2013, ``Standard Methods for
Air Velocity and Airflow Measurement,'' ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.2-1987
(RA 1992), ``Standard Methods for Pressure Measurement,'' ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 41.3-2014, ``Standard Methods for Humidity Measurement,''
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.6-2014, and ``Standard Methods for Power
Measurement,'' ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.11-2014. These standards are
industry-accepted test procedures that prescribe methods and
instruments for measuring temperature, air velocity, pressure,
humidity, and power, respectively. These standards are cited by ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 16-2016, which this NOPR proposes to incorporate by
reference. These standards are reasonably available at https://webstore.ansi.org/.
In this NOPR, DOE also proposes to incorporate by reference the
test standard IEC 62301, titled ``Household electrical appliances--
Measurement of standby power,'' (Edition 2.0, 2011-01) for appendix F.
IEC 62301 is an industry-accepted test standard that sets a
standardized method to measure the standby power of household and
similar electrical appliances and is already incorporated by reference
for a number of other DOE test procedures. IEC Standard 62301 Second
Edition includes details regarding test set-up, test conditions, and
stability requirements that are necessary to ensure consistent and
repeatable standby and off-mode test results. IEC Standard 62301 Second
Edition is reasonably available at https://webstore.iec.ch/ and https://www.webstore.ansi.org. The proposed amendments in this NOPR include
updating general references to IEC 62301 from the First Edition to the
[[Page 35736]]
Second Edition and adopting a new standby power test approach.
V. Public Participation
A. Participation in the Webinar
The time and date of the webinar are listed in the DATES section at
the beginning of this document. If no participants register for the
webinar, then it will be cancelled.
Webinar registration information, participant instructions, and
information about the capabilities available to webinar participants
will be published on DOE's website: https://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/product.aspx/productid/41. Participants
are responsible for ensuring their systems are compatible with the
webinar software.
Additionally, you may request an in-person meeting to be held prior
to the close of the request period provided in the DATES section of
this document. Requests for an in-person meeting may be made by
contacting Appliance and Equipment Standards Program staff at (202)
287-1445 or by email: [email protected].
B. Submission of Comments
DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this
proposed rule before or after the public meeting, but no later than the
date provided in the DATES section at the beginning of this proposed
rule. Interested parties may submit comments using any of the methods
described in the ADDRESSES section at the beginning of this proposed
rule.
Submitting comments via https://www.regulations.gov. The https://www.regulations.gov web page will require you to provide your name and
contact information. Your contact information will be viewable to DOE
Building Technologies staff only. Your contact information will not be
publicly viewable except for your first and last names, organization
name (if any), and submitter representative name (if any). If your
comment is not processed properly because of technical difficulties,
DOE will use this information to contact you. If DOE cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, DOE may not be able to consider your comment.
However, your contact information will be publicly viewable if you
include it in the comment or in any documents attached to your comment.
Any information that you do not want to be publicly viewable should not
be included in your comment, nor in any document attached to your
comment. Following this instruction, persons viewing comments will see
only first and last names, organization names, correspondence
containing comments, and any documents submitted with the comments.
Do not submit to https://www.regulations.gov information for which
disclosure is restricted by statute, such as trade secrets and
commercial or financial information (hereafter referred to as
Confidential Business Information (CBI)). Comments submitted through
https://www.regulations.gov cannot be claimed as CBI. Comments received
through the website will waive any CBI claims for the information
submitted. For information on submitting CBI, see the Confidential
Business Information section.
DOE processes submissions made through https://www.regulations.gov
before posting. Normally, comments will be posted within a few days of
being submitted. However, if large volumes of comments are being
processed simultaneously, your comment may not be viewable for up to
several weeks. Please keep the comment tracking number that https://www.regulations.gov provides after you have successfully uploaded your
comment.
Submitting comments via email, hand delivery, or mail. Comments and
documents submitted via email, hand delivery, or mail also will be
posted https://www.regulations.gov. If you do not want your personal
contact information to be publicly viewable, do not include it in your
comment or any accompanying documents. Instead, provide your contact
information on a cover letter. Include your first and last names, email
address, telephone number, and optional mailing address. The cover
letter will not be publicly viewable as long as it does not include any
comments.
Include contact information each time you submit comments, data,
documents, and other information to DOE. If you submit via mail or hand
delivery, please provide all items on a CD, if feasible, in which case
it is not necessary to submit printed copies. No faxes will be
accepted.
Comments, data, and other information submitted to DOE
electronically should be provided in PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or
Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file format. Provide documents that
are not secured, written in English and free of any defects or viruses.
Documents should not contain special characters or any form of
encryption and, if possible, they should carry the electronic signature
of the author.
Campaign form letters. Please submit campaign form letters by the
originating organization in batches of between 50 to 500 form letters
per PDF or as one form letter with a list of supporters' names compiled
into one or more PDFs. This reduces comment processing and posting
time.
Confidential Business Information. According to 10 CFR 1004.11, any
person submitting information that he or she believes to be
confidential and exempt by law from public disclosure should submit via
email, postal mail, or hand delivery two well-marked copies: One copy
of the document marked confidential including all the information
believed to be confidential, and one copy of the document marked non-
confidential with the information believed to be confidential deleted.
Submit these documents via email to [email protected] or on a
CD, if feasible. DOE will make its own determination about the
confidential status of the information and treat it according to its
determination.
It is DOE's policy that all comments may be included in the public
docket, without change and as received, including any personal
information provided in the comments (except information deemed to be
exempt from public disclosure).
C. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment
Although DOE welcomes comments on any aspect of this proposal, DOE
is particularly interested in receiving comments and views of
interested parties concerning the following issues:
(1) The proposed amendments to the room AC definition in 10 CFR 430.2.
(See section III.A of this document)
(2) The proposed new beginning section to appendix F that would
explicitly state the scope of coverage. (See section III.A of this
document)
(3) The proposal to incorporate by reference ANSI/AHAM RAC-1-2015, and
to adjust the section references in appendix F, to more narrowly refer
to the cooling mode-specific sections and to update the section
reference for measuring electrical power input. (See section III.B.1 of
this document)
(4) The proposal to reference the relevant sections of ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 16-2016 in appendix F. (See section III.B.2 of this document)
(5) The proposal to incorporate the requirements of ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 16-2016 while
[[Page 35737]]
maintaining that an accuracy of 0.5 percent of the quantity
measured is applicable to all devices measuring electrical input for
the room AC test procedure. (See section III.B.2 of this document)
(6) The proposal to incorporate ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.1-2013, ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 41.2-1987 (RA 1992), ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.3-2014,
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.6-2014, and ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.11-2014 in
appendix F. (See section III.B.3 of this document)
(7) The proposal to adopt the additional test conditions from the LG
Waiver test procedure for variable-speed room ACs. (See section III.C.2
of this document)
(8) The proposal to require fixing the compressor speed settings for
variable-speed room ACs to full speed at the 95 [deg]F and 92 [deg]F
test conditions, intermediate speed at the 87 [deg]F test condition,
and low speed at the 82 [deg]F test condition. (See section III.C.3.a
of this document)
(9) The proposal to require that manufacturers provide the third-party
lab with the control settings required to achieve the fixed compressor
speed for each test condition. (See section III.C.3.b of this document)
(10) The proposal to not address boost compressor speed performance and
energy consumption in appendix F at this time. (See section III.C.3.c
of this document)
(11) The proposal to use the capacity and electrical power adjustment
factors of 0.0099 per [deg]F and 0.0076 per [deg]F, respectively. (See
section III.C.4 of this document)
(12) The proposal to implement cycling loss factors consistent with
AHRI Standard 210/240 to represent the expected performance of a
theoretical comparable single-speed room AC at reduced outdoor
temperature test conditions. (See section III.C.5 of this document)
(13) The proposed weighting factors associated with each of the outdoor
test conditions. (See section III.C.6 of this document)
(14) The proposed calculations to determine a performance adjustment
factor, which would credit the CEER of variable-speed room ACs to
account for their efficiency improvements relative to a theoretical
comparable single-speed room AC under varying test conditions. (See
section III.C.7 of this document)
(15) The proposal not to allow for an optional alternative air-enthalpy
test approach for room ACs. (See section III.C.8 and section III.E.1.c
of this document)
(16) The proposal to include compressor frequencies and control
settings as additional product-specific information for certifications
involving variable-speed room ACs in 10 CFR 429.15. (See section
III.C.9 and section III.J of this document)
(17) The proposal to calculate estimated annual operating cost for
variable-speed room ACs using a weighted-average annual energy
consumption based on the four cooling mode test conditions in newly
added Table 1 of appendix F. (See section III.C.10 of this document)
(18) The proposal to report variable-speed room AC input power for
certification purposes using the value measured at the 95 [deg]F rating
condition. (See section III.C.10 of this document)
(19) The proposal to add new definitions for cooling mode, cooling
capacity, combined energy efficiency ratio, single-speed room air
conditioner, variable-speed room air conditioner, variable-speed
compressor, full compressor speed (full), intermediate compressor speed
(intermediate), and low compressor speed (low) in appendix F. (See
section III.D of this document)
(20) The proposal to specify in appendix F that room ACs designed for
through-the-wall installation (i.e., non-louvered room ACs) must be
installed using a compatible wall sleeve (per manufacturer
instructions), with the provided or manufacturer-required rear grille,
and with the included trim frame and other manufacturer-provided
installation materials. (See section III.E.1.d of this document)
(21) The proposal, consistent with ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2016,
Sections 6.1.1.4 and Section 8.4.2, to not require that room ACs
designed for window installation (i.e., louvered room ACs) be installed
with the manufacturer-provided installation materials, including side
curtains, and instead be tested with the partition wall sealed to the
unit. (See section III.E.1.d of this document)
(22) The proposal to not include additional cooling mode test
conditions for single-speed room ACs. (See section III.E.1.e of this
document)
(23) The proposal to not establish requirements for measuring and
reporting the power factors for room ACs. (See section III.E.1.f of
this document)
(24) The proposal to not establish a heating mode test procedure for
room ACs at this time. (See section III.E.2 of this document)
(25) The proposal to not establish a definition or test procedure for
off-cycle mode. (See section III.E.3 of this document)
(26) The proposal to incorporate provisions from IEC Standard 62301
Second Edition for measuring standby mode and off mode power. (See
section III.F of this document)
(27) The proposal to reference the power equipment specifications from
Section 4.4 of IEC Standard 62301 Second Edition for determining
standby mode and off mode power in appendix F. (See section III.F.1.a
of this document)
(28) The proposal to adopt and reference the sampling method from
Section 5.3.2 of IEC Standard 62301 Second Edition to determine standby
mode and off mode average power in appendix F. (See section III.F.1.b
of this document)
(29) The proposal to specify that all network or connectivity settings
must be disabled during testing. (See section III.G of this document)
(30) The proposal to not amend the DOE test procedure for room ACs to
consider energy consumption while a connected room AC responds to a DR
signal. (See section III.H of this document)
(31) The proposal to maintain the current CEER calculations for single-
speed room ACs at this time. (See section III.I of this document)
(32) The proposed rounding instructions in appendix F for cooling
capacity, electrical input power, and CEER and to adjust the estimated
annual operating cost calculation to reference the annual energy
consumption for each operating mode as calculated in appendix F. (See
section III.K of this document)
(33) The understanding of the estimated impact and associated costs to
room AC manufacturers of the proposed amendment to test variable-speed
room ACs. (See section III.L.1.a of this document)
(34) The degree to which the DOE test procedure should consider and be
harmonized further with the most recent relevant industry standards for
room ACs and whether any changes to the Federal test method would
provide additional benefits
[[Page 35738]]
to the public. (See section III.L.2 of this document)
(35) The benefits and burdens of adopting any industry or voluntary
consensus-based or other appropriate test procedure, without
modification. (See section III.L.2 of this document)
(36) Whether the industry is considering updating its standards for
room AC testing to include provisions for testing variable-speed room
ACs. (See section III.L.2 of this document)
(37) Any other aspect of the existing test procedure for room ACs not
already addressed by the specific areas identified in this document.
(See section III.L.3 of this document)
(38) The finding that there are no small businesses that manufacture
room ACs. (See section IV.C of this document)
VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of this proposed
rule.
List of Subjects
10 CFR Part 429
Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business
information, Energy conservation, Household appliances, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
10 CFR Part 430
Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business
information, Energy conservation, Household appliances, Imports,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Small
businesses.
Signing Authority
This document of the Department of Energy was signed on April 30,
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 20, 2020.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, DOE is proposing to amend
parts 429 and 430 of Chapter II of Title 10, Code of Federal
Regulations as set forth below:
PART 429--CERTIFICATION, COMPLIANCE, AND ENFORCEMENT FOR CONSUMER
PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT
0
1. The authority citation for part 429 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291-6317; 28 U.S.C. 2461 note.
0
2. Section 429.15 is amended by:
0
a. Removing the words ``energy efficiency ratio'' in paragraph
(a)(2)(ii) and adding, in its place the words ``combined energy
efficiency ratio (CEER) (determined in Sec. 430.23(f)(3) for each unit
in the sample)'';
0
b. Adding paragraphs (a)(3), (4) and (5);
0
c. Revising paragraph (b)(2); and
0
d. Adding paragraph (b)(3).
The revision and additions read as follows:
Sec. 429.15 Room air conditioners.
(a) * * *
(3) The cooling capacity of a basic model is the mean of the
measured cooling capacities for each tested unit of the basic model, as
determined in Sec. 430.23(f)(1) of this chapter. Round the cooling
capacity value to the nearest hundred.
(4) The electrical power input of a basic model is the mean of the
measured electrical power inputs for each tested unit of the basic
model, as determined in Sec. 430.23(f)(2) of this chapter. Round the
electrical power input to the nearest ten.
(5) Round the value of CEER for a basic model to one decimal place.
(b) * * *
(2) Pursuant to Sec. 429.12(b)(13), a certification report shall
include the following public product-specific information: The combined
energy efficiency ratio in British thermal units per Watt-hour (Btu/
Wh)), cooling capacity in British thermal units per hour (Btu/h), and
the electrical power input in watts (W).
(3) Pursuant to Sec. 429.12(b)(13), a certification report for a
variable-speed room air conditioner basic model must include
supplemental information and instructions in PDF format that include--
(i) The mean measured cooling capacity for the units tested at each
additional test condition (i.e., respectively, the mean of
Capacity2, Capacity3, and Capacity4,
each expressed in Btu/h and rounded to the nearest 100 Btu/h, as
determined in accordance with section 4.1.2 of appendix F of subpart B
of part 430 of this chapter);
(ii) The mean electrical power input at each additional test
condition (respectively, the mean of Power2,
Power3, and Power4, each expressed in W and
rounded to the nearest 10 W, in accordance with section 4.1.2 of
appendix F of subpart B of part 430 of this chapter, for test
conditions 2, 3, and 4, in Table 1 of appendix F of subpart B of part
430 of this chapter); and
(iii) All additional testing and testing set up instructions (e.g.,
specific operational or control codes or settings) necessary to operate
the basic model under the required conditions specified by the relevant
test procedure.
PART 430--ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAM FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS
0
3. The authority citation for part 430 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291-6309; 28 U.S.C. 2461 note.
0
4. Section 430.2 is amended by revising the definition of ``Room air
conditioner'' to read as follows:
Sec. 430.2 Definitions.
* * * * *
Room air conditioner means a window-mounted or through-the-wall-
mounted encased assembly, other than a ``packaged terminal air
conditioner,'' that delivers cooled, conditioned air to an enclosed
space, and is powered by single-phase electric current. It includes a
source of refrigeration and may include additional means for
ventilating and heating.
* * * * *
0
5. Section 430.3 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (g)(1);
0
b. In paragraph (g)(6), removing, ``appendix X1'', and adding in its
place, ``appendices F and X1'';
0
c. Redesignating paragraphs (g)(11) through (14) as (g)(15) through
(18), respectively;
0
d. Redesignating paragraphs (g)(9) as (g)(12), and (g)(10) as (g)(13);
0
e. Redesignating paragraph (g)(8) as (g)(9);
0
f. Adding new paragraphs (g)(8), (10), (11), and (14);
0
g. Revising paragraph (i)(6);
0
g. In paragraph (p)(5), removing ``appendix F and''; and
[[Page 35739]]
0
h. In paragraph (p)(6), adding ``F,'' before ``G''.
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 430.3 Materials incorporated by reference.
* * * * *
(g) * * *
(1) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2016 (``ANSI/ASHRAE 16''), Method of
Testing for Rating Room Air Conditioners, Packaged Terminal Air
Conditioners, and Packaged Terminal Heat Pumps for Cooling and Heating
Capacity, ASHRAE approved October 31, 2016, ANSI approved November 1,
2016, IBR approved for appendix F to subpart B.
* * * * *
(8) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.2-1987 (RA 1992), (``ASHRAE 41.2-1987
(RA 1992)''), Standard Methods for Laboratory Airflow Measurement, ANSI
reaffirmed April 20, 1992, IBR approved for appendix F to subpart B.
* * * * *
(10) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.3-2014, (``ASHRAE 41.3-2014''),
Standard Methods for Pressure Measurement, ANSI approved July 3, 2014,
IBR approved for appendix F to subpart B.
(11) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.6-2014, (``ASHRAE 41.6-2014''),
Standard Method for Humidity Measurement, ANSI approved July 3, 2014,
IBR approved for appendix F to subpart B.
* * * * *
(14) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.11-2014, (``ASHRAE 41.11-2014''),
Standard Methods for Power Measurement, ANSI approved July 3, 2014, IBR
approved for appendix F to subpart B.
* * * * *
(i) * * *
(6) ANSI/AHAM RAC-1-2015 (``ANSI/AHAM RAC-1''), Room Air
Conditioners, approved 2015, IBR approved for appendix F to subpart B
of this part.
* * * * *
0
6. Section 430.23 is amended by revising paragraph (f) to read as
follows:
Sec. 430.23 Test procedures for the measurement of energy and water
consumption.
* * * * *
(f) Room air conditioners. (1) Determine cooling capacity,
expressed in British thermal units per hour (Btu/h), with the results
of the test rounded to the nearest 100 Btu/h, as follows:
(i) For a single-speed room air conditioner, determine the cooling
capacity in accordance with section 4.1.2 of appendix F of this
subpart.
(ii) For a variable-speed room air conditioner, determine the
cooling capacity in accordance with section 4.1.2 of appendix F of this
subpart for test condition 1 in Table 1 of appendix F of this subpart.
(2) Determine electrical power input, expressed in watts (W) and
rounded to the nearest 10 W as follows:
(i) For a single-speed room air conditioner, determine the
electrical power input in accordance with section 4.1.2 of appendix F
of this subpart.
(ii) For a variable-speed room air conditioner, determine the
electrical power input in accordance with section 4.1.2 of appendix F
of this subpart, for test condition 1 in Table 1 of appendix F of this
subpart.
(3) Determine the combined energy efficiency ratio (CEER),
expressed in British thermal units per watt-hour (Btu/Wh) and rounded
to the nearest 0.1 Btu/Wh as follows:
(i) For a single-speed room air conditioner, determine the CEER in
accordance with section 5.2.2 of appendix F of this subpart.
(ii) For a variable-speed room air conditioner, determine the CEER
in accordance with section 5.3.11 of appendix F of this subpart.
(4) Determine the estimated annual operating cost for a room air
conditioner, expressed in dollars per year, by multiplying the
following two factors and rounding as directed:
(i) For single-speed room air conditioners, the sum of
AECcool and AECia/om, determined in accordance
with section 5.2.1 and section 5.1, respectively, of appendix F of this
subpart. For variable-speed room air conditioners, the sum of
AECwt and AECia/om, determined in accordance with
section 5.3.4 and section 5.1, respectively, of appendix F of this
subpart; and
(ii) A representative average unit cost of electrical energy in
dollars per kilowatt-hour as provided by the Secretary. Round the
resulting product to the nearest dollar per year.
* * * * *
0
7. Appendix F to subpart B of part 430 is revised to read as follows:
Appendix F to Subpart B of Part 430--Uniform Test Method for Measuring
the Energy Consumption of Room Air Conditioners
Note: On or after [DATE 180 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF
THE FINAL RULE IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER], any representations made
with respect to the energy use or efficiency of room air
conditioners must be made in accordance with the results of testing
pursuant to this appendix.
Prior to [DATE 180 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL
RULE IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER], manufacturers must either test room
air conditioners in accordance with this appendix, or the previous
version of this appendix as it appeared in the Code of Federal
Regulations on January 1, 2020. DOE notes that, because
representations made on or after [DATE 180 DAYS AFTER DATE OF
PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL RULE IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER] must be made
in accordance with this appendix, manufacturers may wish to begin
using this test procedure immediately.
0. Incorporation by Reference
DOE incorporated by reference the entire standard for ANSI/AHAM
RAC-1, ANSI/ASHRAE 16, ANSI/ASHRAE 41.1, ASHRAE 41.2-1987 (RA 1992),
ASHRAE 41.3-2014, ASHRAE 41.6-2014, ASHRAE 41.11-2014, and IEC 62301
in Sec. 430.3. However, only enumerated provisions of ANSI/AHAM
RAC-1 and ANSI/ASHRAE 16 apply to this appendix, as follows:
(1) ANSI/AHAM RAC-1:
(i) Section 4--Testing Conditions, Section 4.1--General, using ANSI/
ASHRAE 16-2016 in place of ANSI/ASHRAE 16-1983 (RA 2014)
(ii) Section 5--Standard Measurement Test, Section 5.2--Standard
Test Conditions: 5.2.1.1
(iii) Section 6--Performance Tests--Cooling Units, Section 6.1--
Cooling Capacity Test, using ANSI/ASHRAE 16-2016 in place of ANSI/
ASHRAE 16-1983 (RA 2014)
(iv) Section 6--Performance Tests--Cooling Units, Section 6.2--
Electrical Input Test, using ANSI/ASHRAE 16-2016 in place of ANSI/
ASHRAE 16-1983 (RA 2014)
(2) ANSI/ASHRAE 16:
(i) Section 3--Definitions
(ii) Section 5--Instruments
(iii) Section 6--Apparatus, Section 6.1--Calorimeters, Sections
6.1.1-6.1.1., 6.1.1.3a, 6.1.1.4-6.1.4, including Table 1
(iv) Section 7--Methods of Testing, Section 7.1--Standard Test
Methods, Section 7.1a, 7.1.1a
(v) Section 8--Test Procedures, Section 8.1--General
(vi) Section 8--Test Procedures, Section 8.2--Test Room Requirements
(viii) Section 8--Test Procedures, Section 8.3--Air Conditioner
Break-In
(ix) Section 8--Test Procedures, Section 8.4--Air Conditioner
Installation
(x) Section 8--Test Procedures, Section 8.5--Cooling Capacity Test
(xi) Section 9--Data To Be Recorded, Section 9.1
(xii) Section 10--Measurement Uncertainty
(xiii) Normative Appendix A Cooling Capacity Calculations--
Calorimeter Test Indoor and Calorimeter Test Outdoor
If there is any conflict between any industry standard(s) and
this appendix, follow the language of the test procedure in this
appendix, disregarding the conflicting industry standard language.
[[Page 35740]]
1. Scope
This appendix contains the test requirements to measure the
energy performance of a room air conditioner.
2. Definitions
2.1 ``Active mode'' means a mode in which the room air
conditioner is connected to a mains power source, has been activated
and is performing any of the following functions: Cooling or heating
the conditioned space, or circulating air through activation of its
fan or blower, with or without energizing active air-cleaning
components or devices such as ultra-violet (UV) radiation,
electrostatic filters, ozone generators, or other air-cleaning
devices.
2.2 ``ANSI/AHAM RAC-1'' means the test standard published
jointly by the American National Standards Institute and the
Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers, titled ``Room Air
Conditioners,'' Standard RAC-1-2015 (incorporated by reference; see
Sec. 430.3).
2.3 ``ANSI/ASHRAE 16'' means the test standard published jointly
by the American National Standards Institute and the American
Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers
titled ``Method of Testing for Rating Room Air Conditioners and
Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners,'' Standard 16-2016 (incorporated
by reference; see Sec. 430.3).
2.4 ``ANSI/ASHRAE 41.1'' means the test standard published
jointly by the American National Standards Institute and the
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning
Engineers titled ``Standard Method for Temperature Measurement,''
Standard 41.1-2013 (incorporated by reference; see Sec. 430.3).
2.5 ``ASHRAE 41.2-1987 (RA 1992)'' means the test standard
published jointly by the American National Standards Institute and
the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning
Engineers titled ``Standard Methods for Laboratory Airflow
Measurement,'' Standard 41.2-1987 (RA 1992) (incorporated by
reference; see Sec. 430.3).
2.6 ``ASHRAE 41.3-2014'' means the test standard published
jointly by the American National Standards Institute and the
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning
Engineers titled ``Standard Methods for Pressure Measurement,''
Standard 41.3-2014 (incorporated by reference; see Sec. 430.3).
2.7 ``ASHRAE 41.6-2014'' means the test standard published
jointly by the American National Standards Institute and the
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning
Engineers titled ``Standard Method for Humidity Measurement,''
Standard 41.6-2014 (incorporated by reference; see Sec. 430.3).
2.8 ``ASHRAE 41.11-2014'' means the test standard published
jointly by the American National Standards Institute and the
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning
Engineers titled ``Standard Methods for Power Measurement,''
Standard 41.11-2014 (incorporated by reference; see Sec. 430.3).
2.9 ``Combined energy efficiency ratio'' means the energy
efficiency of a room air conditioner in British thermal units per
watt-hour (Btu/Wh) and determined in section 5.2.2 of this appendix
for single-speed room air conditioners and section 5.3.12 of this
appendix for variable-speed room air conditioners.
2.10 ``Cooling capacity'' means the amount of cooling, in
British thermal units per hour (Btu/h), provided to a conditioned
space, measured under the specified conditions and determined in
section 4.1 of this appendix.
2.11 ``Cooling mode'' means an active mode in which a room air
conditioner has activated the main cooling function according to the
thermostat or temperature sensor signal or switch (including remote
control).
2.12 ``Full compressor speed (full)'' means the compressor speed
at which the unit operates at full load testing conditions, achieved
by following the instructions certified by the manufacturer.
2.13 ``IEC 62301'' means the test standard published by the
International Electrotechnical Commission, titled ``Household
electrical appliances--Measurement of standby power,'' Publication
62301 (Edition 2.0 2011-01), (incorporated by reference; see Sec.
430.3).
2.14 ``Inactive mode'' means a standby mode that facilitates the
activation of active mode by remote switch (including remote
control) or internal sensor or which provides continuous status
display.
2.15 ``Intermediate compressor speed (intermediate)'' means the
compressor speed higher than the low compressor speed by one third
of the difference between low compressor speed and full compressor
speed with a tolerance of plus 5 percent (designs with non-discrete
speed stages) or the next highest inverter frequency step (designs
with discrete speed steps), achieved by following the instructions
certified by the manufacturer.
2.16 ``Low compressor speed (low)'' means the compressor speed
at which the unit operates at low load test conditions, achieved by
following the instructions certified by the manufacturer, such that
Capacity4, the measured cooling capacity at test
condition 4 in Table 1 of this appendix, is no less than 47 percent
and no greater than 57 percent of Capacity1, the measured
cooling capacity with the full compressor speed at test condition 1
in Table 1 of this appendix.
2.17 ``Off mode'' means a mode in which a room air conditioner
is connected to a mains power source and is not providing any active
or standby mode function and where the mode may persist for an
indefinite time, including an indicator that only shows the user
that the product is in the off position.
2.18 ``Single-speed room air conditioner'' means a type of room
air conditioner that cannot automatically adjust the compressor
speed based on detected conditions.
2.19 ``Standby mode'' means any product mode where the unit is
connected to a mains power source and offers one or more of the
following user-oriented or protective functions which may persist
for an indefinite time:
(a) To facilitate the activation of other modes (including
activation or deactivation of active mode) by remote switch
(including remote control), internal sensor, or timer. A timer is a
continuous clock function (which may or may not be associated with a
display) that provides regular scheduled tasks (e.g., switching) and
that operates on a continuous basis.
(b) Continuous functions, including information or status
displays (including clocks) or sensor-based functions.
2.20 ``Theoretical comparable single-speed room air
conditioner'' means a theoretical single-speed room air conditioner
with the same cooling capacity and electrical power input as the
variable-speed room air conditioner under test, with no cycling
losses considered, at test condition 1 in Table 1 of this appendix.
2.21 ``Variable-speed compressor'' means a compressor that can
vary its rotational speed in non-discrete stages or discrete steps
from low to full.
2.22 ``Variable-speed room air conditioner'' means a type of
room air conditioner that can automatically adjust compressor speed
based on detected conditions.
3. Test Methods and General Instructions
3.1 Cooling mode. The test method for testing room air
conditioners in cooling mode (``cooling mode test'') consists of
applying the methods and conditions in ANSI/AHAM RAC-1 Section 4,
Paragraph 4.1 and Section 5, Paragraph 5.2.1.1, except in accordance
with ANSI/ASHRAE 16, including the references to ANSI/ASHRAE 41.1,
ANSI/ASHRAE 41.2-1987 (RA 1992), ANSI/ASHRAE 41.3-2014, ANSI/ASHRAE
41.6-2014, and ANSI/ASHRAE 41.11-2014, all referenced therein, as
defined in sections 2.3 through 2.8 of this appendix. Use the
cooling capacity simultaneous indoor calorimeter and outdoor
calorimeter test method in Section 7.1.a and Sections 8.1 through
8.5 of ANSI/ASHRAE 16, except as otherwise specified in this
appendix. If a unit can operate on multiple operating voltages as
distributed in commerce by the manufacturer, test it and rate the
corresponding basic models at all nameplate operating voltages. For
a variable-speed room air conditioner, test the unit following the
cooling mode test a total of four times: One test at each of the
test conditions listed in Table 1 of this appendix, consistent with
section 4.1 of this appendix.
3.1.1 Through-the-wall installation. Install a non-louvered room
air conditioner inside a compatible wall sleeve with the provided or
manufacturer-required rear grille, and with the included trim frame
and other manufacturer-provided installation materials, per
manufacturer instructions provided to consumers.
3.1.2 Power measurement accuracy. All instruments used for
measuring electrical inputs to the test unit, reconditioning
equipment, and any other equipment that operates within the
calorimeter walls must be accurate to 0.5 percent of the
quantity measured.
3.1.3 Electrical supply. For cooling mode testing, test at each
nameplate operating voltage, and maintain the input standard voltage
within 1 percent. Test at the rated frequency,
maintained within 1 percent.
3.1.4 Control settings. If the room air conditioner has network
capabilities, the
[[Page 35741]]
network settings must be disabled throughout testing.
3.1.5 Measurement resolution. Record measurements at the
resolution of the test instrumentation.
3.1.6 Temperature tolerances. Maintain each of the measured
chamber dry-bulb and wet-bulb temperatures within a range of 1.0
[deg]F.
3.2 Standby and off modes.
3.2.1 Install the room air conditioner in accordance with
section 5, paragraph 5.2 of IEC 62301 and maintain the indoor test
conditions (and outdoor test conditions where applicable) as
required by section 4, paragraph 4.2 of IEC 62301. If testing is not
conducted in a facility used for testing cooling mode performance,
the test facility must comply with section 4, paragraph 4.2 of IEC
62301.
3.2.2 Electrical supply. For standby mode and off mode testing,
test at each nameplate operating voltage, and maintain the input
standard voltage within 1 percent. Maintain the
electrical supply at the rated frequency 1 percent.
3.2.3 Supply voltage waveform. For the standby mode and off mode
testing, maintain the electrical supply voltage waveform indicated
in section 4, paragraph 4.3.2 of IEC 62301.
3.2.4 Wattmeter. The wattmeter used to measure standby mode and
off mode power consumption must meet the resolution and accuracy
requirements in Section 4, Paragraph 4.4 of IEC 62301.
3.2.5 Air ventilation damper. If the unit is equipped with an
outdoor air ventilation damper, close this damper during standby
mode and off mode testing.
4. Test Conditions and Measurements
4.1 Cooling mode.
4.1.1 Temperature conditions. Establish the test conditions
described in sections 4 and 5 of ANSI/AHAM RAC-1 and in accordance
with ANSI/ASHRAE 16, including the references to ANSI/ASHRAE 41.1
and ANSI/ASHRAE 41.6-2014, for cooling mode testing, with the
following exceptions for variable-speed room air conditioners:
Conduct the set of four cooling mode tests with the test conditions
presented in Table 1 of this appendix. Set the compressor speed
required for each test condition in accordance with instructions the
manufacturer provided to DOE.
Table 1--Indoor and Outdoor Inlet Air Test Conditions--Variable-Speed Room Air Conditioners
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Evaporator inlet (indoor) air, Condenser inlet (outdoor) air,
[deg]F [deg]F
Test condition -------------------------------------------------------------------- Compressor speed
Dry bulb Wet bulb Dry bulb Wet bulb
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Test Condition 1................................ 80 67 95 75 Full
Test Condition 2................................ 80 67 92 72.5 Full
Test Condition 3................................ 80 67 87 69 Intermediate
Test Condition 4................................ 80 67 82 65 Low
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4.1.2 Cooling capacity and power measurements. For single-speed
units, measure the cooling mode cooling capacity (expressed in Btu/
h), Capacity, and electrical power input (expressed in watts),
Pcool, in accordance with section 6, paragraphs 6.1 and
6.2 of ANSI/AHAM RAC-1, respectively, and in accordance with ANSI/
ASHRAE 16, including the references to ANSI/ASHRAE 41.2-1987 (RA
1992) and ANSI/ASHRAE 41.11-2014. For variable-speed room air
conditioners, measure the condition-specific cooling capacity
(expressed in Btu/h), Capacitytc, and electrical power
input (expressed in watts), Ptc, for each of the four
cooling mode rating test conditions (tc), as required in section 6,
paragraphs 6.1 and 6.2, respectively, of ANSI/AHAM RAC-1,
respectively, and in accordance with ANSI/ASHRAE 16, including the
references to ANSI/ASHRAE 41.2-1987 (RA 1992) and ANSI/ASHRAE 41.11-
2014.
4.2 Standby and off modes. Establish the testing conditions set
forth in section 3.2 of this appendix, ensuring the unit does not
enter any active mode during the test. For a unit that drops from a
higher power state to a lower power state as discussed in section 5,
paragraph 5.1, Note 1 of IEC 62301, allow sufficient time for the
room air conditioner to reach the lower power state before
proceeding with the test measurement. Use the sampling method test
procedure specified in section 5, paragraph 5.3.2 of IEC 62301 for
testing all standby and off modes, with the following modifications:
allow the product to stabilize for 5 to 10 minutes and use an energy
use measurement period of 5 minutes.
4.2.1 If the unit has an inactive mode, as defined in section
2.14 of this appendix, as defined in section 2.17 of this appendix,
measure and record the average inactive mode power, Pia,
in watts.
4.2.2 If the unit has an off mode, as defined in section 2.17 of
this appendix, measure and record the average off mode power,
Pom, in watts.
5. Calculations
5.1 Annual energy consumption in inactive mode and off mode.
Calculate the annual energy consumption in inactive mode and off
mode, AECia/om, expressed in kilowatt-hours per year
(kWh/year).
AECiaom = Pia x tia + Pom + tom
Where:
AECia/om = annual energy consumption in inactive mode and
off mode, in kWh/year.
Pia = average power in inactive mode, in watts,
determined in section 4.2 of this appendix.
Pom = average power in off mode, in watts, determined in
section 4.2 of this appendix.
tia = annual operating hours in inactive mode and
multiplied by a 0.001 kWh/Wh conversion factor from watt-hours to
kilowatt-hours. This value is 5.115 kWh/W if the unit has inactive
mode and no off mode, 2.5575 kWh/W if the unit has both inactive and
off mode, and 0 kWh/W if the unit does not have inactive mode.
tom = annual operating hours in off mode and multiplied
by a 0.001 kWh/Wh conversion factor from watt-hours to kilowatt-
hours. This value is 5.115 kWh/W if the unit has off mode and no
inactive mode, 2.5575 kWh/W if the unit has both inactive and off
mode, and 0 kWh/W if the unit does not have off mode.
5.2 Combined energy efficiency ratio for single-speed room air
conditioners. Calculate the combined energy efficiency ratio for
single-speed room air conditioners as follows:
5.2.1 Single-speed room air conditioner annual energy
consumption in cooling mode. Calculate the annual energy consumption
in cooling mode for a single-speed room air conditioner,
AECcool, expressed in kWh/year.
AECcool = 0.75 x Pcool
Where:
AECcool = single-speed room air conditioner annual energy
consumption in cooling mode, in kWh/year.
Pcool = single-speed room air conditioner average power
in cooling mode, in watts, determined in section 4.1.2 of this
appendix.
0.75 is 750 annual operating hours in cooling mode multiplied by a
0.001 kWh/Wh conversion factor from watt-hours to kilowatt-hours.
5.2.2 Single-speed room air conditioner combined energy
efficiency ratio. Calculate the combined energy efficiency ratio,
CEER, expressed in Btu/Wh, as follows:
[[Page 35742]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP11JN20.006
Where:
CEER = combined energy efficiency ratio, in Btu/Wh.
Capacity = single-speed room air conditioner cooling capacity, in
Btu/h, determined in section 4.1.2 of this appendix.
AECcool = single-speed room air conditioner annual energy
consumption in cooling mode, in kWh/year, calculated in section
5.2.1 of this appendix.
AECia/om = annual energy consumption in inactive mode or
off mode, in kWh/year, calculated in section 5.1 of this appendix.
0.75 as defined in section 5.2.1 of this appendix.
5.3 Combined energy efficiency ratio for variable-speed room air
conditioners. Calculate the combined energy efficiency ratio for
variable-speed room air conditioners as follows:
5.3.1 Weighted electrical power input. Calculate the weighted
electrical power input in cooling mode, Pwt, expressed in
watts, as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP11JN20.010
Where:
Pwt = weighted electrical power input, in watts, in
cooling mode.
Ptc = electrical power input, in watts, in cooling mode
for each test condition in Table 1 of this appendix.
Wtc = weighting factors for each cooling mode test
condition: 0.05 for test condition 1, 0.16 for test condition 2,
0.31 for test condition 3, and 0.48 for test condition 4.
tc represents the cooling mode test condition: ``1'' for test
condition 1 (95 [deg]F condenser inlet dry-bulb temperature), ``2''
for test condition 2 (92 [deg]F), ``3'' for test condition 3 (87
[deg]F), and ``4'' for test condition 4 (82 [deg]F).
5.3.2 Theoretical comparable single-speed room air conditioner.
Calculate the cooling capacity, expressed in Btu/h, and the
electrical power input, expressed in watts, for a theoretical
comparable single-speed room air conditioner at all cooling mode
test conditions.
Capacityss_tc = Capacity1 x (1 +
(Mc x (95--Ttc)))
Pss_tc = P1 x (1--(Mp x (95--
Ttc)))
Where:
Capacityss_tc = theoretical comparable single-speed room
air conditioner cooling capacity, in Btu/h, calculated for each of
the cooling mode test conditions in Table 1 of this appendix.
Capacity1 = variable-speed room air conditioner unit's
cooling capacity, in Btu/h, determined in section 4.1.2 of this
appendix for test condition 1 in Table 1 of this appendix.
Pss_tc = theoretical comparable single-speed room air
conditioner electrical power input, in watts, calculated for each of
the cooling mode test conditions in Table 1 of this appendix.
P1 = variable-speed room air conditioner unit's
electrical power input, in watts, determined in section 4.1.2 of
this appendix for test condition 1 in Table 1 of this appendix.
Mc = adjustment factor to determine the increased
capacity at lower outdoor test conditions, 0.0099 per [deg]F.
Mp = adjustment factor to determine the reduced
electrical power input at lower outdoor test conditions, 0.0076 per
[deg]F.
95 is the condenser inlet dry-bulb temperature for test condition 1
in Table 1 of this appendix, 95 [deg]F.
Ttc = condenser inlet dry-bulb temperature for each of
the test conditions in Table 1 of this appendix (in [deg]F).
tc as explained in section 5.3.1 of this appendix.
5.3.3 Variable-speed room air conditioner unit's annual energy
consumption for cooling mode at each cooling mode test condition.
Calculate the annual energy consumption for cooling mode under each
test condition, AECtc, expressed in kilowatt-hours per
year (kWh/year), as follows:
AECtc = 0.75 x Ptc
Where:
AECtc = variable-speed room air conditioner unit's annual
energy consumption, in kWh/year, in cooling mode for each test
condition in Table 1 of this appendix.
Ptc = as defined in section 5.3.1 of this appendix.
0.75 as defined in section 5.2.1 of this appendix.
tc as explained in section 5.3.1 of this appendix.
5.3.4 Variable-speed room air conditioner weighted annual energy
consumption. Calculate the weighted annual energy consumption in
cooling mode for a variable-speed room air conditioner,
AECwt, expressed in kWh/year.
AECwt = [Sigma]tcAECtc x Wtc
Where:
AECwt = weighted annual energy consumption in cooling
mode for a variable-speed room air conditioner, expressed in kWh/
year.
AECtc = variable-speed room air conditioner unit's annual
energy consumption, in kWh/year, in cooling mode for each test
condition in Table 1 of this appendix, determined in section 5.3.3
of this appendix.
Wtc = weighting factors for each cooling mode test
condition: 0.05 for test condition 1, 0.16 for test condition 2,
0.31 for test condition 3, and 0.48 for test condition 4.
tc as explained in section 5.3.1 of this appendix.
5.3.5 Theoretical comparable single-speed room air conditioner
annual energy consumption in cooling mode at each cooling mode test
condition. Calculate the annual energy consumption in cooling mode
for a theoretical comparable single-speed room air conditioner for
cooling mode under each test condition, AECss_tc,
expressed in kWh/year.
AECss\tc = 0.75 x Pss\tc
Where:
AECss_tc = theoretical comparable single-speed room air
conditioner annual energy consumption, in kWh/year, in cooling mode
for each test condition in Table 1 of this appendix.
Pss_tc = theoretical comparable single-speed room air
conditioner electrical power input, in watts, in cooling mode for
each test condition in Table 1 of this appendix, determined in
section 5.3.2 of this appendix.
0.75 as defined in section 5.2.1 of this appendix.
tc as explained in section 5.3.1 of this appendix.
5.3.6 Variable-speed room air conditioner combined energy
efficiency ratio at each cooling mode test condition. Calculate the
variable-speed room air conditioner unit's combined energy
efficiency ratio, CEERtc, for each test condition,
expressed in Btu/Wh.
[[Page 35743]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP11JN20.007
Where:
CEERtc = variable-speed room air conditioner unit's
combined energy efficiency ratio, in Btu/Wh, for each test condition
in Table 1 of this appendix.
Capacitytc = variable-speed room air conditioner unit's
cooling capacity, in Btu/h, for each test condition in Table 1 of
this appendix, determined in section 4.1.2 of this appendix.
AECtc = variable-speed room air conditioner unit's annual
energy consumption, in kWh/year, in cooling mode for each test
condition in Table 1 of this appendix, determined in section 5.3.3
of this appendix.
AECia/om = annual energy consumption in inactive mode of
off mode, in kWh/year, determined in section 5.1 of this appendix.
0.75 as defined in section 5.2.1 of this appendix.
tc as explained in section 5.3.1 of this appendix.
5.3.7 Theoretical comparable single-speed room air conditioner
combined energy efficiency ratio. Calculate the combined energy
efficiency ratio for a theoretical comparable single-speed room air
conditioner, CEERss_tc, for each test condition,
expressed in Btu/Wh.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP11JN20.008
Where:
CEERss_tc = theoretical comparable single-speed room air
conditioner combined energy efficiency ratio, in Btu/Wh, for each
test condition in Table 1 of this appendix.
Capacityss_tc = theoretical comparable single-speed room
air conditioner cooling capacity, in Btu/h, for each test condition
in Table 1 of this appendix, determined in section 5.3.2 of this
appendix.
AECss_tc = theoretical comparable single-speed room air
conditioner annual energy consumption, in kWh/year, in cooling mode
for each test condition in Table 1 of this appendix, determined in
section 5.3.5 of this appendix.
AECia/om = annual energy consumption in inactive mode or
off mode, in kWh/year, determined in section 5.1 of this appendix.
0.75 as defined in section 5.2.1 of this appendix.
tc as explained in section 5.3.1 of this appendix.
5.3.8 Theoretical comparable single-speed room air conditioner
adjusted combined energy efficiency ratio. Calculate the adjusted
combined energy efficiency ratio, for a theoretical comparable
single-speed room air conditioner, CEERss_tc_adj, with
cycling losses considered, for each test condition, expressed in
Btu/Wh.
CEERss\tc\adj = CEERss\tc CEERtc x CLFtc
Where:
CEERss_tc_adj = theoretical comparable single-speed room
air conditioner adjusted combined energy efficiency ratio, in Btu/
Wh, for each test condition in Table 1 of this appendix.
CEERss_tc = theoretical comparable single-speed room air
conditioner combined energy efficiency ratio, in Btu/Wh, for each
test condition in Table 1 of this appendix, determined in section
5.3.7 of this appendix.
CLFtc = cycling loss factor for each test condition; 1
for test condition 1, 0.971 for test condition 2, 0.923 for test
condition 3, and 0.875 for test condition 4.
tc as explained in section 5.3.1 of this appendix.
5.3.9 Weighted combined energy efficiency ratio. Calculate the
weighted combined energy efficiency ratio for the variable-speed
room air conditioner unit, CEERwt, and theoretical
comparable single-speed room air conditioner, CEERss_wt,
expressed in Btu/Wh.
CEERwt = [Sigma]tcCEERtc x Wtc
CEERss\wt = [Sigma]tcCEERss\tc\adj x Wtc
Where:
CEERwt = variable-speed room air conditioner unit's
weighted combined energy efficiency ratio, in Btu/Wh.
CEERss_wt = theoretical comparable single-speed room air
conditioner weighted combined energy efficiency ratio, in Btu/Wh.
CEERtc = variable-speed room air conditioner unit's
combined energy efficiency ratio, in Btu/Wh, at each test condition
in Table 1 of this appendix, determined in section 5.3.6 of this
appendix.
CEERss_tc_adj = theoretical comparable single-speed room
air conditioner adjusted combined energy efficiency ratio, in Btu/
Wh, at each test condition in Table 1 of this appendix, determined
in section 5.3.8 of this appendix.
Wtc as defined in section 5.3.4 of this appendix.
tc as explained in section 5.3.1 of this appendix.
5.3.10 Variable-speed room air conditioner performance
adjustment factor. Calculate the variable-speed room air conditioner
unit's performance adjustment factor, Fp.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP11JN20.009
Where:
Fp = variable-speed room air conditioner unit's
performance adjustment factor.
CEERwt = variable-speed room air conditioner unit's
weighted combined energy efficiency ratio, in Btu/Wh, determined in
section 5.3.9 of this appendix.
CEERss_wt = theoretical comparable single-speed room air
conditioner weighted combined energy efficiency ratio, in Btu/Wh,
determined in section 5.3.9 of this appendix.
5.3.11 Variable-speed room air conditioner combined energy
efficiency ratio. Calculate the combined energy efficiency ratio,
CEER, expressed in Btu/Wh, for variable-speed air conditioners.
CEER = CEER1 x (1 + Fp)
Where:
CEER = combined energy efficiency ratio, in Btu/Wh.
CEER1 = variable-speed room air conditioner combined
energy efficiency ratio for test condition 1 in Table 1 of this
appendix, in Btu/Wh, determined in section 5.3.6 of this appendix.
Fp = variable-speed room air conditioner performance
adjustment factor, determined in section 5.3.10 of this appendix.
[FR Doc. 2020-11215 Filed 6-10-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
