Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Variable Refrigerant Flow Multi-Split Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps, 18965-18983 [2023-06178]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
18965
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
Vol. 88, No. 61
Thursday, March 30, 2023
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains regulatory documents having general
applicability and legal effect, most of which
are keyed to and codified in the Code of
Federal Regulations, which is published under
50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by
the Superintendent of Documents.
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 431
[EERE–2018–BT–STD–0003]
RIN 1904–AE42
Energy Conservation Program: Energy
Conservation Standards for Variable
Refrigerant Flow Multi-Split Air
Conditioners and Heat Pumps
Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Energy Policy and
Conservation Act, as amended (EPCA),
prescribes energy conservation
standards for various consumer
products and certain commercial and
industrial equipment, including small,
large, and very large commercial
package air conditioning and heating
equipment, of which variable refrigerant
flow (VRF) multi-split air conditioners
and VRF multi-split system heat pumps
(collectively referred to as ‘‘VRF multisplit systems’’) are a category. EPCA
requires the U.S. Department of Energy
(DOE or the Department) to consider the
need for amended standards each time
American Society of Heating,
Refrigerating and Air Conditioning
Engineers (ASHRAE) Standard 90.1 is
amended with respect to the standard
levels or design requirements applicable
to that equipment, or periodically under
a six-year-lookback review provision. In
this final rule, DOE is adopting
amended energy conservation standards
for VRF multi-split systems that rely on
a new cooling efficiency metric and are
equivalent to those levels specified in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1. DOE has
determined that it lacks the clear and
convincing evidence required by the
statute to adopt standards more
stringent than the levels specified in the
industry standard.
DATES:
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 29, 2023
Jkt 259001
Effective date: The effective date of
this rule is May 30, 2023.
Compliance date: Compliance with
the amended standards established for
VRF multi-split systems in this final
rule is required on and after January 1,
2024.
ADDRESSES: The docket for this
rulemaking, which includes Federal
Register notices, public meeting
attendee lists and transcripts,
comments, and other supporting
documents/materials, is available for
review at www.regulations.gov. All
documents in the docket are listed in
the www.regulations.gov index.
However, not all documents listed in
the index may be publicly available,
such as information that is exempt from
public disclosure.
The docket web page can be found at
www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE2018-BT-STD-0003. The docket web
page contains instructions on how to
access all documents, including public
comments, in the docket.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Catherine Rivest, 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–
7335. Email:
ApplianceStandardsQuestions@
ee.doe.gov.
Mr. Eric Stas, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of the General Counsel,
GC–33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW,
Washington, DC 20585–0121.
Telephone: (202) 586–5827. Email:
Eric.Stas@hq.doe.gov.
For further information on how to
review the docket, contact the
Appliance and Equipment Standards
Program staff at (202) 287–1445 or by
email: ApplianceStandardsQuestions@
ee.doe.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Synopsis of the Final Rule
II. Introduction
A. Authority
B. Background
1. Current Standards
2. ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2016
3. ASRAC Negotiations
4. Proposed Standards
III. General Discussion
A. Test Procedure
B. Methodology for Efficiency Crosswalk
Analysis
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
1. Crosswalk Background and Overview
2. Crosswalk Details and Results
3. Equipment Class Structure for VRFs
IV. Estimates of Potential Energy Savings
V. Conclusions
A. Consideration of More-Stringent
Efficiency Levels
B. Review Under the Six-Year-Lookback
Provision
C. Amended Energy Conservation
Standards
VI. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866
and 13563
B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act
C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995
D. Review Under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
F. Review Under Executive Order 12988
G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995
H. Review Under the Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act, 1999
I. Review Under Executive Order 12630
J. Review Under the Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act, 2001
K. Review Under Executive Order 13211
L. Review Under the Information Quality
Bulletin for Peer Review
M. Congressional Notification
VII. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
I. Synopsis of the Final Rule
The Energy Policy and Conservation
Act, Public Law 94–163, (42 U.S.C.
6291–6317, as codified) as amended
(EPCA),1 authorizes DOE to regulate the
energy efficiency of a number of
consumer products and certain
industrial equipment. Title III, Part C 2
of EPCA established the Energy
Conservation Program for Certain
Industrial Equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6311–
6317) Such equipment includes small,
large, and very large commercial
package air conditioning and heating
equipment, of which VRF multi-split
systems, the subject of this rulemaking,
are a category. (42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(B)–
(D))
Pursuant to EPCA, DOE is triggered to
consider amending the energy
conservation standards for certain types
of commercial and industrial
equipment, including the equipment at
issue in this document, whenever the
1 All references to EPCA in this document refer
to the statute as amended through the Energy Act
of 2020, Public Law 116–260 (Dec. 27, 2020), which
reflect the last statutory amendments that impact
Parts A and A–1 of EPCA.
2 For editorial reasons, upon codification in the
U.S. Code, Part C was re-designated Part A–1.
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
18966
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
ASHRAE amends the standard levels or
design requirements prescribed in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1, ‘‘Energy
Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise
Residential Buildings.’’ Under a
separate provision of EPCA, DOE is
required to review the existing energy
conservation standards for those types
of covered equipment subject to
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 every six years
to determine whether those standards
need to be amended. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(A)–(C))
More specifically, under the
‘‘ASHRAE trigger’’ provision, EPCA
directs that for each type of covered
equipment, if ASHRAE Standard 90.1 is
amended, DOE must adopt amended
energy conservation standards at the
new efficiency level in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1, unless clear and
convincing evidence supports a
determination that adoption of a morestringent efficiency level would produce
significant additional energy savings
and be technologically feasible and
economically justified. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)) If DOE adopts as a
uniform national standard the efficiency
level specified in the amended ASHRAE
Standard 90.1, DOE must establish such
standard not later than 18 months after
publication of the amended industry
standard. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(I))
If DOE determines that a more-stringent
standard is appropriate under the
statutory criteria, DOE must establish
such more-stringent standard not later
than 30 months after publication of the
revised ASHRAE Standard 90.1. (42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(i))
Under EPCA, DOE must also review
its energy conservation standards for
VRF multi-split systems every six years
and either: (1) issue a notice of
determination that the standards do not
need to be amended, as adoption of a
more-stringent level under the relevant
statutory criteria is not supported by
clear and convincing evidence; or (2)
issue a notice of proposed rulemaking
including new proposed standards
based on certain criteria and procedures
in subparagraph (B).3 (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(C)(i))
3 In relevant part, subparagraph (B) specifies that:
(1) in making a determination of economic
justification, DOE must consider, to the maximum
extent practicable, the benefits and burdens of an
amended standard based on the seven criteria
described in EPCA; (2) DOE may not prescribe any
standard that increases the energy use or decreases
the energy efficiency of a covered equipment; and
(3) DOE may not prescribe an amended standard
that interested persons have established by a
preponderance of evidence is likely to result in the
unavailability in the United States of any product
type (or class) of performance characteristics
(including reliability, features, sizes, capacities, and
volumes) that are substantially the same as those
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 29, 2023
Jkt 259001
ASHRAE officially released ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2016 on October 26,
2016, thereby triggering DOE’s
previously referenced obligations
pursuant to EPCA to determine for
certain classes of VRF multi-split
systems, whether: (1) the amended
industry standard should be adopted; or
(2) clear and convincing evidence exists
to justify more-stringent standard levels.
For any class where DOE was not
triggered, the Department routinely
considers those classes under the
statute’s six-year-lookback review
provision at the same time, so as to
address the subject equipment in a
comprehensive fashion.
The current Federal energy
conservation standards for air-cooled
VRF multi-split systems with cooling
capacity greater than or equal to 65,000
Btu/h and water-source VRF multi-split
heat pumps (denominated in terms of
EER and COP) are codified in DOE’s
regulations at 10 CFR 431.97. These
standards are specified in terms of
Energy Efficiency Ratio (EER) for
cooling mode and Coefficient of
Performance (COP) for heating mode
based on the Federal test procedure at
10 CFR 431.96, which points to
applicable appendix D which in turn
references American National Standards
Institute (ANSI)/Air-Conditioning,
Heating, and Refrigeration Institute
(AHRI) Standard 1230–2010, ‘‘2010
Standard for Performance Rating of
Variable Refrigerant Flow (VRF) MultiSplit Air-Conditioning and Heat Pump
Equipment,’’ approved August 2, 2010
and updated by Addendum 1 in March
2011 (ANSI/AHRI 1230–2010).
The current Federal energy
conservation standards for air-cooled,
three-phase VRF multi-split systems
with cooling capacity less than 65,000
Btu/h are also codified in 10 CFR
431.97. These standards are specified in
terms of Seasonal Energy Efficiency
Ratio (SEER) for cooling mode and
Heating Seasonal Performance Factor
(HSPF) for heating mode based on the
rating conditions in ANSI/AHRI 1230–
2010. Although the current standards
levels are based on the same test
procedure as used for all other
categories of VRF systems (i.e., aircooled VRF multi-split systems with
cooling capacity greater than or equal to
65,000 Btu/h and water-source VRF
multi-split systems), the organizations
that maintain the industry consensus
test procedures have recently updated
their scope such that air-cooled, threephase VRF multi-split systems with
cooling capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h
generally available in the United States. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(B)(ii)–(iii))
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
are now covered under AHRI 210/240–
2023 instead of AHRI 1230–2021.
Consequently, DOE addressed test
procedures for air-cooled, three-phase
VRF multi-split systems with cooling
capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h in a
separate test procedure rulemaking for
air-cooled, three-phase, small
commercial package air conditioning
and heating equipment with cooling
capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h (see 87
FR 77298 (Dec. 16, 2022)) instead of in
the test procedure rulemaking for VRF
multi-split systems (see 87 FR 63860
(Oct. 20, 2022)). Accordingly, DOE is
not evaluating the Federal energy
conservation standards for such
equipment in this document and is
instead addressing energy conservation
standards for air-cooled, three-phase
VRF multi-split systems with cooling
capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h in a
separate energy conservation standards
rulemaking for air-cooled, three-phase,
small commercial package air
conditioning and heating equipment
with a cooling capacity of less than
65,000 Btu/h (see 87 FR 18290 (March
30, 2022)).
The efficiency levels set forth in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2016 for VRF
multi-split systems with cooling
capacity 65,000 Btu/h or greater are
specified in terms of both EER and
Integrated Energy Efficiency Ratio
(IEER) for cooling mode and COP for
heating mode. These efficiency levels
are based on the rating conditions of
ANSI/AHRI Standard 1230–2014 with
addendum 1 (ANSI/AHRI 1230–2014),
which are identical rating conditions to
those found in AHRI 1230–2010. The
EER levels found in ASHRAE 90.1–2016
are unchanged from the current Federal
EER requirements; however, for certain
classes of water-source VRF multi-split
heat pumps, the COP levels specified in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2016 are more
stringent. See additional discussion in
section II.B.2 of this document.
On April 11, 2018, DOE published in
the Federal Register a Notice of Intent
to establish a negotiated rulemaking
working group (Working Group) under
the Appliance Standards and
Rulemaking Federal Advisory
Committee (ASRAC) to negotiate a
proposed test procedure and amended
energy conservation standards for VRF
multi-split systems. 83 FR 15514. The
Working Group reached consensus on
an energy conservation standards term
sheet (VRF ECS Term Sheet) on
November 5, 2019, outlining
recommended amended energy
conservation standards for all
equipment classes of VRF multi-split
systems. The standard levels
recommended by the Working Group in
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
18967
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
the VRF ECS Term Sheet 4 are in terms
of the IEER and COP metrics and
equivalent to the levels specified in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2022.5 The
levels recommended by the working
group are measured according to the
most recent industry test standard for
VRF multi-split systems 6—AHRI
Standard 1230, ‘‘2021 Standard for
Performance Rating of Variable
Refrigerant Flow (VRF) Multi-Split AirConditioning and Heat Pump
Equipment’’ (AHRI 1230–2021), which
is referenced in ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2022. See additional discussion in
section II.B.3 of this final rule.
As described in detail in section III.B
of this document, DOE conducted a
crosswalk analysis during the ASRAC
negotiation meetings to validate the
translation of the EER levels currently
required by the DOE standards to IEER,
as well as the IEER efficiency levels as
recommended by the Working Group.
DOE notes that IEER is a more
comprehensive metric because it reflects
the energy efficiency across a range of
operating conditions, as opposed to the
efficiency at a single condition. The
crosswalk translates the current Federal
EER standards (measured per the
current DOE test procedure) to IEER
levels of equivalent stringency
(measured per the September 20, 2019
draft version of the AHRI 1230
standard). As described in section II.B.3
of this document, the recommended
2019 draft test procedure was later
published as AHRI 1230–2021, and no
substantive changes were made that
impact crosswalk results. Differences in
the metrics and test procedures cause
the crosswalk analysis to yield a range
of IEER values corresponding to a given
EER value. DOE’s translation of the
current EER levels to IEER according to
the updated test procedure shows that
each value recommended by the
Working Group is within the range
resulting from DOE’s evaluation. Given
that the metric takes into account a
wider breadth of energy consumption
across a variety of operating conditions,
DOE has determined that the
recommended IEER values are at least
equivalent in stringency to the current
EER values. Further, given that IEER is
a more comprehensive metric, DOE has
concluded that the recommended IEER
values would not decrease the
minimum required energy efficiency of
VRF basic models.
Because the updates in AHRI 1230–
2021 do not affect the measurement of
COP, no crosswalk was required to
evaluate the stringency of the COP
levels proposed in the VRF ECS Term
Sheet as compared to the existing
Federal COP levels.
In this final rule, DOE is adopting the
energy conservation standard levels and
the equipment class structure from
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2016 for aircooled VRF multi-split systems with
cooling capacity greater than or equal to
65,000 Btu/h and for all water-source
VRF multi-split heat pumps. The
amended standards, which are
expressed in terms of IEER and COP, are
presented in Table I–1. These standards
will apply to all VRF multi-split systems
listed in Table I–1 manufactured in, or
imported into, the United States starting
on January 1, 2024. The amended
standard levels are equivalent to the
standard levels recommended by the
Working Group in the VRF ECS Term
Sheet. The amended equipment class
structure differs from the existing DOE
equipment class structure regarding
capacity break points and designations
based on heating type; however, DOE
has concluded that none of the changes
to the equipment class structure for VRF
multi-split systems constitute
backsliding.
DOE has determined that the potential
energy savings associated with adopting
the ASHRAE 90.1–2016 standard levels
for the triggered classes are de minimis.
Also, as described in section V of this
document, DOE has determined that
insufficient data are available to
determine, based on clear and
convincing evidence, that morestringent standards would result in
significant additional energy savings
and be technologically, feasible and
economically justified. As such, DOE
has not conducted further analysis of
more-stringent standard levels for this
final rule. Consequently, DOE is
adopting the levels specified in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2016, as
required by EPCA.
TABLE I–1—AMENDED ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS FOR VRF MULTI-SPLIT SYSTEMS
Equipment type
Size category
Heating type
VRF Multi-Split Air Conditioners (Air-Cooled) ........
≥65,000 and <135,000 Btu/h ....................
≥135,000 and <240,000 Btu/h ..................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ........
≥65,000 and <135,000 Btu/h ....................
All ..............................................................
All ..............................................................
All ..............................................................
Heat Pump without Heat Recovery ..........
Heat Pump with Heat Recovery ...............
Heat Pump without Heat Recovery ..........
Heat Pump with Heat Recovery ...............
Heat Pump without Heat Recovery ..........
Heat Pump with Heat Recovery ...............
Heat Pump without Heat Recovery ..........
Heat Pump with Heat Recovery ...............
Heat Pump without Heat Recovery ..........
Heat Pump with Heat Recovery ...............
Heat Pump without Heat Recovery ..........
Heat Pump with Heat Recovery ...............
Heat Pump without Heat Recovery ..........
Heat Pump with Heat Recovery ...............
VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps (Air-Cooled) .............
≥135,000 and <240,000 Btu/h ..................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 btu/h .........
VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps (Water-Source) ........
<65,000 Btu/h ...........................................
≥65,000 and <135,000 Btu/h ....................
≥135,000 and <240,000 Btu/h ..................
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ........
4 The VRF ECS Term Sheet can be accessed at
www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2018-BTSTD-0003-0055.
5 DOE notes that on October 24, 2019, ASHRAE
officially released for distribution and made public
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019. ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2019 maintained the equipment class
structure for VRF multi-split systems from ASHRAE
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 29, 2023
Jkt 259001
Standard 90.1–2016 and did not update efficiency
levels for any VRF equipment classes. In January
2023, ASHRAE published ASHRAE Standard 90.1–
2022, which updates the test procedure reference
for VRF multi-split systems to AHRI 1230–2021.
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2022 also maintains IEER
standard levels equivalent to those specified in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Minimum efficiency
15.5
14.9
13.9
14.6
14.4
13.9
13.7
12.7
12.5
16.0
15.8
16.0
15.8
14.0
13.8
12.0
11.8
IEER.
IEER.
IEER.
IEER,
IEER,
IEER,
IEER,
IEER,
IEER,
IEER,
IEER,
IEER,
IEER,
IEER,
IEER,
IEER,
IEER,
3.3
3.3
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.2
4.3
4.3
4.3
4.3
4.0
4.0
3.9
3.9
COP.
COP.
COP.
COP.
COP.
COP.
COP.
COP.
COP.
COP.
COP.
COP.
COP.
COP.
6 The VRF ASRAC Working Group recommended
a 2019 draft version of AHRI 1230 with additional
recommendations for further development of the
test standard outside of the Working Group. The
2019 draft of AHRI 1230 was later released as AHRI
1230–2021, which included the Working Group’s
recommendations.
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
18968
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
II. Introduction
The following section briefly
discusses the statutory authority
underlying this final rule, as well as
some of the relevant historical
background related to the establishment
of standards for VRF multi-split
systems.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
A. Authority
EPCA, Public Law 94–163 (42 U.S.C.
6291–6317, as codified), among other
things, authorizes DOE to regulate the
energy efficiency of a number of
consumer products and certain
industrial equipment. Title III, Part C of
EPCA, added by Public Law 95–619,
Title IV, section 441(a), (42 U.S.C. 6311–
6317, as codified), established the
Energy Conservation Program for
Certain Industrial Equipment, which
sets forth a variety of provisions
designed to improve energy efficiency.
This covered equipment includes small,
large, and very large commercial
package air conditioning and heating
equipment, which includes the VRF
multi-split systems that are the subject
of this document. (42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(B)–
(D)) Additionally, as discussed in
further detail subsequently, the statute
requires DOE to consider amending the
energy conservation standards for
certain types of commercial and
industrial equipment, including the
equipment at issue in this document,
whenever ASHRAE amends the
efficiency levels or design requirements
prescribed in ASHRAE Standard 90.1,
and even in the absence of an ASHRAE
trigger event, a separate provision of
EPCA requires DOE to consider
amended standards for such equipment,
at a minimum, every six years. (42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)–(C))
Under EPCA, the energy conservation
program, consists essentially of four
parts: (1) testing, (2) labeling, (3) the
establishment of Federal energy
conservation standards, and (4)
certification and enforcement
procedures. Relevant provisions of
EPCA specifically include definitions
(42 U.S.C. 6311), energy conservation
standards (42 U.S.C. 6313), test
procedures (42 U.S.C. 6314), labeling
provisions (42 U.S.C. 6315), and the
authority to require information and
reports from manufacturers (42 U.S.C.
6316).
Federal energy efficiency
requirements for covered equipment
established under EPCA generally
supersede State laws and regulations
concerning energy conservation testing,
labeling, and standards. (42 U.S.C.
6316(a) and (b); 42 U.S.C. 6297) DOE
may, however, grant waivers of Federal
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 29, 2023
Jkt 259001
preemption in limited circumstances for
particular State laws or regulations, in
accordance with the procedures and
other provisions set forth under EPCA.
(42 U.S.C. 6297(d); 42 U.S.C. 6316(a); 42
U.S.C. 6316(b)(2)(D))
Subject to certain criteria and
conditions, DOE is required to develop
test procedures to measure the energy
efficiency, energy use, or estimated
annual operating cost of covered
equipment during a representative
average use cycle and that are not
unduly burdensome to conduct. (42
U.S.C. 6314(a)(2)) Manufacturers of
covered equipment must use the Federal
test procedures as the basis for: (1)
certifying to DOE that their equipment
complies with the applicable energy
conservation standards adopted
pursuant to EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6316(b); 42
U.S.C. 6296), and (2) making
representations about the energy use or
efficiency of that equipment (42 U.S.C.
6314(d)). Similarly, DOE uses these test
procedures to determine whether the
equipment complies with the relevant
energy conservation standards
promulgated under EPCA. The DOE test
procedures for VRF multi-split systems
appear at 10 CFR part 431, subpart F.
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 sets industry
energy efficiency levels for small, large,
and very large commercial package airconditioning and heating equipment,
packaged terminal air conditioners,
packaged terminal heat pumps, warm
air furnaces, packaged boilers, storage
water heaters, instantaneous water
heaters, and unfired hot water storage
tanks (collectively referred to as
‘‘ASHRAE equipment’’). For each type
of listed equipment, EPCA directs that
if ASHRAE amends ASHRAE Standard
90.1 with respect to the standard levels
or design requirements under that
standard, DOE must adopt amended
standards at the new ASHRAE
efficiency level, unless DOE determines,
supported by clear and convincing
evidence,7 that adoption of a morestringent level would produce
significant additional conservation of
energy and would be technologically
feasible and economically justified. (42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)) If DOE makes
such a determination, it must publish a
7 The
clear and convincing threshold is a
heightened standard, and would only be met where
the Secretary has an abiding conviction, based on
available facts, data, and DOE’s own analyses, that
it is highly probable an amended standard would
result in a significant additional amount of energy
savings, and is technologically feasible and
economically justified. American Public Gas
Association v. U.S. Dep’t of Energy, No. 20–1068,
2022 WL 151923, at *4 (D.C. Cir. January 18, 2022)
(citing Colorado v. New Mexico, 467 U.S. 310, 316,
104 S.Ct. 2433, 81 L.Ed.2d 247 (1984)).
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
final rule to establish the more-stringent
standards. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(i))
Although EPCA does not explicitly
define the term ‘‘amended’’ in the
context of what type of revision to
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 would trigger
DOE’s obligation, DOE’s longstanding
interpretation has been that the
statutory trigger is an amendment to the
standard applicable to that equipment
under ASHRAE Standard 90.1 that
increases the energy efficiency level for
that equipment. See 72 FR 10038, 10042
(March 7, 2007). If the revised ASHRAE
Standard 90.1 leaves the energy
efficiency level unchanged (or lowers
the energy efficiency level), as
compared to the energy efficiency level
specified by the uniform national
standard adopted pursuant to EPCA,
regardless of the other amendments
made to the ASHRAE Standard 90.1
requirement (e.g., the inclusion of an
additional metric), DOE has stated that
it does not have the authority to conduct
a rulemaking to consider a higher
standard for that equipment pursuant to
42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A), although this
does not limit DOE’s authority to
consider higher standards as part of a
six-year-lookback rulemaking analysis
(pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C); see
discussion in the following paragraphs).
See 74 FR 36312, 36313 (July 22, 2009)
and 77 FR 28928, 28937 (May 16, 2012).
If an amendment to ASHRAE Standard
90.1 changes the metric for the standard
on which the Federal requirement was
based, DOE would perform a crosswalk
analysis to determine whether the
amended metric under ASHRAE
Standard 90.1 resulted in an energy
efficiency level that was more stringent
than the current DOE standard. Under
EPCA, DOE must also review its energy
conservation standards for VRF multisplit systems every six years and either:
(1) issue a notice of determination that
the standards do not need to be
amended, as adoption of a morestringent level is not supported by clear
and convincing evidence; or (2) issue a
notice of proposed rulemaking
including new proposed standards
based on certain criteria and procedures
in subparagraph (B).8 (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(C))
8 In relevant part, subparagraph (B) specifies that:
(1) in making a determination of economic
justification, DOE must consider, to the maximum
extent practicable, the benefits and burdens of an
amended standard based on the seven criteria
described in EPCA; (2) DOE may not prescribe any
standard that increases the energy use or decreases
the energy efficiency of covered equipment; and (3)
DOE may not prescribe an amended standard that
interested persons have established by a
preponderance of evidence is likely to result in the
unavailability in the United States of any product
type (or class) of performance characteristics
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
In deciding whether a more-stringent
standard is economically justified,
under either the provisions of 42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(A) or 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C),
DOE must determine whether the
benefits of the standard exceed its
burdens. DOE must make this
determination after receiving comments
on the proposed standard, and by
considering, to the maximum extent
practicable, the following seven factors:
(1) The economic impact of the
standard on manufacturers and
consumers of products subject to the
standard;
(2) The savings in operating costs
throughout the estimated average life of
the covered products in the type (or
class) compared to any increase in the
price, initial charges, or maintenance
expenses for the covered equipment that
are likely to result from the standard;
(3) The total projected amount of
energy savings likely to result directly
from the standard;
(4) Any lessening of the utility or the
performance of the covered product
likely to result from the standard;
(5) The impact of any lessening of
competition, as determined in writing
by the Attorney General, that is likely to
result from the standard;
(6) The need for national energy
conservation; and
(7) Other factors the Secretary of
Energy considers relevant.
(42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(ii)(I)–(VII))
EPCA, as codified, also contains what
is known as an ‘‘anti-backsliding’’
provision, which prevents the Secretary
from prescribing any amended standard
that either increases the maximum
allowable energy use or decreases the
minimum required energy efficiency of
a covered product. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(B)(iii)(I)) Also, the Secretary
may not prescribe an amended or new
standard if interested persons have
established by a preponderance of the
evidence that the standard is likely to
result in the unavailability in the United
States in any covered product type (or
class) of performance characteristics
(including reliability), features, sizes,
capacities, and volumes that are
substantially the same as those generally
available in the United States. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(B)(iii)(II)(aa)).
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
B. Background
1. Current Standards
EPCA defines ‘‘commercial package
air conditioning and heating
equipment’’ as air-cooled, water-cooled,
(including reliability, features, sizes, capacities, and
volumes) that are substantially the same as those
generally available in the United States. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(B)(ii)–(iii))
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 29, 2023
Jkt 259001
evaporatively-cooled, or water-source
(not including ground-water-source)
electrically operated, unitary central air
conditioners and central air
conditioning heat pumps for
commercial application. (42 U.S.C.
6311(8)(A); 10 CFR 431.92) EPCA
further classifies ‘‘commercial package
air conditioning and heating
equipment’’ into categories based on
cooling capacity (i.e., small, large, and
very large categories). (42 U.S.C.
6311(8)(B)–(D); 10 CFR 431.92) ‘‘Small
commercial package air conditioning
and heating equipment’’ means
equipment rated below 135,000 Btu per
hour (cooling capacity). (42 U.S.C.
6311(8)(B); 10 CFR 431.92) ‘‘Large
commercial package air conditioning
and heating equipment’’ means
equipment rated: (i) at or above 135,000
Btu per hour; and (ii) below 240,000 Btu
per hour (cooling capacity). (42 U.S.C.
6311(8)(C); 10 CFR 431.92) ‘‘Very large
commercial package air conditioning
and heating equipment’’ means
equipment rated: (i) at or above 240,000
Btu per hour; and (ii) below 760,000 Btu
per hour (cooling capacity). (42 U.S.C.
6311(8)(D); 10 CFR 431.92)
Pursuant to its authority under EPCA
(42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)) and in
response to updates to ASHRAE
Standard 90.1, DOE has established the
category of VRF multi-split systems,
which meets the EPCA definition of
‘‘commercial package air conditioning
and heating equipment,’’ but which
EPCA did not expressly identify. See 10
CFR 431.92 and 10 CFR 431.97.
This final rule covers commercial and
industrial equipment that meets the
definition of ‘‘variable refrigerant flow
systems,’’ included in the definition of
‘‘basic model’’ as codified at 10 CFR
431.92. More specifically, ‘‘variable
refrigerant flow systems’’ means all
units manufactured by one
manufacturer within a single equipment
class, having the same primary energy
source (e.g., electric or gas), and which
have the same or comparably
performing compressor(s) that have a
common ‘‘nominal’’ cooling capacity
and the same heat rejection medium
(e.g., air or water) (includes VRF watersource heat pumps). Id.
A ‘‘variable refrigerant flow multisplit air conditioner’’ means a unit of
commercial package air-conditioning
and heating equipment that is
configured as a split-system air
conditioner incorporating a single
refrigerant circuit, with one or more
outdoor units, at least one variablespeed compressor or an alternate
compressor combination for varying the
capacity of the system by three or more
steps, and multiple indoor fan coil
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
18969
units, each of which is individually
metered and individually controlled by
an integral control device and common
communications network and which
can operate independently in response
to multiple indoor thermostats. Variable
refrigerant flow implies three or more
steps of capacity control on common,
inter-connecting piping. 10 CFR 431.92.
A ‘‘variable refrigerant flow multisplit heat pump’’ means a unit of
commercial package air-conditioning
and heating equipment that is
configured as a split-system heat pump
that uses reverse cycle refrigeration as
its primary heating source and which
may include secondary supplemental
heating by means of electrical
resistance, steam, hot water, or gas. The
equipment incorporates a single
refrigerant circuit, with one or more
outdoor units, at least one variablespeed compressor or an alternate
compressor combination for varying the
capacity of the system by three or more
steps, and multiple indoor fan coil
units, each of which is individually
metered and individually controlled by
a control device and common
communications network and which
can operate independently in response
to multiple indoor thermostats. Variable
refrigerant flow implies three or more
steps of capacity control on common,
inter-connecting piping. 10 CFR 431.92.
DOE adopted energy conservation
standards for VRF multi-split systems in
a final rule published in the Federal
Register on May 16, 2012 (May 2012
Final Rule). 77 FR 28928, 28995. DOE’s
initial standards for VRF multi-split
systems were prompted by ASHRAE’s
decision to include minimum efficiency
levels for VRF multi-split systems for
the first time in the 2010 edition of
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 (ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2010). For four of the
VRF water-source heat pump classes
(including VRF water-source heat
pumps with cooling capacity less than
17,000 Btu/h and VRF water-source heat
pumps with cooling capacity greater
than or equal to 135,000 Btu/h and less
than 760,000 Btu/h), DOE adopted the
standard levels in ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2010, having determined that the
updates to ASHRAE Standard 90.1–
2010 either raised the energy efficiency
levels above the existing Federal energy
conservation standards or set standards
for equipment for which DOE did not
previously have standards. 77 FR 28928,
28938 (May 16, 2012). For all other
equipment classes of VRF multi-split
systems, DOE maintained the standards
from the equipment class under which
the corresponding VRF multi-split
system equipment class was previously
regulated (i.e., air-cooled VRF multi-
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
18970
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
split systems had previously been
covered as small, large, and very large
air-cooled central air-conditioning heat
pumps with electric resistance heating,
while water-source VRF multi-split heat
pumps had previously been covered as
water-source heat pumps).
For the equipment addressed in this
final rule, DOE’s current equipment
classes for VRF multi-split systems are
differentiated by refrigeration cycle (air
conditioners or heat pumps), condenser
heat rejection medium (air-cooled or
water-source), cooling capacity, and
heating type (for air-cooled: ‘‘No heating
or electric resistance heating’’ or ‘‘all
other types of heating’’; for watersource: ‘‘without heat recovery,’’ ‘‘with
heat recovery,’’ or ‘‘all’’). DOE’s current
standards for VRF multi-split systems
are set forth at Table 13 to 10 CFR
431.97 and repeated in Table II–1 of this
document.
TABLE II–1—CURRENT FEDERAL ENERGY EFFICIENCY STANDARDS FOR VRF MULTI-SPLIT SYSTEMS
Equipment type
Cooling capacity
Heating type 1
Efficiency level
Compliance date:
equipment
manufactured
on and after . . .
VRF Multi-Split Air Conditioners (AirCooled).
<65,000 Btu/h ..................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <135,000 Btu/h
All .....................................................
No Heating or Electric Resistance
Heating.
All Other Types of Heating ..............
No Heating or Electric Resistance
Heating.
All Other Types of Heating ..............
No Heating or Electric Resistance
Heating.
All Other Types of Heating ..............
All .....................................................
No Heating or Electric Resistance
Heating.
All Other Types of Heating ..............
No Heating or Electric Resistance
Heating.
All Other Types of Heating ..............
No Heating or Electric Resistance
Heating.
All Other Types of Heating ..............
Without heat recovery ......................
13.0 SEER ......................
11.2 EER ........................
June 16, 2008.
January 1, 2010.
11.0 EER ........................
11.0 EER ........................
January 1, 2010.
January 1, 2010.
10.8 EER ........................
10.0 EER ........................
January 1, 2010.
January 1, 2010.
9.8 EER ..........................
13.0 SEER, 7.7 HSPF ....
11.0 EER, 3.3 COP ........
January 1, 2010.
June 16, 2008.
January 1, 2010.
10.8 EER, 3.3 COP ........
10.6 EER, 3.2 COP ........
January 1, 2010.
January 1, 2010.
10.4 EER, 3.2 COP.
9.5 EER, 3.2 COP ..........
January 1, 2010.
January 1, 2010.
9.3 EER, 3.2 COP ..........
12.0 EER, 4.2 COP ........
With heat recovery ...........................
11.8 EER, 4.2 COP ........
All .....................................................
All .....................................................
Without heat recovery ......................
With heat recovery ...........................
12.0 EER, 4.2 COP ........
12.0 EER, 4.2 COP ........
10.0 EER, 3.9 COP ........
9.8 EER, 3.9 COP ..........
January 1, 2010.
October 29, 2012.
October 29, 2003.
October 29, 2012.
October 29, 2003.
October 29, 2003.
October 29, 2003.
October 29, 2013.
October 29, 2013.
≥135,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h
VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps (AirCooled).
<65,000 Btu/h ..................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <135,000 Btu/h
≥135,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h
VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps (WaterSource).
<17,000 Btu/h ..................................
≥17,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h ...
≥65,000 Btu/h and <135,000 Btu/h
≥135,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h
1 VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps (Air-Cooled) with heat recovery fall under the category of ‘‘All Other Types of Heating’’ unless they also have electric resistance heating, in which case they fall under the category for ‘‘No Heating of Electric Resistance Heating.’’
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
2. ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2016
ASHRAE released the 2016 version of
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 (ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2016) on October 26,
2016, which increased the heating mode
efficiency level (in terms of COP) for six
of the current DOE VRF multi-split
system equipment classes:
(1) VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps,
Water-source <17,000 Btu/h, Without
Heat Recovery;
(2) VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps,
Water-source <17,000 Btu/h, With Heat
Recovery;
(3) VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps,
Water-source ≥17,000 Btu/h and
<65,000 Btu/h;
(4) VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps.
Water-source ≥65,000 Btu/h and
<135,000 Btu/h;
(5) VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps,
Water-source ≥135,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h, Without Heat Recovery;
and
(6) VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps,
Water-source ≥135,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h, With Heat Recovery.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 29, 2023
Jkt 259001
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2016 left the
heating mode efficiency level for the
remaining six DOE equipment classes of
VRF multi-split heat pump systems with
cooling capacity greater than or equal to
65,000 Btu/h and the cooling mode
efficiency levels in terms of EER for all
DOE equipment classes unchanged.
(DOE notes that standards for 3-phase
air-cooled VRF heat pumps <65,000
Btu/h are being considered in a separate
energy conservation standards
rulemaking (see Docket EERE–2022–
BT–STD–0008).
DOE published a notice of data
availability and request for information
(NODA/RFI) in response to the
amendments to ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2016 in the Federal Register on
July 8, 2019 (July 2019 NODA/RFI). 84
FR 32328. In the July 2019 NODA/RFI,
DOE compared the current Federal
standards for VRF multi-split systems
(in terms of EER and COP) to the levels
in ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2016 and
requested comment on its preliminary
findings. 84 FR 32328, 32333–32334
(July 8, 2019). In addition to evaluating
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
amended energy conservation standards
for the six equipment classes triggered
by the updated levels in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2016, DOE also
examined the other 14 equipment
classes of VRF multi-split systems under
its six-year-lookback authority (42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C)) and solicited data
from stakeholders. 84 FR 32328, 32334
(July 8, 2019).
On October 24, 2019, ASHRAE
officially released for distribution and
made public ASHRAE Standard 90.1–
2019. ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019
maintained the equipment class
structure for VRF multi-split systems
from ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2016 and
did not update efficiency levels for any
VRF equipment classes.
Subsequently, in January 2023,
ASHRAE published ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2022. Once again, ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2022 maintained the
equipment class structure for VRF
multi-split systems from ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2016 and maintained the
IEER efficiency levels for all VRF
equipment classes.
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
18971
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
3. ASRAC Negotiations
On April 11, 2018, DOE published in
the Federal Register a notice of its
intent to establish a negotiated
rulemaking working group (Working
Group) under the Appliance Standards
and Rulemaking Federal Advisory
Committee (ASRAC), in accordance
with the Federal Advisory Committee
Act 9 and the Negotiated Rulemaking
Act,10 to negotiate an amended test
procedure and amended energy
conservation standards for VRF multisplit systems. 83 FR 15514. The purpose
of the Working Group was to discuss
and, if possible, reach consensus on a
proposed rule regarding the test
procedure and energy conservation
standards for VRF multi-split systems,
as authorized by EPCA. Id. The Working
Group comprised 21 voting members
including manufacturers, energy
efficiency advocates, utilities, and trade
organizations.11
On October 1, 2019, the Working
Group reached consensus on a test
procedure term sheet (VRF TP Term
Sheet; Docket No. EERE–2018–BT–
STD–0003–0044) that includes several
recommendations. The following list
includes the most substantial
recommendations:
(1) VRF multi-split systems should be
rated with the Integrated Energy
Efficiency Ratio (IEER) metric to allow
consumers to make consistent
comparisons with other equipment
using the IEER metric (e.g., rooftop air
conditioner ratings).
(2) Use of the amended test procedure
should not be required until the
compliance date of amended energy
conservation standards.
(3) The Federal test procedure for VRF
multi-split systems should be consistent
with the September 20, 2019 draft
version of AHRI 1230, with additional
recommended amendments to be
implemented after the conclusion of
ASRAC negotiations.
Following completion of the VRF TP
Term Sheet, the Working Group
proceeded to negotiate recommended
revised energy conservation standards
for VRF multi-split systems that
accounted for the translation from the
EER metric to the IEER metric, as well
as the changes between the Federal test
procedure that references AHRI 1230–
2010 and the recommended 2019 draft
test procedure AHRI 1230 (which was
later published as AHRI 1230–2021). As
described in greater detail in section
III.B of this document, DOE conducted
a crosswalk analysis to inform the
development of standard levels for VRF
multi-split systems in terms of the new
test procedure and metric. DOE
presented the results of its crosswalk
analysis on November 5, 2019 (Docket
No. EERE–2018–BT–STD–0003–0061 at
p. 45), and subsequently, the Working
Group reached consensus on an energy
conservation standards term sheet (VRF
ECS Term Sheet; Docket No. EERE–
2018–BT–STD–0003–0055)
recommending:
(1) Amendments to the Federal
minimum efficiency standards for VRF
multi-split systems (as presented in
Table II–2 of this final rule) per the test
procedure recommended in the VRF TP
Term Sheet.
(2) The compliance date of the
recommended energy conservation
standards should be January 1, 2024 for
all VRF multi-split system equipment
classes included in this rulemaking.
TABLE II–2—RECOMMENDED EFFICIENCY LEVELS FROM VRF ECS TERM SHEET
Energy efficiency
levels recommended 1
Equipment class
VRF
VRF
VRF
VRF
VRF
VRF
VRF
VRF
VRF
VRF
VRF
VRF
VRF
VRF
VRF
VRF
VRF
VRF
VRF
Air Conditioners, Air-cooled, ≥65,000 Btu/h and <135,000 Btu/h ..............................................................................
Air Conditioners, Air-cooled, ≥135,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h ............................................................................
Air Conditioners, Air-cooled, ≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ............................................................................
Heat Pumps, Air-cooled, ≥65,000 Btu/h and <135,000 Btu/h, No Heating or Electric Resistance Heating .............
Heat Pumps, Air-cooled, ≥65,000 Btu/h and <135,000 Btu/h, All Other Types of Heating .......................................
Heat Pumps, Air-cooled, ≥135,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h, No Heating or Electric Resistance Heating ...........
Heat Pumps, Air-cooled, ≥135,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h, All Other Types of Heating .....................................
Heat Pumps, Air-cooled, ≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h, No Heating or Electric Resistance Heating ...........
Heat Pumps, Air-cooled, ≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h, All Other Types of Heating .....................................
Heat Pumps, Water-source, <17,000 Btu/h, Without Heat Recovery ........................................................................
Heat Pumps, Water-source, <17,000 Btu/h, With Heat Recovery .............................................................................
Heat Pumps, Water-source, ≥17,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h, Without Heat Recovery .........................................
Heat Pumps, Water-source, ≥17,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h, With Heat Recovery ..............................................
Heat Pumps, Water-source, ≥65,000 Btu/h and <135,000 Btu/h, Without Heat Recovery .......................................
Heat Pumps, Water-source, ≥65,000 Btu/h and <135,000 Btu/h, With Heat Recovery ............................................
Heat Pumps, Water-source, ≥135,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h, Without Heat Recovery .....................................
Heat Pumps, Water-source, ≥135,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h, With Heat Recovery ..........................................
Heat Pumps, Water-source, ≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h, Without Heat Recovery .....................................
Heat Pumps, Water-source, ≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h, With Heat Recovery ..........................................
15.5
14.9
13.9
14.6
14.4
13.9
13.7
12.7
12.5
16.0
15.8
16.0
15.8
16.0
15.8
14.0
13.8
12.0
11.8
IEER.
IEER.
IEER.
IEER,
IEER,
IEER,
IEER;
IEER,
IEER;
IEER,
IEER,
IEER,
IEER,
IEER,
IEER,
IEER,
IEER,
IEER,
IEER,
3.3
3.3
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.2
4.3
4.3
4.3
4.3
4.3
4.3
4.0
4.0
3.9
3.9
COP.
COP.
COP.
COP.
COP.
COP.
COP.
COP.
COP.
COP.
COP.
COP.
COP.
COP.
COP.
COP.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
1 The VRF ECS Term Sheet includes the notation ‘‘COP ’’ which indicates coefficient of performance in heating mode at 47 °F outdoor ambiH
ent temperature (for air-cooled VRF multi-split heat pumps) and at 68 °F entering water temperature (for water-source VRF multi-split heat
pumps).
DOE notes that there are minor
differences in equipment class structure
(related to cooling capacity,
supplementary heating type, and
presence of heat recovery) between the
VRF ECS Term Sheet, ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2019, and the current
95
U.S.C. App. 2, Public Law 92–463.
U.S.C. 561–570, Public Law 101–648.
11 A complete list of the ASRAC VRF Working
Group members is available by clicking on the
10 5
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 29, 2023
Jkt 259001
Federal energy conservation standards
for VRF multi-split systems. This topic
is discussed in greater detail in section
II.B.3 of this document.
On May 18, 2021, AHRI published an
updated industry test standard for VRF
multi-split systems, AHRI 1230–2021.
Subsequently, on December 10, 2021,
DOE published in the Federal Register
the VRF TP NOPR (December 2021 VRF
TP NOPR), in which DOE proposed an
amended test procedure for VRF multisplit systems that incorporates by
reference AHRI 1230–2021 and
‘‘Working Group’’ tab at: www.energy.gov/eere/
buildings/appliance-standards-and-rulemakingfederal-advisorycommittee#Variable%20Refrigerant
%20Flow%20Multi-Split%20Air%20Conditioners
%20and%20Heat%20Pumps
%20Working%20Group.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
18972
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
proposed to adopt IEER as the test
metric for VRF multi-split systems. 86
FR 70644, 70652. DOE finalized these
proposals in a test procedure final rule
published in the Federal Register on
October 20, 2022 (October 2022 TP
Final Rule). 87 FR 63860. In the October
2022 TP Final Rule, DOE determined
that the amendments to the test
procedure would alter the measured
efficiency of VRF multi-split systems, as
compared to ratings using the current
Federal regulated metric, EER (see 10
CFR 431.97). In that document, DOE
stated that testing pursuant to the
amended test procedure would not be
required until such time as
manufacturers were required to comply
with amended energy conservation
standards that are denominated in terms
of IEER, should such standards be
adopted. 87 FR 63860, 63880 (Oct. 20,
2022).
4. Proposed Standards
On March 1, 2022, DOE published a
NOPR (March 2022 NOPR) in the
Federal Register that proposed to adopt
the energy conservation standards and
equipment class structure for VRF
multi-split systems as adopted in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2016. 87 FR
11335 (March 1, 2022). Specifically,
DOE proposed amended energy
conservation standards VRF multi-split
systems that rely on the IEER metric and
are equivalent to those levels specified
in ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2016. Id. at
87 FR 11336–11338. In the March 2022
NOPR, DOE outlined its plan to
crosswalk the existing VRF energy
conservation standards (denominated in
terms of EER as the cooling metric) to
the efficiency levels in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2016 (denominated in
terms of IEER) and requested comment.
Id. at 87 FR 11342–11345. DOE
preliminarily determined that it lacks
the clear and convincing evidence
required by the statute to adopt
standards more stringent than the levels
specified in the industry standard. Id. at
87 FR 11337. DOE received nine
comments in response to the March
2022 NOPR from the interested parties
listed in Table II–3.
TABLE II–3—MARCH 2022 NOPR WRITTEN COMMENTS
Abbreviation
Air-Conditioning, Heating, & Refrigeration Institute ................................
Appliance Standards Awareness Project, American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance.
Carrier .....................................................................................................
Daikin Comfort Technologies North America, Inc ..................................
GE Appliances—a Haier Company ........................................................
Hydronic Industry Alliance—Commercial ...............................................
Lennox International, Inc ........................................................................
New York State Energy Research and Development Authority ............
Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San Diego Gas & Electric, Southern California Edison (collectively referred to as the ‘‘California Investor-owned Utilities’’ or ‘‘CA IOUs’’).
AHRI ..................
Joint Advocates
77
76
Industry Trade Association.
Efficiency Advocacy Organizations.
Carrier ................
Daikin .................
GE ......................
HIA–C ................
Lennox ...............
NYSERDA .........
CA IOUs ............
74
79
78
67
75
73
72
Manufacturer.
Manufacturer.
Manufacturer.
Industry Trade Association.
Manufacturer.
State Agency.
Utilities.
A parenthetical reference at the end of
a comment quotation or paraphrase
provides the location of the item in the
public record.12 To the extent that
interested parties have provided written
comments that are substantively
consistent with any oral comments
provided during the March 23, 2022
public meeting webinar for the VRF
multi-split systems energy conservation
standards NOPR, DOE cites the written
comments throughout this final rule. In
this case, DOE did not identify any oral
comments provided during the webinar
that are not substantively reflected by
written comments.
III. General Discussion
DOE developed this final rule after
considering oral and written comments,
data, and information from interested
parties that represent a variety of
interests. The following discussion
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Comment No.
in the docket
Commenter(s)
12 The parenthetical reference provides a
reference for information located in the docket of
DOE’s rulemaking to develop energy conservation
standards for VRF multi-split systems. (Docket No.
EERE–2018–BT–STD–0003, which is maintained at
www.regulations.gov). The references are arranged
as follows: (commenter name, comment docket ID
number, page of that document).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 29, 2023
Jkt 259001
addresses issues raised by these
commenters.
A. Test Procedure
EPCA sets forth generally applicable
criteria and procedures for DOE’s
adoption and amendment of test
procedures. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a))
Manufacturers of covered products must
use these test procedures to certify to
DOE that their product complies with
energy conservation standards and to
quantify the efficiency of their product.
The IEER and COP standards proposed
in the March 2022 NOPR and outlined
in section II.B.4 of this document are
measured according to the amended
industry test standard for VRF multisplit systems, AHRI 1230–2021, in
alignment with the VRF ECS Term
Sheet discussed in section II.B.3 of this
document.
In response to the March 2022 NOPR,
Lennox and Daikin commented that
they support the adoption of IEER,
which is a part-load metric. (Lennox,
No. 75 at pp. 1–2; Daikin, No. 79 at p.
1) Daikin stated that IEER is more
representative of the operating cooling
efficiency of a VRF system. (Daikin, No.
79 at p. 1) Lennox further commented
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Commenter type
that the IEER metric would allow
consumers to make comparisons of
energy efficiency with other commercial
air conditioners that utilize the IEER
metric. (Lennox, No. 75 at pp. 1–2)
Conversely, HIA–C argued that the
standard should focus on certification of
VRF performance at limits compared to
performance at part-loads, as opposed to
comparison between VRF systems or
between VRF and other commercial air
conditioners. (HIA–C, No. 67 at p. 1)
In response, DOE notes that EPCA
does not require the Department to
develop energy conservation standards
that compare full-load and part-load
performance. Instead, DOE must
develop energy conservation standards
that are as representative of real-world
performance as possible. For VRF multisplit systems, this means including both
full-load and part-load performance.
Additionally, using the same
performance metric for multiple types of
equipment that serve the same purpose
allows for consumers to make informed
decisions when selecting their system.
Thus, DOE is finalizing its proposal to
amend energy conservation standards
for VRF multi-split systems in terms of
the IEER metric.
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
In response to the March 2022 NOPR,
Lennox expressed support for DOE
adopting the industry test procedure
AHRI 1230–2021, stating that it
significantly improves the
representativeness of the tested value
for VRF equipment. (Lennox, No. 75 at
pp. 1–2) In contrast, AHRI commented
that DOE does not have the authority to
propose adopting AHRI 1230–2021 as
the Federal test procedure until such
time as AHRI 1230–2021 is referenced
in ASHRAE Standard 90.1 as the
appropriate test standard for VRF
systems, elaborating that EPCA requires
DOE to adopt a Federal test procedure
that is consistent with the applicable
test procedure specified in the amended
ASHRAE Standard 90.1. (AHRI, No. 77
at p. 2) AHRI and GE commented that
DOE should support Addendum ay to
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 which
updates the test procedure reference for
VRF multi-split systems in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1 to AHRI 1230–2021.13
(AHRI, No. 77 at p. 2; GE, No. 78 at p.
2)
NYSERDA encouraged DOE to start
looking ahead to the next test procedure
rulemaking and the potential for the
VRF test procedure to address cold
climate performance. Along these lines,
NYSERDA urged DOE to add another
low-temperature test point at 5 °F (and
as low as ¥15 °F) for this equipment, as
the current 47 °F and the optional 17 °F
test condition are not low enough to
ensure adequate system performance in
cold climates. (NYSERDA, No. 73 at pp.
2–3) HIA–C similarly commented that
DOE should clarify the temperatures at
which COP tests are performed so as to
allow comparison between performance
at full and part loads. (HIA–C, No. 67 at
p. 1) The commenter further stated that
the IEER metric does not address
connected cassettes or splits in
combination, such that certain
refrigerant volumes and tubing lengths
are not represented, and it
recommended an intermediate step to
clarify the temperature at which a
metric applies. (Id.)
DOE notes that all VRF test procedure
issues have been handled in a separate
rulemaking. DOE addressed the content
and authority of its proposed test
procedure amendments in the October
20, 2022 VRF TP Final Rule. See 87 FR
63860.
13 Addendum ay to ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019,
which updates the test procedure reference for VRF
multi-split systems to AHRI 1230–2021, has been
incorporated into the recently published ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2022.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 29, 2023
Jkt 259001
B. Methodology for Efficiency Crosswalk
Analysis
1. Crosswalk Background and Overview
Consistent with the recommendation
of the Working Group, DOE is amending
the energy conservation standards for
VRF multi-split systems to rely on the
IEER metric for cooling efficiency, and
maintaining the metric for heating
efficiency (i.e., COP). As discussed in
the March 2022 NOPR, the Department
has concluded that a change of metrics
would be beneficial for a number of
reasons, including that the IEER metric
provides a more representative measure
of field performance of VRF multi-split
systems by weighting the full-load and
part-load (75-percent, 50-percent, and
25-percent of full-load capacity)
efficiencies by the average amount of
time the equipment spends operating at
each load. 87 FR 11335, 11342 (March
1, 2022).
As stated, EPCA prohibits DOE from
prescribing any amended standard that
either increases the maximum allowable
energy use or decreases the minimum
required energy efficiency of covered
equipment. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(B)(iii)(I)); commonly referred
to as EPCA’s ‘‘anti-backsliding
provision’’) In consideration of the IEER
metric and to ensure any potential
amendment would not violate EPCA’s
‘‘anti-backsliding’’ provision, as part of
the ASRAC Working Group activities,
DOE conducted a crosswalk analysis to
validate both the translation of the EER
levels currently required by the DOE
standards to corresponding IEER levels,
as well as the IEER efficiency levels as
recommended by the Working Group.
The crosswalk analysis translates the
current Federal EER standards
(measured per the current DOE test
procedure) to IEER levels of equivalent
stringency (measured per the updated
AHRI Standard 1230). (Docket No.
EERE–2018–BT–STD–0003–0056)
The energy conservation standards
presented in this document were
developed based on an update to the
relevant industry test standard (i.e., the
2019 draft test procedure AHRI 1230
that was finalized as ASHRAE 1230–
2021). Compared to the current Federal
test procedure (which references ANSI/
AHRI 1230–2010), AHRI 1230–2021
included two substantive changes that
impact the translation of standards in
EER to standards using IEER.
Specifically, DOE considered the
following changes in its crosswalk
analysis in addition to the metric
change from EER to IEER:
(1) Maximum sensible heat ratio
(SHR) limits of 0.82 and 0.85 were
added for full-load and 75-percent, part-
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
18973
load conditions, respectively. SHR
represents the ratio of sensible cooling
capacity (i.e., the ability to change the
temperature of indoor air) to the total
cooling capacity, which also includes
latent cooling capacity (i.e., the ability
to remove moisture from indoor air). For
example, an SHR of 0.80 indicates that
80 percent of the capacity of a system
reduces the temperature of the air and
the remaining 20 percent dehumidifies
the air.
(2) A controls verification procedure
(CVP) was added that verifies that the
values provided by manufacturers in the
supplemental test instruction (STI) for
setting critical parameters during
steady-state testing are within the range
of critical parameters that would be
used by the system’s native controls at
the same conditions.
On November 5, 2019, DOE presented
its crosswalk findings to the Working
Group to inform the development of
recommended standards levels for VRF
multi-split systems in terms of the new
test procedure and cooling metric.
These findings demonstrated that the
translation of the current EER standards
to the recommended IEER values would
not decrease the minimum required
energy efficiency of VRF multi-split
systems using a minimally-compliant
model. DOE also presented to the
Working Group anonymized and
aggregated data provided by VRF multisplit system manufacturers. These data
showed a preliminary translation of
ratings to the IEER metric in terms of the
updated test procedure for a collection
of VRF multi-split systems spanning
four equipment classes. The
crosswalked results included the IEER
efficiency level specified in the VRF
ECS term sheet for the selected classes.
Detailed discussion of the crosswalk
presentation can be found in Docket No.
EERE–2018–BT–STD–0003–0056.
Given that translating the current EER
levels to IEER according to the updated
test procedure does not provide for a
single point answer (as would thereby
allow for a direct comparison), DOE
stated in the March 2022 NOPR that it
believes it is reasonable to ensure that
the recommended value lies within the
range resulting from DOE’s evaluation
as a proxy for understanding whether
there is a potential for backsliding.
Consequently, DOE tentatively
determined that the recommended IEER
levels are at least equivalent in
stringency to the current EER levels.
Further, given that IEER is a more
comprehensive metric (reflecting energy
efficiency across a range of operating
conditions, as opposed to the efficiency
at a single condition), DOE tentatively
determined that the recommended IEER
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
18974
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
levels would not decrease the minimum
required energy efficiency of a VRF
multi-split system. 87 FR 11335, 11343
(March 1, 2022). DOE received no
comments to the contrary in response to
the March 2022 NOPR. Consequently,
for the reasons previously explained,
DOE maintains this determination in the
final rule.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
2. Crosswalk Details and Results
As discussed in further detail in the
March 2022 NOPR, DOE conducted a
crosswalk analysis to account for the
translation from EER to IEER, as well as
changes in the updated industry test
standard—namely the addition of SHR
limits and the introduction of the CVP.
See 87 FR 11335, 11343–11345 (March
1, 2022). Because these three factors
have interacting effects on the measured
cooling performance of VRF multi-split
systems, DOE modeled their interaction
holistically and did not examine
incremental changes in performance
due to any one factor.
DOE only conducted a crosswalk
analysis for the VRF cooling mode
efficiency, as DOE did not propose to
change the heating efficiency metric
(i.e., COP), nor did the changes to the
test procedure for VRF multi-split
systems impact measured efficiency in
heating mode. To develop a crosswalk
approach that is applicable to all
equipment classes of VRF multi-split
systems, DOE analyzed a basic model
representative of equipment classes
with high sales volume.14 Specifically,
DOE selected an air-cooled VRF multisplit heat pump system in the cooling
capacity range greater than 135,000 Btu/
h and less than or equal to 240,000 Btu/
h without heat recovery. DOE created a
performance model using VapCyc and
CoilDesigner software 15 to evaluate
capacity and efficiency of the selected
system per the updated industry test
standard at full-load cooling and
reduced load conditions.
DOE also sought to translate the
current EER standards to equivalent
14 According to a report from Cadeo group, aircooled VRF multi-split heat pump systems in the
cooling capacity range greater than 135,000 Btu/h
and less than or equal to 240,000 Btu/h without
heat recovery account for 12.4 percent of the VRF
multi-split system market. Air-cooled VRF multisplit systems in the same capacity range equipped
with heat recovery account for an additional 32.6
percent of the VRF multi-split system market.
(EERE–2017–BT–TP–0018–0002)
15 VapCyc and CoilDesigner are HVAC energy
modeling software programs. CoilDesigner is a
detailed heat exchanger modeling program. VapCyc
integrates CoilDesigner heat exchanger simulations
with compressor and expansion models to complete
a refrigeration cycle model to simulate performance
of an air conditioning or heat pump system at
specific operating conditions. (Available at:
www.optimizedthermalsystems.com.) (Last accessed
Dec. 30, 2022)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 29, 2023
Jkt 259001
IEER standards when tested according
to the updated industry test standard.
Consequently, DOE investigated ways to
translate the SHR requirements and CVP
procedure introduced by the amended
test procedure for VRF multi-split
systems. AHRI 1230–2021 sets SHR
limits of 0.82 and 0.85 at the full-load
cooling condition and the 75-percent
part-load cooling condition,
respectively, but does not include SHR
limits for the 50-percent or 25-percent
part-load cooling conditions. Because
manufacturers do not currently certify
or publicize any information about SHR
at the full-load EER test condition, DOE
was unable to precisely determine SHR
values representative of a baseline EER
VRF multi-split system. So, to account
for the effect of the SHR limits in the
updated industry test standard in its
crosswalk analysis, DOE relied on the
native controls test data to establish a
range of potential initial SHR values
observed at the full-load and 75-percent
part-load IEER test conditions. 87 FR
11335, 11343–11344 (March 1, 2022).
To account for the addition of a CVP
in AHRI 1230–2021, DOE tentatively
concluded that using information about
the ranges of operational settings
observed during native controls testing
to represent a future system that would
pass the CVP (i.e., a system for which
the certified critical parameter settings
would be validated by a CVP conducted
with the system operating under native
controls) was the most accurate
approach for estimating how
manufacturers would certify critical
parameter control settings as part of
testing to IEER as measured by AHRI
1230–2021. Id. at 87 FR 11344.
For additional detail regarding the
methods used in the crosswalk for VRF
multi-split systems, see section III.A.2 of
the March 2022 NOPR. 87 FR 11335,
11343–11344 (March 1, 2022).
Based on the modeling conducted, the
expected performance of the
representative equipment class of VRF
multi-split systems when tested
according to AHRI 1230–2021 would be
in the range of 13 to 16 IEER. Because
of the wider range of operation
conditions captured in IEER as well as
the various strategies that manufacturers
may employ to respond to the test
procedure changes, a single EER
baseline value inherently translates to a
range of IEER values.
As discussed, the IEER metric
captures performance at additional partload operating conditions not
considered by the EER metric; therefore,
a single EER value translates to a range
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
of potential IEER values.16 IEER
captures the impacts of design features
and control strategies that may not affect
full-load operation but do affect partload operation. For example, VRF multisplit systems may use different
strategies for reducing capacity at partial
loads like reducing the number of
thermally-active indoor units or slowing
compressor speeds, which may result in
differential impacts on measured IEER,
but which would not have any impact
on the measured full-load performance
EER. DOE also recognizes that there are
a variety of paths that manufacturers
may take to account for the new test
procedure, and that the crosswalk
analysis approximates how
manufacturers in the aggregate may
respond to test procedure changes. For
example, some manufacturers may elect
to meet the new SHR limitations by
reducing evaporating temperatures,
while other manufacturers may meet the
new SHR limitations by reducing indoor
airflow and decreasing the number of
thermally-active indoor units. Each
strategy may have different trade-offs in
terms of overall system performance and
measured energy efficiency.
As described in section I of this
document, the Working Group
recommended efficiency levels for VRF
multi-split systems that align with the
efficiency levels specified in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2016 in terms of IEER
and COP. While DOE’s crosswalk
analysis showed that a single EER
baseline could result in a range of IEER
values, the IEER levels included in the
VRF ECS Term Sheet (which the
Working Group recommended as an
appropriate crosswalk of current Federal
EER standards) are within the range of
DOE’s crosswalked results. Based on
this analysis, in the March 2022 NOPR,
DOE tentatively determined that the
recommended IEER levels are at least
equivalent in stringency to the current
EER levels. 87 FR 11335, 11337 (March
1, 2022). Further, given that IEER is a
more comprehensive metric (reflecting
energy efficiency across a range of
operating conditions, as opposed to the
efficiency at a single condition), DOE
tentatively determined that the
recommended IEER levels would not
decrease the minimum required energy
efficiency of a VRF multi-split system,
thereby avoiding statutorily
impermissible backsliding with respect
to the current Federal standards in
terms of EER. Id. at 87 FR 11345.
16 In a January 2016 energy conservation
standards direct final rule for ACUACs, DOE
discussed a metric translation from EER to IEER in
which a single EER level corresponds to a range of
IEERs. 81 FR 2420, 2452 (Jan. 15, 2016).
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
Finally, DOE determined that no
changes to heating mode ratings in
terms of COP are expected from the
changes to the test procedure for VRF
multi-split systems included in AHRI
1230–2021. Id.
In response to the March 2022 NOPR,
AHRI, Carrier, and Lennox commented
that they support the proposed
crosswalk analysis methodology and
results. (AHRI, No. 77 at p. 3; Carrier,
No. 74 at p. 2; Lennox, No. 75 at p. 2)
AHRI and Carrier further commented
that they felt that DOE’s initial testing
supports their tentative conclusion that
the recommended IEER levels are at
least equivalent in stringency to current
EER levels. (AHRI, No. 77 at p. 3;
Carrier, No. 74 at p. 2) Carrier
commented that they agree with DOE
that the recommended IEER levels
would not decrease the minimum
required energy efficiency of VRF
systems. (Carrier, No. 74 at p. 2)
However, AHRI and Carrier argued
that the proposed changes to the test
procedure impact the measured
efficiency of VRF multi-split systems in
a way that increases the stringency of
the standards from the current EER
standards as measured by AHRI 1230–
2010 and leads to energy savings.
(AHRI, No. 77 at p. 3; Carrier, No. 74 at
p. 2)
In response to these comments, DOE
notes that, as discussed in this section,
the crosswalk from EER, as measured by
AHRI 1230–2010 to IEER as measured
by AHRI 1230–2021, resulted in a range
of values, which includes the proposed
standards. DOE was not provided data
that shows that the standards proposed
in the March 2022 NOPR are higher in
stringency than the current EER levels.
DOE also did not receive any negative
comments regarding its crosswalk
analysis methodology, and, therefore,
the Department has not changed it in
this final rule. Accordingly, for the
reasons previously discussed, DOE
maintains its conclusion that the
recommended IEER levels are at least
equivalent in stringency to the current
EER levels.
3. Equipment Class Structure for VRFs
In the July 2019 NODA/RFI, DOE
discussed two areas where the
equipment class structure for VRF
multi-split systems differs between
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 and the Federal
standards. 84 FR 32328, 32334 (July 8,
2019). These differences were further
examined in some detail in the March
2022 NOPR. 87 FR 11335, 11345–11346
(March 1, 2022). The differences can be
summarized as follows:
(1) Capacity break points. For watersource VRF multi-split heat pumps, the
current Federal standards include VRF
multi-split systems with cooling
capacity greater than or equal to 135,000
Btu/h and less than 760,000 Btu/h in a
single category. ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2016 splits this grouping at
240,000 Btu/h to create capacity
categories of greater than or equal to
135,000 and less than 240,000 btu/h and
greater than or equal to 240,000 and less
than 760,000 Btu/h. Also for watersource VRF multi-split systems, the
current Federal standards include
18975
separate classes for systems with
cooling capacity less than 17,000 Btu/h
and for systems with cooling capacity
between 17,000 Btu/h and 65,000 Btu/
h. ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2016 groups
these classes together into a single
equipment class with cooling capacity
less than 65,000 Btu/h.
(2) Heating type. The current Federal
standards are disaggregated for certain
classes of VRF multi-split systems based
on heating type. For all air-cooled VRF
multi-split air conditioners and heat
pumps with cooling capacity greater
than or equal to 65,000 Btu/h, the
Federal cooling standards differ by 0.2
EER points depending on whether a
system is equipped with ‘‘no heating or
electric resistance heating’’ or ‘‘all other
types of heating.’’ For water-source VRF
multi-split heat pumps, some capacity
classes disaggregate instead by systems
with heat recovery versus without heat
recovery (also with a 0.2 EER difference
in the applicable standards classes).
Other water-source VRF multi-split heat
pump standards are not disaggregated
beyond the specified capacity range.
ASHRAE 90.1–2016 disaggregates
standards for air-cooled and watersource VRF multi-split heat pumps
based on the presence of heat recovery,
instead of ‘‘heating type.’’ Air-cooled
VRF multi-split air conditioners do not
have subdivided cooling efficiency
levels based on heating type in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2016.
These differences are presented in
Table III–1:
TABLE III–1—COMPARISON OF CURRENT DOE EFFICIENCY LEVELS WITH ASHRAE STANDARD 90.1
Equipment type
VRF Multi-Split Air Conditioners (AirCooled).
Cooling capacity
Heating type
≥65,000 Btu/h and <135,000 Btu/h
≥135,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h
VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps (AirCooled).
≥65,000 Btu/h and <135,000 Btu/h
≥135,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h
VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps (WaterSource).
<17,000 Btu/h ..................................
≥17,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h ...
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 29, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00011
No Heating or
Heating.
All Other Types
No Heating or
Heating.
All Other Types
No Heating or
Heating.
All Other Types
No Heating or
Heating 1.
All Other Types
DOE efficiency level
Electric Resistance
11.2 EER ........................
of Heating ..............
Electric Resistance
11.0 EER ........................
11.0 EER ........................
of Heating ..............
Electric Resistance
10.8 EER ........................
10.0 EER ........................
of Heating ..............
Electric Resistance
9.8 EER ..........................
11.0 EER, 3.3 COP ........
of Heating 1 2 ..........
10.8 EER, 3.3 COP ........
No Heating or Electric Resistance
Heating 1.
All Other Types of Heating 1 2 ..........
10.6 EER, 3.2 COP ........
No Heating or Electric Resistance
Heating 1.
All Other Types of Heating 1 2 ..........
9.5 EER, 3.2 COP ..........
Without heat recovery ......................
12.0 EER, 4.2 COP ........
With heat recovery ...........................
11.8 EER, 4.2 COP ........
Without heat recovery ......................
12.0 EER, 4.2 COP ........
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
10.4 EER, 3.2 COP ........
9.3 EER, 3.2 COP ..........
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
ASHRAE standard
90.1–2016/2019
efficiency level
11.2 EER, 15.5
IEER.
No Standard.3
11.0 EER, 14.9
IEER.
No Standard.3
10.0 EER, 13.9
IEER.
No Standard.3
11.0 EER, 14.6
IEER, 3.3 COP.
10.8 EER, 14.4
IEER, 3.3 COP.
10.6 EER, 13.9
IEER, 3.2 COP.
10.4 EER, 13.7
IEER, 3.2 COP.
9.5 EER, 12.7 IEER,
3.2 COP.
9.3 EER, 12.5 IEER,
3.2 COP.
12.0 EER, 16.0
IEER, 4.3 COP.
11.8 EER, 15.8
IEER, 4.3 COP.
12.0 EER, 16.0
IEER, 4.3 COP.
18976
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE III–1—COMPARISON OF CURRENT DOE EFFICIENCY LEVELS WITH ASHRAE STANDARD 90.1—Continued
Equipment type
Cooling capacity
Heating type
DOE efficiency level
With heat recovery ...........................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <135,000 Btu/h
Without heat recovery ......................
12.0 EER, 4.2 COP ........
With heat recovery ...........................
≥135,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h
Without heat recovery ......................
10.0 EER, 3.9 COP ........
With heat recovery ...........................
9.8 EER, 3.9 COP ..........
Without heat recovery ......................
10.0 EER, 3.9 COP ........
With heat recovery ...........................
9.8 EER, 3.9 COP ..........
ASHRAE standard
90.1–2016/2019
efficiency level
11.8 EER, 15.8
IEER, 4.3 COP.
12.0 EER, 16.0
IEER, 4.3 COP.
11.8 EER, 15.8
IEER, 4.3 COP.
10.0 EER, 14.0
IEER, 4.0 COP.
9.8 EER, 13.8 IEER,
4.0 COP.
10.0 EER, 12.0
IEER, 3.9 COP
9.8 EER, 11.8 IEER,
3.9 COP.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
1 In terms of current Federal standards, VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps (Air-Cooled) with heat recovery fall under the heating type ‘‘All Other Types of Heating’’ unless
they also have electric resistance heating, in which case it falls under the category for ‘‘No Heating or Electric Resistance Heating.’’
2 In ASHRAE Standard 90.1, this equipment class is referred to as units with heat recovery rather than all other types of heating.
3 ASHRAE Standard 90.1 only includes standards for VRF air conditioners with ‘‘electric resistance or none’’ heating type. Because stakeholders have expressed
that it is unlikely that VRF air conditioners would ever be paired with other forms of supplemental heating, DOE’s amended equipment classes for VRF air conditioners are condensed using ‘‘all types of heating’’ to ensure no change in coverage or backsliding.
In the March 2022 NOPR, DOE
proposed to adopt the ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2016 equipment class
structure for VRF multi-split systems in
its regulations at 10 CFR 431.97, staying
consistent with EPCA’s direction to
establish amended uniform national
standards for the VRF multi-split
systems at the minimum levels specified
in ASHRAE Standard 90.1. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(I)) 87 FR 11335, 11345–
11347 (March 1, 2022). In the March
2022 NOPR, DOE stated that to align
with this class structure, DOE would
amend the existing DOE class structure
by expanding the number of VRF watersource heat pump classes, reducing the
number of air-cooled VRF air
conditioner classes, and amending the
convention for heating type for heat
pump systems with and without heat
recovery. Id. at 87 FR 11346.
DOE proposed a minor clarification in
the language used to describe the
heating type for VRF multi-split system
heat pumps to explicitly designate
which classes are with and without heat
recovery. 87 FR 11335, 11346–11347
(March 1, 2022). ASHRAE 90.1–2016
currently includes separate classes for
systems with and without heat recovery,
designated as ‘‘VRF multi-split systems’’
or ‘‘VRF multi-split system with heat
recovery,’’ while DOE’s proposal revised
these descriptions to explicitly state
either ‘‘heat pump without heat
recovery’’ or ‘‘heat pump with heat
recovery.’’ 87 FR 11335, 11346 (March
1, 2022).
DOE also proposed in the March 2022
NOPR to include separate efficiency
levels for VRF multi-split air
conditioners that: (1) have either electric
resistance heat or no heat and (2) have
any other type of heating. Specifically,
DOE proposed to label the condensed
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 29, 2023
Jkt 259001
equipment classes for VRF multi-split
air conditioners as having ‘‘All’’ types of
heating, and to set IEER standards for
the proposed condensed classes that are
equivalent in stringency to the EER
standards for the class with ‘‘electric
resistance or none’’ heating type. 87 FR
11335, 11346–11347 (March 1, 2022).
DOE tentatively concluded that setting
IEER standards to cover ‘‘all’’ kinds of
heating would not constitute an increase
of stringency for any models currently
in existence because DOE did not have
any knowledge of VRF multi-split air
conditioners on the market that have
‘‘all other types of heating’’ (e.g., a
furnace). Id. Such approach was
intended to eliminate any antibacksliding concerns that might
otherwise arise if DOE were to adopt a
class structure that could be viewed as
potentially reducing the current extent
of coverage of the VRF energy
conservation standards.
Finally, in the March 2022 NOPR,
DOE tentatively concluded that
adopting the proposed class structure
and efficiency levels would not result in
a change in stringency for any classes.
Id. This was because, in cases where
DOE is proposing to subdivide or
condense equipment classes relative to
the existing DOE equipment class
structure, the IEER levels recommended
by the Working Group are within the
limits of precision determined by DOE’s
crosswalk translation. For example, in
cases where the current DOE equipment
class only includes a single EER
standard but ASHRAE Standard 90.1–
2016 includes separate IEER standards
for classes with and without heat
recovery, both of the ASHRAE Standard
90.1 IEER levels fall within the
crosswalk range determined by DOE to
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
represent equivalent stringency to
existing EER standard. Id.
In response, AHRI, Carrier, the Joint
Advocates, and the CA IOUs
commented that they support DOE’s
proposed equipment class structure.
(AHRI, No. 77 at p. 3; Carrier, No. 74 at
p. 2; Joint Advocates, No. 76 at p. 1; CA
IOUs, No. 72 at p. 1) AHRI and Carrier
stated that the structure accurately
reflects the market for VRFs. (AHRI, No.
77 at p. 3; Carrier, No. 74 at p. 2) Carrier
also stated that alignment with the
industry standard would facilitate
rulemakings in response to future
updates. (Carrier, No. 74 at p. 2) AHRI
further commented that Addendum ay
includes harmonization with the
additional clarification for heating type.
(AHRI, No. 77 at p. 3)
Based on comment responses, in this
final rule, DOE is finalizing its
proposals to adopt the ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2016 equipment class
structure for VRF multi-split systems in
its regulations at 10 CFR 431.97, to
clarify language used to describe the
heating type for VRF multi-split system
heat pumps to explicitly designate
which classes are with and without heat
recovery, and to include separate
efficiency levels for VRF multi-split air
conditioners that: (1) have either electric
resistance heat or no heat and (2) have
any other type of heating.
IV. Estimates of Potential Energy
Savings
As required under 42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(A)(i), for VRF multi-split
system equipment classes for which
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2016 set levels
more stringent than the current Federal
standards, DOE performed an
assessment to determine the energysavings potential of amending Federal
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
standard levels to reflect the efficiency
levels specified in ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2016. In the July 2019 NODA/RFI,
DOE presented the findings of the
energy savings potential for the six
considered equipment classes for which
the Department was triggered. 84 FR
32328, 32335 (July 8, 2019). DOE
tentatively determined, based on a
report by Cadeo Group,17 that four of the
six affected classes—those with cooling
capacities that are less than 17,000 Btu/
h or greater than or equal to 135,000
Btu/h (with or without heat recovery),
do not have any market share and, thus,
no energy savings potential from
amended standards. The Cadeo report
showed that the remaining two affected
classes, with cooling capacities greater
than 17,000 Btu/h and less than 135,000
Btu/h, represented under three percent
of the VRF multi-split system market.
DOE tentatively concluded that
potential energy savings for these
equipment classes were de minimis. Id.
DOE noted that in ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2016, the COP was raised by 0.1 on
both of these equipment classes, and
that most commercial buildings are
cooling dominant. Id. DOE is unaware
of any additional information available
in the intervening period that would
alter its initial understanding of the
energy savings potential of the VRF
multi-split systems equipment classes
for which DOE was triggered by
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2016. Given
this information, in this final rule DOE
concludes that energy savings for these
equipment classes are de minimis.
Consideration of more-stringent
efficiency levels than those specified in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 are discussed in
section V.A of this document.
V. Conclusions
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
A. Consideration of More-Stringent
Efficiency Levels
When triggered by an update to
ASHRAE Standard 90.1, EPCA requires
DOE to establish an amended uniform
national standard for equipment classes
at the minimum level specified in the
amended ASHRAE Standard 90.1 unless
DOE determines, by rule published in
the Federal Register and supported by
clear and convincing evidence, that
adoption of a uniform national standard
more stringent than the amended
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 for the
17 Cadeo Report, Variable Refrigerant Flow: A
Preliminary Market Assessment. See:
www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2017-BTTP-0018-0002. The report presents market share by
VRF multi-split system equipment class, based on
confidential sales data given in interviews with
several major manufacturers of VRF multi-split
equipment and DOE’s Compliance Certification
Database.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 29, 2023
Jkt 259001
equipment class would result in
significant additional conservation of
energy and is technologically feasible
and economically justified. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(I)–(II))
As discussed in section II.B.3 of this
final rule, following publication of the
July 2019 NODA/RFI, the ASRAC
Working Group reached consensus on
two term sheets containing
recommendations regarding the test
procedure and energy conservation
standards for VRF multi-split systems.
As discussed in section III.B of this
document, the recommended standards
are consistent with the crosswalk
conducted by DOE to translate the
existing Federal standards in terms of
EER to equivalent levels in terms of
IEER, measured per AHRI 1230–2021.
These recommended efficiency levels
also align with the IEER and COP levels
in ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2016. The
Working Group did not consider morestringent efficiency levels.
In the March 2022 NOPR, DOE
considered but did not estimate
potential energy savings that would
occur from more-stringent standards. To
assess the magnitude of potential energy
savings from amended standards and
determine which level, if any, of morestringent standards would be
economically justified, DOE must be
able to properly represent the no-newstandards case—the case without
amended standards—and must be able
to properly characterize the technology
options and costs associated with
specific levels of efficiency. With
regards to VRF multi-split systems, this
would require developing efficiency
data for the entire market in terms of
IEER measured per AHRI 1230–2021. 87
FR 11335, 11348 (March 1, 2022).
DOE considered two approaches for
developing market-wide performance
data in terms of IEER measured per
AHRI 1230–2021: (1) DOE examined
whether any such data exist in publiclyavailable sources, and (2) DOE
considered whether existing
performance data in terms of EER
(measured per the current Federal test
procedure) could be effectively
translated to IEER (measured per AHRI
1230–2021). Id.
On the first approach, DOE found that
public data in terms of IEER measured
per AHRI 1230–2021 are not available,
as the rating of VRF multi-split systems
using the updated metric and test
procedure is not currently required.
DOE acknowledged that IEER
performance data are widely
represented by VRF manufacturers, but
that all such data are measured per an
earlier version of the industry test
standard (AHRI 1230–2014) and, thus,
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
18977
not directly comparable. DOE also
found that the AHRI Directory did not
yet require IEER representations
measured per AHRI 1230–2021. 87 FR
11335, 11348 (March 1, 2022).
On the second approach, DOE
considered the results of its crosswalk
analysis to determine whether a marketwide translation of existing EER data to
IEER data (measured per AHRI 1230–
2021) was possible. As discussed in
section III.A the NOPR, the combined
effect of translating the Federal cooling
efficiency metric from EER to IEER and
the effect of test procedure changes
between the current DOE test procedure
(which references AHRI 1230–2010) and
the proposed DOE test procedure
(which would reference AHRI 1230–
2021) is likely to produce different
impacts on measured efficiency across
different manufacturers and different
models. As DOE’s crosswalk analysis
has shown, a minimally-compliant VRF
multi-split system with 10.8 EER can
result in a range of crosswalked IEER
levels from 13 to 16, depending on
control inputs selected by the
manufacturer. Additionally, an
estimation of energy savings potentials
of more-stringent energy efficiency
levels would require developing
efficiency data for the entire VRF multisplit system market, which would be a
much broader analysis than that
conducted for the crosswalk. The
crosswalk analysis conducted to support
the Working Group recommendations
and presented in the NOPR only
translated the baseline efficiency level
between the metrics for a single class of
VRF multi-split system and did not
translate all efficiency levels currently
represented in the market. As noted,
there are insufficient market data
regarding the performance of VRF multisplit systems measured in terms of IEER
per AHRI 1230–2021. As such, DOE
preliminarily determined that it lacked
clear and convincing evidence to adopt
more-stringent standard levels.
Regardless of whether DOE
preliminarily determined that morestringent standards would be
technologically feasible and
economically justified, DOE would be
unable to adopt such standards absent a
determination, supported by clear and
convincing evidence, that morestringent standards would result in
significant additional energy savings.
(42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(II))
Therefore, having preliminarily
determined that it lacks clear and
convincing evidence as to the energy
savings that would result from morestringent standards, DOE did not
conduct analysis as to the technological
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
18978
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
feasibility or economic justification of
such standards for VRF multi-split
systems. 87 FR 11335, 11348 (March 1,
2022).
In response to the March 2022 NOPR,
AHRI commented that it supports the
proposed standards. (AHRI. No. 77 at
pp. 1–2) The CA IOUs, Lennox, Daikin,
and Joint Advocates commented that
they support DOE’s proposal to adopt
the VRF ECS levels from the ASRAC
Working Group term sheet. (CA IOUs,
No. 72 at p. 1; Lennox, No. 75 at p. 1;
Daikin, No. 79 at p. 1; Joint Advocates,
No. 76 at p. 1) The CA IOUs commented
that they acknowledge the challenges
associated with the crosswalk analysis,
and that they agree that DOE lacks the
evidence necessary to justify efficiency
levels above those in ASHRAE Standard
90.1. (CA IOUs, No. 72 at p. 1)
Conversely, NYSERDA commented that
it is not convinced that the levels being
set are the most efficient levels that DOE
can justify and urged DOE to reevaluate
its VRF standards once a database of
equipment is available. (NYSERDA, No.
73 at p. 2)
After carefully considering these
comments, DOE concludes that it does
not have the clear and convincing
evidence necessary to justify the
adoption of more-stringent energy
conservation standard levels for VRF
multi-split systems. To be able to
properly characterize the technology
options and associated costs, DOE
would require efficiency data for the
entire market in terms of IEER measured
per AHRI 1230–2021. As NYSERDA
noted, DOE does not presently have
such data available. Consequently, DOE
concludes that more-stringent standards
cannot be justified at this time.
Therefore, DOE has not conducted
analysis as to the technological
feasibility or economic justification of
more-stringent standards for VRF multisplit systems.
B. Review Under the Six-Year-Lookback
Provision
As discussed, DOE is required to
conduct an evaluation of each class of
covered equipment in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1 every six years. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(C)(i)) Accordingly, DOE is
evaluating 12 of the Federal VRF
equipment classes for which ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2016 did not increase the
stringency of the standards. Energy
conservation standards for the two
remaining classes of VRF multi-split
systems (i.e., three-phase, air-cooled
VRF multi-split systems with cooling
capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h) are not
addressed in this final rule and instead
will be addressed in a separate energy
conservation standards rulemaking.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 29, 2023
Jkt 259001
DOE may only adopt more-stringent
standards pursuant to the six-yearlookback review if the Secretary
determines, by rule published in the
Federal Register and supported by clear
and convincing evidence, that the
adoption of more-stringent standards
would result in significant additional
conservation of energy and is
technologically feasible and
economically justified. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(C)(i)(II); 42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(B); 42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(II))
For the reasons presented in the prior
section, DOE has determined that it
lacks clear and convincing evidence that
more-stringent standards for these 12
equipment classes would result in
significant additional energy savings.
Because DOE does not have sufficient
data to meet the ‘‘clear and convincing’’
threshold for these 12 classes, DOE did
not conduct an analysis of standard
levels more stringent than the current
Federal standard levels for VRF multisplit systems that were not amended in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2016. See
section V.A of this document for further
discussion of the consideration of
energy efficiency levels more stringent
than the ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2016
levels.
C. Amended Energy Conservation
Standards
Based on the foregoing, DOE is
amending energy conservation
standards for VRF multi-split systems in
terms of IEER and COP equivalent to
those specified for VRF multi-split
systems in ASHRAE Standard 90.1–
2016, which align with the levels
recommended in the ASRAC Working
Group’s VRF ECS Term Sheet. The
amended standards are presented in
Table I–1. Compliance with the
amended standards is required for VRF
multi-split systems manufactured in, or
imported into, the United States starting
January 1, 2024, which aligns with the
Working Group’s recommendation in
the VRF ECS Term Sheet.
As discussed, ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2016 includes more-stringent COP
standards for six water-source VRF
multi-split heat pump classes. EPCA
provides that the compliance date for
prescribing levels contained in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1 shall be on or after a date
that is two or three years (depending on
the equipment type or size) after the
effective date of the applicable
minimum energy efficiency requirement
in the amended ASHRAE standard. (42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(D)) The effective date
for amended COP standards in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2016 was January 1,
2017. In the March 2022 NOPR, DOE
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
acknowledged that the statute originally
tied calculation of a compliance date to
either two or three years after the
effective date of amended ASHRAE
Standard 90.1. However, because these
dates have passed, DOE proposed the
date recommended in the VRF ECS
Term Sheet (i.e., January 1, 2024) as a
reasonable amount of lead time
supported by a broad array of interested
stakeholders. DOE stated that if it
received comments in response to the
NOPR that recommend alternative
compliance date(s) later than January 1,
2024, DOE would consider adopting
alternative compliance date(s) in the
final rule. 87 FR 11335, 11349 (March
1, 2022).
In response to the March 2022 NOPR,
AHRI commented that, given that
January 1, 2024 is rapidly approaching,
DOE should consider using its authority
under 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(l) to
make the proposed energy conservation
standard effective sooner than 18
months after the rule is finalized.
(AHRI, No. 77 at p. 2) Daikin
encouraged DOE to finalize the VRF
ECS rulemaking quickly, as industry
needs as much time as possible to
comply, especially with the revised VRF
test procedure. (Daikin, No. 79 at p. 1)
The CA IOUs, NYSERDA, and Joint
Advocates also commented their
support for the proposed compliance
date of January 1, 2024. (CA IOUs, No.
72 at p. 1; NYSERDA, No. 73 at p. 1
Joint Advocates, No. 76 at p. 1)
GE commented that, because of the
amount of time that has passed since the
ASRAC Working Group term sheet was
published, DOE should postpone the
compliance date, as one year of lead
time is not sufficient time for
manufacturers to evaluate all products
and make necessary changes to meet the
new standard according to the new test
procedure. (GE, No. 78 at p. 2)
Similarly, Carrier commented that DOE
should consider shifting the compliance
date by 12–18 months, so that
manufacturers have a minimum of two
years between the publication of the
final rule and the compliance date to
give manufacturers enough time to
implement the new test procedure and
redesign their impacted equipment
accordingly. (Carrier, No. 74 at p. 1)
In response, DOE notes that
manufacturers have been aware of the
updated levels since the ASRAC
Working Group reached consensus on
the VRF ECS Term Sheet in 2019. While
DOE acknowledges that the test
procedure changes will impact rated
efficiencies of VRF multi-split systems,
the Department further notes that
manufacturers have been aware of these
changes since at least the publication of
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
AHRI 1230–2021. Thus, DOE concludes
that manufacturers have had sufficient
time to adjust to both the amended VRF
energy conservation standards and the
new VRF test procedure. Therefore, in
this final rule, DOE maintains its
compliance date of January 1, 2024, for
amended standards for VRF multi-split
systems.
NYSERDA commented that DOE
should consider beginning a new
standards rulemaking prior to the date
mandated under the six-year-lookback
requirement, as this will allow for
advancements in the energy
conservation standards for VRF multisplit systems based upon certification
data generated by application of the new
test procedure. (NYSERDA, No. 73 at p.
2)
On NYSERDA’s point, DOE will
consider appropriate timing of its next
proceeding for VRF multi-split systems
in light of the relevant statutory
deadlines and compliance dates for any
future rulemakings.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
VI. Procedural Issues and Regulatory
Review
A. Review Under Executive Orders
12866 and 13563
Executive Order (‘‘E.O.’’) 12866,
‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review,’’ 58
FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993), as
supplemented and reaffirmed by E.O.
13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review,’’ 76 FR 3821 (Jan.
21, 2011), requires agencies, to the
extent permitted by law, to: (1) propose
or adopt a regulation only upon a
reasoned determination that its benefits
justify its costs (recognizing that some
benefits and costs are difficult to
quantify); (2) tailor regulations to
impose the least burden on society,
consistent with obtaining regulatory
objectives, taking into account, among
other things, and to the extent
practicable, the costs of cumulative
regulations; (3) select, in choosing
among alternative regulatory
approaches, those approaches that
maximize net benefits (including
potential economic, environmental,
public health and safety, and other
advantages; distributive impacts; and
equity); (4) to the extent feasible, specify
performance objectives, rather than
specifying the behavior or manner of
compliance that regulated entities must
adopt; and (5) identify and assess
available alternatives to direct
regulation, including providing
economic incentives to encourage the
desired behavior, such as user fees or
marketable permits, or providing
information upon which choices can be
made by the public. DOE emphasizes as
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 29, 2023
Jkt 259001
well that E.O. 13563 requires agencies to
use the best available techniques to
quantify anticipated present and future
benefits and costs as accurately as
possible. In its guidance, the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs
(OIRA) in the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has emphasized that such
techniques may include identifying
changing future compliance costs that
might result from technological
innovation or anticipated behavioral
changes. For the reasons stated in the
preamble, this regulatory action is
consistent with these principles.
Section 6(a) of E.O. 12866 also
requires agencies to submit ‘‘significant
regulatory actions’’ to OIRA for review.
OIRA has determined that this final rule
does not constitute a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ under section 3(f) of
E.O. 12866. Accordingly, this action was
not submitted to OIRA for review under
E.O. 12866.
B. 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 (IRFA) and a final regulatory
flexibility analysis (FRFA) 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 E.O. 13272, ‘‘Proper
Consideration of Small Entities in
Agency Rulemaking,’’ 67 FR 53461
(August 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
rulemaking process. 68 FR 7990. DOE
has made its procedures and policies
available on the Office of the General
Counsel’s website (www.energy.gov/gc/
office-general-counsel). DOE reviewed
this final rule to amend the Federal
energy conservation standards for VRF
multi-split systems under the provisions
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act and the
policies and procedures published on
February 19, 2003. DOE certifies that
this final rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. The factual
basis for this certification is set forth in
the following paragraphs.
In this final rule, DOE is amending
the existing Federal minimum energy
conservation standards for VRF multisplit systems under EPCA’s ASHRAE
trigger requirement and the six-year
lookback provision. Under the trigger,
EPCA directs that if ASHRAE amends
ASHRAE Standard 90.1, DOE must
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
18979
adopt uniform national amended
standards at the new ASHRAE
efficiency level, unless DOE determines,
by rule published in the Federal
Register and supported by clear and
convincing evidence, that adoption of a
more-stringent level would produce
significant additional conservation of
energy and would be technologically
feasible and economically justified. (42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)) Under the sixyear-lookback, DOE must also review
energy efficiency standards for VRF
multi-split systems every six years and
either: (1) issue a notice of
determination that the standards do not
need to be amended based upon the
criteria in 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A) (i.e.,
that there is clear and convincing
evidence to show that adoption of a
more-stringent level would save
significant additional energy and would
be technologically feasible and
economically justified); or (2) issue a
notice of proposed rulemaking
including new proposed standards
based on certain criteria and procedures
in 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B). (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(C))
In this document, DOE is updating the
standards for VRF multi-split systems at
10 CFR 431.97 to align with the most
recent version of ASHRAE Standard
90.1, including the updated COP levels
for the six classes of VRF multi-split
water-source heat pumps on which DOE
was triggered. DOE is also expressing
cooling efficiency standards in terms of
the IEER metric, as measured according
to the amended industry test procedure
AHRI 1230–2021, and removing
standard levels in terms of the EER
metric, as measured according to the
current DOE test procedure. Finally,
DOE is amending the equipment class
structure for VRF multi-split systems to
align with the equipment class structure
present in ASHRAE Standard 90.1, with
regards to capacity break points,
supplementary heating type, and
presence of heat recovery. The amended
standard levels have a compliance date
applying to all VRF multi-split systems
manufactured on or after January 1,
2024. Table 14 to paragraph (f)(2) of 10
CFR 431.97 accounts for all changes
between the previous Federal VRF
multi-split system standards and those
outlined in ASHRAE Standard 90.1–
2016 (as reaffirmed in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2019).
DOE uses the Small Business
Administration (SBA) small business
size standards to determine whether
manufacturers qualify as small
businesses, which are listed by the
North American Industry Classification
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
18980
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
System (NAICS).18 The SBA considers a
business entity to be a small business,
if, together with its affiliates, it employs
less than a threshold number of workers
specified in 13 CFR part 121.
VRF multi-split system manufacturers
are classified under NAICS code
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. This
employee threshold includes all
employees in a business’s parent
company and any other subsidiaries.
Prior to the March 2022 NOPR, DOE
conducted a focused inquiry into small
business manufacturers of the
equipment covered by this rulemaking.
DOE used available public information
to identify potential small
manufacturers that manufacture
domestically. DOE identified
manufacturers using DOE’s Compliance
Certification Database 19 and the AHRI
Directory database. DOE used this
publicly-available information to
identify ten distinct original equipment
manufacturers ‘‘OEMs’’ of the covered
VRF multi-split system equipment. In
reviewing the ten OEMs, DOE did not
identify any companies that met the
SBA criteria for a small entity. 87 FR
11335, 11349–11350 (March 1, 2022).
DOE requested comment regarding its
tentative conclusions that there are no
small business OEMs of VRF multi-split
systems, that adoption of the prevailing
industry standard levels would not
result in any significant economic
impact, and, accordingly, that the
proposed rule would not have
significant impacts on a substantial
number of small manufacturers. Id.
In response, AHRI commented that
they are not aware of any small business
OEMs of VRF multi-split systems.
(AHRI, No. 77 at p. 3) Therefore, DOE
concludes that this final rule will not
have ‘‘a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities’’
and that preparation of an IRFA/FRFA
is not warranted. Additional
information about this final rule is
addressed elsewhere in this document.
DOE has transmitted its 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).
18 The size standards are listed by NAICS code
and industry description and are available at:
www.sba.gov/document/support--table-sizestandards (Last accessed on Dec. 30, 2022).
19 DOE’s Compliance Certification Database is
available at: www.regulations.doe.gov/ccms (Last
accessed Dec. 30, 2022).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 29, 2023
Jkt 259001
C. Review Under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995
Manufacturers of VRF multi-split
systems must certify to DOE that their
equipment complies with any
applicable energy conservation
standards. In certifying compliance,
manufacturers must test their
equipment according to the DOE test
procedures for VRF multi-split systems,
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 VRF multi-split systems. (See
generally 10 CFR part 429). The
collection-of-information requirement
for the certification and recordkeeping
is 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.
This final rule does not make any
changes to the certification and
recordkeeping requirements for VRF
multi-split system manufacturers.
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.
D. Review Under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
Pursuant to the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA), DOE has analyzed this final
rule in accordance with NEPA and
DOE’s NEPA implementing regulations
(10 CFR part 1021). DOE has determined
that this rule qualifies for categorical
exclusion under 10 CFR part 1021,
subpart D, appendix B5.1 because it is
a rulemaking that establishes energy
conservation standards for consumer
products or industrial equipment, none
of the exceptions identified in
categorical exclusion B5.1(b) apply, no
extraordinary circumstances exist that
require further environmental analysis,
and it otherwise meets the requirements
for application of a categorical
exclusion. See 10 CFR 1021.410.
Therefore, DOE has determined that
promulgation of this final rule is not a
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
major Federal action significantly
affecting the quality of the human
environment within the meaning of
NEPA, and does not require an
environmental assessment or an
environmental impact statement.
E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
E.O. 13132, ‘‘Federalism,’’ 64 FR
43255 (August 10, 1999), imposes
certain requirements on Federal
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 final 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 equipment that is the subject of this
final 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. 6316(a) and (b); 42
U.S.C. 6297) Therefore, no further
action is required by Executive Order
13132.
F. Review Under Executive Order 12988
With respect to the review of existing
regulations and the promulgation of
new regulations, section 3(a) of E.O.
12988, ‘‘Civil Justice Reform,’’ 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. 61 FR 4729 (Feb. 7, 1996).
Regarding the review required by
section 3(a), section 3(b) of E.O. 12988
specifically requires that executive
agencies make every reasonable effort to
ensure that the regulation: (1) clearly
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
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 E.O. 12988 requires executive
agencies to review regulations in light of
applicable standards in section 3(a) and
section 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, this final
rule meets the relevant standards of E.O.
12988.
G. 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
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
‘‘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 them. On
March 18, 1997, DOE published a
statement of policy on its process for
intergovernmental consultation under
UMRA. 62 FR 12820. DOE’s policy
statement is also available at:
www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/gcprod/
documents/umra_97.pdf.
DOE examined this final rule
according to UMRA and its statement of
policy and determined that this rule
does not contain a Federal
intergovernmental mandate, nor is it
expected to require expenditures of
$100 million or more in any one year by
State, local, and Tribal governments, in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 29, 2023
Jkt 259001
the aggregate, or by the private sector.
As a result, the analytical requirements
of UMRA do not apply.
H. 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
final 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.
I. Review Under Executive Order 12630
Pursuant to E.O. 12630,
‘‘Governmental Actions and Interference
with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights,’’ 53 FR 8859 (March 18, 1988),
DOE has determined that this final rule
would not result in any takings that
might require compensation under the
Fifth Amendment to the U.S.
Constitution.
J. Review Under the 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 for Federal agencies to review
most disseminations of information to
the public under information quality
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). Pursuant to
OMB Memorandum M–19–15,
‘‘Improving Implementation of the
Information Quality Act’’ (April 24,
2019), DOE published updated
guidelines which are available at:
www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/
12/f70/DOE%20Final%
20Updated%20IQA%20
Guidelines%20Dec%202019.pdf. DOE
has reviewed this final rule under the
OMB and DOE guidelines and has
concluded that it is consistent with
applicable policies in those guidelines.
K. Review Under Executive Order 13211
E.O. 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 OIRA at OMB, a Statement of Energy
Effects for any significant energy action.
A ‘‘significant energy action’’ is defined
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
18981
as any action by an agency that
promulgates 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 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.
DOE has concluded that this
regulatory action, which sets forth
amended energy conservation standards
for VRF multi-split systems, is not a
significant energy action because it is
not a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866. Moreover, the
standards are not likely to have a
significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy, nor has it
been designated as such by the
Administrator at OIRA. Accordingly,
DOE has not prepared a Statement of
Energy Effects.
L. Review Under the Information
Quality Bulletin for Peer Review
On December 16, 2004, OMB, in
consultation with the Office of Science
and Technology Policy (OSTP), issued
its Final Information Quality Bulletin
for Peer Review (the Bulletin). 70 FR
2664 (Jan. 14, 2005). The Bulletin
establishes that certain scientific
information shall be peer reviewed by
qualified specialists before it is
disseminated by the Federal
Government, including influential
scientific information related to agency
regulatory actions. The purpose of the
Bulletin is to enhance the quality and
credibility of the Government’s
scientific information. Under the
Bulletin, the energy conservation
standards rulemaking analyses are
‘‘influential scientific information,’’
which the Bulletin defines as ‘‘scientific
information the agency reasonably can
determine will have, or does have, a
clear and substantial impact on
important public policies or private
sector decisions.’’ Id. at 70 FR 2667.
In response to OMB’s Bulletin, DOE
conducted formal peer reviews of the
energy conservation standards
development process and the analyses
that are typically used and has prepared
a Peer Review report pertaining to the
energy conservation standards
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
18982
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
rulemaking analyses.20 Generation of
this report involved a rigorous, formal,
and documented evaluation using
objective criteria and qualified and
independent reviewers to make a
judgment as to the technical/scientific/
business merit, the actual or anticipated
results, and the productivity and
management effectiveness of programs
and/or projects. Because available data,
models, and technological
understanding have changed since 2007,
DOE has engaged with the National
Academy of Sciences to review DOE’s
analytical methodologies to ascertain
whether modifications are needed to
improve the Department’s analyses.
DOE is in the process of evaluating the
resulting December 2021 NAS report.21
M. Congressional Notification
As required by 5 U.S.C. 801, DOE will
report to Congress on the promulgation
of this final rule prior to its effective
date. The report will state that it has
been determined that the rule is not a
‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
information, Energy conservation,
Household appliances, Imports,
Intergovernmental relations,
Laboratories, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Small
businesses.
Signing Authority
This document of the Department of
Energy was signed on January 30, 2023,
by Francisco Alejandro Moreno, Acting
Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency
and Renewable Energy, 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.
VII. Approval of the Office of the
Secretary
The Secretary of Energy has approved
publication of this final rule.
Signed in Washington, DC, on March 21,
2023.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S.
Department of Energy.
List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 431
Administrative practice and
procedure, Confidential business
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, DOE amends part 431 of
chapter II, subchapter D, of title 10 of
the Code of Federal Regulations, as set
forth below:
PART 431—ENERGY CONSERVATION
PROGRAM FOR CERTAIN
COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL
EQUIPMENT
1. The authority citation for part 431
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6317; 28 U.S.C.
2461 note.
2. Section 431.97 is amended by:
■ a. Revising paragraph (f); and
■ b. Redesignating ‘‘Table 14’’ as ‘‘Table
15’’ in paragraph (g).
The revision reads as follows:
■
§ 431.97 Energy efficiency standards and
their compliance dates.
*
*
*
*
*
(f)(1) Each variable refrigerant flow air
conditioner or heat pump manufactured
on or after the compliance date listed in
table 13 of this section and prior to
January 1, 2024, must meet the
applicable minimum energy efficiency
standard level(s) set forth in table 13 of
this section.
TABLE 13 TO PARAGRAPH (F)(1) TO § 431.97—MINIMUM EFFICIENCY STANDARDS FOR VARIABLE REFRIGERANT FLOW
MULTI-SPLIT AIR CONDITIONERS AND HEAT PUMPS
Cooling capacity
Heating type 1
Efficiency level
Compliance date:
equipment
manufactured on
and after . . .
<65,000 Btu/h .......................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <135,000 Btu/h ......
All .....................................................
No Heating or Electric Resistance
Heating.
All Other Types of Heating ..............
No Heating or Electric Resistance
Heating.
All Other Types of Heating ..............
No Heating or Electric Resistance
Heating.
All Other Types of Heating ..............
All .....................................................
No Heating or Electric Resistance
Heating.
All Other Types of Heating ..............
No Heating or Electric Resistance
Heating.
All Other Types of Heating ..............
No Heating or Electric Resistance
Heating.
All Other Types of Heating ..............
Without Heat Recovery ...................
13.0 SEER ...................
11.2 EER ......................
June 16, 2008.
January 1, 2010.
11.0 EER ......................
11.0 EER ......................
January 1, 2010.
January 1, 2010.
10.8 EER ......................
10.0 EER ......................
January 1, 2010.
January 1, 2010.
9.8 EER ........................
13.0 SEER, 7.7 HSPF
11.0 EER, 3.3 COP .....
January 1, 2010.
June 16, 2008.
January 1, 2010.
10.8 EER, 3.3 COP .....
10.6 EER, 3.2 COP .....
January 1, 2010.
January 1, 2010.
10.4 EER, 3.2 COP .....
9.5 EER, 3.2 COP .......
January 1, 2010.
January 1, 2010.
9.3 EER, 3.2 COP .......
12.0 EER, 4.2 COP .....
With Heat Recovery ........................
11.8 EER, 4.2 COP .....
All .....................................................
12.0 EER, 4.2 COP .....
January 1, 2010.
October 29, 2012.
October 29, 2003.
October 29, 2012.
October 29, 2003.
October 29, 2003.
Equipment type
VRF Multi-Split Air Conditioners
(Air-Cooled).
≥135,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h ....
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ....
VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps (AirCooled).
<65,000 Btu/h .......................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <135,000 Btu/h ......
≥135,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h ....
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ....
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps (WaterSource).
<17,000 Btu/h .......................................
≥17,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h ........
20 The 2007 ‘‘Energy Conservation Standards
Rulemaking Peer Review Report’’ is available at:
energy.gov/eere/buildings/downloads/energy-
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 29, 2023
Jkt 259001
conservation-standards-rulemaking-peer-reviewreport-0 (Last accessed Oct. 3, 2022).
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
21 The December 2021 NAS report is available at
www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/review-ofmethods-for-setting-building-and-equipmentperformance-standards.
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
18983
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 13 TO PARAGRAPH (F)(1) TO § 431.97—MINIMUM EFFICIENCY STANDARDS FOR VARIABLE REFRIGERANT FLOW
MULTI-SPLIT AIR CONDITIONERS AND HEAT PUMPS—Continued
Cooling capacity
Heating type 1
Efficiency level
Compliance date:
equipment
manufactured on
and after . . .
≥65,000 Btu/h and <135,000 Btu/h ......
≥135,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ....
All .....................................................
Without Heat Recovery ...................
With Heat Recovery ........................
12.0 EER, 4.2 COP .....
10.0 EER, 3.9 COP .....
9.8 EER, 3.9 COP .......
October 29, 2003.
October 29, 2013.
October 29, 2013.
Equipment type
1 VRF multi-split heat pumps (air-cooled) with heat recovery fall under the category of ‘‘All Other Types of Heating’’ unless they also have electric resistance heating, in which case it falls under the category for ‘‘No Heating or Electric Resistance Heating.’’
(2) Each variable refrigerant flow air
conditioner or heat pump (except aircooled systems with cooling capacity
less than 65,000 Btu/h) manufactured
on or after January 1, 2024, must meet
the applicable minimum energy
efficiency standard level(s) set forth in
table 14 of this section.
TABLE 14 TO PARAGRAPH (F)(2) TO § 431.97—UPDATED MINIMUM EFFICIENCY STANDARDS FOR VARIABLE REFRIGERANT
FLOW MULTI-SPLIT AIR CONDITIONERS AND HEAT PUMPS
Equipment type
Size category
Heating type
VRF Multi-Split Air Conditioners (Air-Cooled) ........
≥65,000 and <135,000 Btu/h ....................
≥135,000 and <240,000 Btu/h ..................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ........
≥65,000 and <135,000 Btu/h ....................
All ..............................................................
All ..............................................................
All ..............................................................
Heat Pump without Heat Recovery ..........
Heat Pump with Heat Recovery ...............
Heat Pump without Heat Recovery ..........
Heat Pump with Heat Recovery ...............
Heat Pump without Heat Recovery ..........
Heat Pump with Heat Recovery ...............
Heat Pump without Heat Recovery ..........
Heat Pump with Heat Recovery ...............
Heat Pump without Heat Recovery ..........
Heat Pump with Heat Recovery ...............
Heat Pump without Heat Recovery ..........
Heat Pump with Heat Recovery ...............
Heat Pump without Heat Recovery ..........
Heat Pump with Heat Recovery ...............
VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps (Air-Cooled) .............
≥135,000 and <240,000 Btu/h ..................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ........
VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps (Water-Source) ........
<65,000 Btu/h ...........................................
≥65,000 and <135,000 Btu/h ....................
≥135,000 and <240,000 Btu/h ..................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ........
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2023–06178 Filed 3–29–23; 8:45 a.m.]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Bureau of Industry and Security
15 CFR Part 744
[Docket No. 230324–0084]
RIN 0694–AJ20
Additions to the Entity List;
Amendment To Confirm Basis for
Adding Certain Entities to the Entity
List Includes Foreign Policy Interest of
Protection of Human Rights Worldwide
Background
Bureau of Industry and
Security, Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
In this rule, the Bureau of
Industry and Security (BIS) amends the
Export Administration Regulations
(EAR) by adding eleven entities to the
Entity List under the destinations of
Burma, the People’s Republic of China
(China), Nicaragua, and Russia. These
eleven entities have been determined by
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 29, 2023
Jkt 259001
the U.S. Government to be acting
contrary to the national security or
foreign policy interests of the United
States. In this rule, BIS also amends the
EAR to explicitly confirm that the
foreign policy interest of protecting
human rights worldwide is a basis for
adding entities to the Entity List.
DATES: This rule is effective on March
28, 2023.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Chair, End-User Review Committee,
Office of the Assistant Secretary for
Export Administration, Bureau of
Industry and Security, Department of
Commerce, Phone: (202) 482–5991,
Email: ERC@bis.doc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The Entity List (supplement no. 4 to
part 744 of the EAR (15 CFR parts 730
through 774)) identifies entities for
which there is reasonable cause to
believe, based on specific and
articulable facts, that the entities have
been involved, are involved, or pose a
significant risk of being or becoming
involved in activities contrary to the
national security or foreign policy
interests of the United States, pursuant
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Minimum efficiency
15.5
14.9
13.9
14.6
14.4
13.9
13.7
12.7
12.5
16.0
15.8
16.0
15.8
14.0
13.8
12.0
11.8
IEER.
IEER.
IEER.
IEER,
IEER,
IEER,
IEER,
IEER,
IEER,
IEER,
IEER,
IEER,
IEER,
IEER,
IEER,
IEER,
IEER,
3.3
3.3
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.2
4.3
4.3
4.3
4.3
4.0
4.0
3.9
3.9
COP.
COP.
COP.
COP.
COP.
COP.
COP.
COP.
COP.
COP.
COP.
COP.
COP.
COP.
to § 744.11(b). The EAR impose
additional license requirements on, and
limit the availability of, most license
exceptions for exports, reexports, and
transfers (in-country) when a listed
entity is a party to the transaction. The
license review policy for each listed
entity is identified in the ‘‘License
Review Policy’’ column on the Entity
List, and the impact on the availability
of license exceptions is described in the
relevant Federal Register document that
added the entity to the Entity List. The
Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS)
places entities on the Entity List
pursuant to parts 744 (Control Policy:
End-User and End-Use Based) and 746
(Embargoes and Other Special Controls)
of the EAR.
The End-User Review Committee
(ERC), composed of representatives of
the Departments of Commerce (Chair),
State, Defense, Energy and, where
appropriate, the Treasury, makes all
decisions regarding additions to,
removals from, or other modifications to
the Entity List. The ERC makes all
decisions to add an entry to the Entity
List by majority vote and makes all
decisions to remove or modify an entry
by unanimous vote.
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 61 (Thursday, March 30, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18965-18983]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-06178]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 2023 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 18965]]
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 431
[EERE-2018-BT-STD-0003]
RIN 1904-AE42
Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for
Variable Refrigerant Flow Multi-Split Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended (EPCA),
prescribes energy conservation standards for various consumer products
and certain commercial and industrial equipment, including small,
large, and very large commercial package air conditioning and heating
equipment, of which variable refrigerant flow (VRF) multi-split air
conditioners and VRF multi-split system heat pumps (collectively
referred to as ``VRF multi-split systems'') are a category. EPCA
requires the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE or the Department) to
consider the need for amended standards each time American Society of
Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Standard
90.1 is amended with respect to the standard levels or design
requirements applicable to that equipment, or periodically under a six-
year-lookback review provision. In this final rule, DOE is adopting
amended energy conservation standards for VRF multi-split systems that
rely on a new cooling efficiency metric and are equivalent to those
levels specified in ASHRAE Standard 90.1. DOE has determined that it
lacks the clear and convincing evidence required by the statute to
adopt standards more stringent than the levels specified in the
industry standard.
DATES:
Effective date: The effective date of this rule is May 30, 2023.
Compliance date: Compliance with the amended standards established
for VRF multi-split systems in this final rule is required on and after
January 1, 2024.
ADDRESSES: The docket for this rulemaking, which includes Federal
Register notices, public meeting attendee lists and transcripts,
comments, and other supporting documents/materials, is available for
review at www.regulations.gov. All documents in the docket are listed
in the www.regulations.gov index. However, not all documents listed in
the index may be publicly available, such as information that is exempt
from public disclosure.
The docket web page can be found at www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2018-BT-STD-0003. The docket web page contains instructions on how
to access all documents, including public comments, in the docket.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Catherine Rivest, 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) 586-7335. Email:
[email protected].
Mr. Eric Stas, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General
Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121.
Telephone: (202) 586-5827. Email: [email protected].
For further information on how to review the docket, contact the
Appliance and Equipment Standards Program staff at (202) 287-1445 or by
email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Synopsis of the Final Rule
II. Introduction
A. Authority
B. Background
1. Current Standards
2. ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016
3. ASRAC Negotiations
4. Proposed Standards
III. General Discussion
A. Test Procedure
B. Methodology for Efficiency Crosswalk Analysis
1. Crosswalk Background and Overview
2. Crosswalk Details and Results
3. Equipment Class Structure for VRFs
IV. Estimates of Potential Energy Savings
V. Conclusions
A. Consideration of More-Stringent Efficiency Levels
B. Review Under the Six-Year-Lookback Provision
C. Amended Energy Conservation Standards
VI. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
F. Review Under Executive Order 12988
G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
H. Review Under the Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act, 1999
I. Review Under Executive Order 12630
J. Review Under the Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act, 2001
K. Review Under Executive Order 13211
L. Review Under the Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review
M. Congressional Notification
VII. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
I. Synopsis of the Final Rule
The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, Public Law 94-163, (42
U.S.C. 6291-6317, as codified) as amended (EPCA),\1\ authorizes DOE to
regulate the energy efficiency of a number of consumer products and
certain industrial equipment. Title III, Part C \2\ of EPCA established
the Energy Conservation Program for Certain Industrial Equipment. (42
U.S.C. 6311-6317) Such equipment includes small, large, and very large
commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment, of which VRF
multi-split systems, the subject of this rulemaking, are a category.
(42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(B)-(D))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ All references to EPCA in this document refer to the statute
as amended through the Energy Act of 2020, Public Law 116-260 (Dec.
27, 2020), which reflect the last statutory amendments that impact
Parts A and A-1 of EPCA.
\2\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code,
Part C was re-designated Part A-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to EPCA, DOE is triggered to consider amending the energy
conservation standards for certain types of commercial and industrial
equipment, including the equipment at issue in this document, whenever
the
[[Page 18966]]
ASHRAE amends the standard levels or design requirements prescribed in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1, ``Energy Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise
Residential Buildings.'' Under a separate provision of EPCA, DOE is
required to review the existing energy conservation standards for those
types of covered equipment subject to ASHRAE Standard 90.1 every six
years to determine whether those standards need to be amended. (42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)-(C))
More specifically, under the ``ASHRAE trigger'' provision, EPCA
directs that for each type of covered equipment, if ASHRAE Standard
90.1 is amended, DOE must adopt amended energy conservation standards
at the new efficiency level in ASHRAE Standard 90.1, unless clear and
convincing evidence supports a determination that adoption of a more-
stringent efficiency level would produce significant additional energy
savings and be technologically feasible and economically justified. (42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)) If DOE adopts as a uniform national standard
the efficiency level specified in the amended ASHRAE Standard 90.1, DOE
must establish such standard not later than 18 months after publication
of the amended industry standard. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(I)) If
DOE determines that a more-stringent standard is appropriate under the
statutory criteria, DOE must establish such more-stringent standard not
later than 30 months after publication of the revised ASHRAE Standard
90.1. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(i))
Under EPCA, DOE must also review its energy conservation standards
for VRF multi-split systems every six years and either: (1) issue a
notice of determination that the standards do not need to be amended,
as adoption of a more-stringent level under the relevant statutory
criteria is not supported by clear and convincing evidence; or (2)
issue a notice of proposed rulemaking including new proposed standards
based on certain criteria and procedures in subparagraph (B).\3\ (42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C)(i))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ In relevant part, subparagraph (B) specifies that: (1) in
making a determination of economic justification, DOE must consider,
to the maximum extent practicable, the benefits and burdens of an
amended standard based on the seven criteria described in EPCA; (2)
DOE may not prescribe any standard that increases the energy use or
decreases the energy efficiency of a covered equipment; and (3) DOE
may not prescribe an amended standard that interested persons have
established by a preponderance of evidence is likely to result in
the unavailability in the United States of any product type (or
class) of performance characteristics (including reliability,
features, sizes, capacities, and volumes) that are substantially the
same as those generally available in the United States. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(B)(ii)-(iii))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASHRAE officially released ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 on October 26,
2016, thereby triggering DOE's previously referenced obligations
pursuant to EPCA to determine for certain classes of VRF multi-split
systems, whether: (1) the amended industry standard should be adopted;
or (2) clear and convincing evidence exists to justify more-stringent
standard levels. For any class where DOE was not triggered, the
Department routinely considers those classes under the statute's six-
year-lookback review provision at the same time, so as to address the
subject equipment in a comprehensive fashion.
The current Federal energy conservation standards for air-cooled
VRF multi-split systems with cooling capacity greater than or equal to
65,000 Btu/h and water-source VRF multi-split heat pumps (denominated
in terms of EER and COP) are codified in DOE's regulations at 10 CFR
431.97. These standards are specified in terms of Energy Efficiency
Ratio (EER) for cooling mode and Coefficient of Performance (COP) for
heating mode based on the Federal test procedure at 10 CFR 431.96,
which points to applicable appendix D which in turn references American
National Standards Institute (ANSI)/Air-Conditioning, Heating, and
Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) Standard 1230-2010, ``2010 Standard for
Performance Rating of Variable Refrigerant Flow (VRF) Multi-Split Air-
Conditioning and Heat Pump Equipment,'' approved August 2, 2010 and
updated by Addendum 1 in March 2011 (ANSI/AHRI 1230-2010).
The current Federal energy conservation standards for air-cooled,
three-phase VRF multi-split systems with cooling capacity less than
65,000 Btu/h are also codified in 10 CFR 431.97. These standards are
specified in terms of Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ratio (SEER) for
cooling mode and Heating Seasonal Performance Factor (HSPF) for heating
mode based on the rating conditions in ANSI/AHRI 1230-2010. Although
the current standards levels are based on the same test procedure as
used for all other categories of VRF systems (i.e., air-cooled VRF
multi-split systems with cooling capacity greater than or equal to
65,000 Btu/h and water-source VRF multi-split systems), the
organizations that maintain the industry consensus test procedures have
recently updated their scope such that air-cooled, three-phase VRF
multi-split systems with cooling capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h are
now covered under AHRI 210/240-2023 instead of AHRI 1230-2021.
Consequently, DOE addressed test procedures for air-cooled, three-phase
VRF multi-split systems with cooling capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h in
a separate test procedure rulemaking for air-cooled, three-phase, small
commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment with cooling
capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h (see 87 FR 77298 (Dec. 16, 2022))
instead of in the test procedure rulemaking for VRF multi-split systems
(see 87 FR 63860 (Oct. 20, 2022)). Accordingly, DOE is not evaluating
the Federal energy conservation standards for such equipment in this
document and is instead addressing energy conservation standards for
air-cooled, three-phase VRF multi-split systems with cooling capacity
less than 65,000 Btu/h in a separate energy conservation standards
rulemaking for air-cooled, three-phase, small commercial package air
conditioning and heating equipment with a cooling capacity of less than
65,000 Btu/h (see 87 FR 18290 (March 30, 2022)).
The efficiency levels set forth in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 for
VRF multi-split systems with cooling capacity 65,000 Btu/h or greater
are specified in terms of both EER and Integrated Energy Efficiency
Ratio (IEER) for cooling mode and COP for heating mode. These
efficiency levels are based on the rating conditions of ANSI/AHRI
Standard 1230-2014 with addendum 1 (ANSI/AHRI 1230-2014), which are
identical rating conditions to those found in AHRI 1230-2010. The EER
levels found in ASHRAE 90.1-2016 are unchanged from the current Federal
EER requirements; however, for certain classes of water-source VRF
multi-split heat pumps, the COP levels specified in ASHRAE Standard
90.1-2016 are more stringent. See additional discussion in section
II.B.2 of this document.
On April 11, 2018, DOE published in the Federal Register a Notice
of Intent to establish a negotiated rulemaking working group (Working
Group) under the Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory
Committee (ASRAC) to negotiate a proposed test procedure and amended
energy conservation standards for VRF multi-split systems. 83 FR 15514.
The Working Group reached consensus on an energy conservation standards
term sheet (VRF ECS Term Sheet) on November 5, 2019, outlining
recommended amended energy conservation standards for all equipment
classes of VRF multi-split systems. The standard levels recommended by
the Working Group in
[[Page 18967]]
the VRF ECS Term Sheet \4\ are in terms of the IEER and COP metrics and
equivalent to the levels specified in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2022.\5\ The
levels recommended by the working group are measured according to the
most recent industry test standard for VRF multi-split systems \6\--
AHRI Standard 1230, ``2021 Standard for Performance Rating of Variable
Refrigerant Flow (VRF) Multi-Split Air-Conditioning and Heat Pump
Equipment'' (AHRI 1230-2021), which is referenced in ASHRAE Standard
90.1-2022. See additional discussion in section II.B.3 of this final
rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The VRF ECS Term Sheet can be accessed at
www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2018-BT-STD-0003-0055.
\5\ DOE notes that on October 24, 2019, ASHRAE officially
released for distribution and made public ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019.
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 maintained the equipment class structure
for VRF multi-split systems from ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 and did
not update efficiency levels for any VRF equipment classes. In
January 2023, ASHRAE published ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2022, which
updates the test procedure reference for VRF multi-split systems to
AHRI 1230-2021. ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2022 also maintains IEER
standard levels equivalent to those specified in ASHRAE Standard
90.1-2019.
\6\ The VRF ASRAC Working Group recommended a 2019 draft version
of AHRI 1230 with additional recommendations for further development
of the test standard outside of the Working Group. The 2019 draft of
AHRI 1230 was later released as AHRI 1230-2021, which included the
Working Group's recommendations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As described in detail in section III.B of this document, DOE
conducted a crosswalk analysis during the ASRAC negotiation meetings to
validate the translation of the EER levels currently required by the
DOE standards to IEER, as well as the IEER efficiency levels as
recommended by the Working Group. DOE notes that IEER is a more
comprehensive metric because it reflects the energy efficiency across a
range of operating conditions, as opposed to the efficiency at a single
condition. The crosswalk translates the current Federal EER standards
(measured per the current DOE test procedure) to IEER levels of
equivalent stringency (measured per the September 20, 2019 draft
version of the AHRI 1230 standard). As described in section II.B.3 of
this document, the recommended 2019 draft test procedure was later
published as AHRI 1230-2021, and no substantive changes were made that
impact crosswalk results. Differences in the metrics and test
procedures cause the crosswalk analysis to yield a range of IEER values
corresponding to a given EER value. DOE's translation of the current
EER levels to IEER according to the updated test procedure shows that
each value recommended by the Working Group is within the range
resulting from DOE's evaluation. Given that the metric takes into
account a wider breadth of energy consumption across a variety of
operating conditions, DOE has determined that the recommended IEER
values are at least equivalent in stringency to the current EER values.
Further, given that IEER is a more comprehensive metric, DOE has
concluded that the recommended IEER values would not decrease the
minimum required energy efficiency of VRF basic models.
Because the updates in AHRI 1230-2021 do not affect the measurement
of COP, no crosswalk was required to evaluate the stringency of the COP
levels proposed in the VRF ECS Term Sheet as compared to the existing
Federal COP levels.
In this final rule, DOE is adopting the energy conservation
standard levels and the equipment class structure from ASHRAE Standard
90.1-2016 for air-cooled VRF multi-split systems with cooling capacity
greater than or equal to 65,000 Btu/h and for all water-source VRF
multi-split heat pumps. The amended standards, which are expressed in
terms of IEER and COP, are presented in Table I-1. These standards will
apply to all VRF multi-split systems listed in Table I-1 manufactured
in, or imported into, the United States starting on January 1, 2024.
The amended standard levels are equivalent to the standard levels
recommended by the Working Group in the VRF ECS Term Sheet. The amended
equipment class structure differs from the existing DOE equipment class
structure regarding capacity break points and designations based on
heating type; however, DOE has concluded that none of the changes to
the equipment class structure for VRF multi-split systems constitute
backsliding.
DOE has determined that the potential energy savings associated
with adopting the ASHRAE 90.1-2016 standard levels for the triggered
classes are de minimis. Also, as described in section V of this
document, DOE has determined that insufficient data are available to
determine, based on clear and convincing evidence, that more-stringent
standards would result in significant additional energy savings and be
technologically, feasible and economically justified. As such, DOE has
not conducted further analysis of more-stringent standard levels for
this final rule. Consequently, DOE is adopting the levels specified in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016, as required by EPCA.
Table I-1--Amended Energy Conservation Standards for VRF Multi-Split Systems
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Equipment type Size category Heating type Minimum efficiency
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VRF Multi-Split Air Conditioners (Air- >=65,000 and <135,000 All.................... 15.5 IEER.
Cooled). Btu/h.
>=135,000 and <240,000 All.................... 14.9 IEER.
Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and All.................... 13.9 IEER.
<760,000 Btu/h.
VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps (Air- >=65,000 and <135,000 Heat Pump without Heat 14.6 IEER, 3.3 COP.
Cooled). Btu/h. Recovery. 14.4 IEER, 3.3 COP.
Heat Pump with Heat
Recovery.
>=135,000 and <240,000 Heat Pump without Heat 13.9 IEER, 3.2 COP.
Btu/h. Recovery. 13.7 IEER, 3.2 COP.
Heat Pump with Heat
Recovery.
>=240,000 Btu/h and Heat Pump without Heat 12.7 IEER, 3.2 COP.
<760,000 btu/h. Recovery. 12.5 IEER, 3.2 COP.
Heat Pump with Heat
Recovery.
VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps (Water- <65,000 Btu/h.......... Heat Pump without Heat 16.0 IEER, 4.3 COP.
Source). Recovery. 15.8 IEER, 4.3 COP.
Heat Pump with Heat
Recovery.
>=65,000 and <135,000 Heat Pump without Heat 16.0 IEER, 4.3 COP.
Btu/h. Recovery. 15.8 IEER, 4.3 COP.
Heat Pump with Heat
Recovery.
>=135,000 and <240,000 Heat Pump without Heat 14.0 IEER, 4.0 COP.
Btu/h. Recovery. 13.8 IEER, 4.0 COP.
Heat Pump with Heat
Recovery.
>=240,000 Btu/h and Heat Pump without Heat 12.0 IEER, 3.9 COP.
<760,000 Btu/h. Recovery. 11.8 IEER, 3.9 COP.
Heat Pump with Heat
Recovery.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 18968]]
II. Introduction
The following section briefly discusses the statutory authority
underlying this final rule, as well as some of the relevant historical
background related to the establishment of standards for VRF multi-
split systems.
A. Authority
EPCA, Public Law 94-163 (42 U.S.C. 6291-6317, as codified), among
other things, authorizes DOE to regulate the energy efficiency of a
number of consumer products and certain industrial equipment. Title
III, Part C of EPCA, added by Public Law 95-619, Title IV, section
441(a), (42 U.S.C. 6311-6317, as codified), established the Energy
Conservation Program for Certain Industrial Equipment, which sets forth
a variety of provisions designed to improve energy efficiency. This
covered equipment includes small, large, and very large commercial
package air conditioning and heating equipment, which includes the VRF
multi-split systems that are the subject of this document. (42 U.S.C.
6311(1)(B)-(D)) Additionally, as discussed in further detail
subsequently, the statute requires DOE to consider amending the energy
conservation standards for certain types of commercial and industrial
equipment, including the equipment at issue in this document, whenever
ASHRAE amends the efficiency levels or design requirements prescribed
in ASHRAE Standard 90.1, and even in the absence of an ASHRAE trigger
event, a separate provision of EPCA requires DOE to consider amended
standards for such equipment, at a minimum, every six years. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(A)-(C))
Under EPCA, the energy conservation program, consists essentially
of four parts: (1) testing, (2) labeling, (3) the establishment of
Federal energy conservation standards, and (4) certification and
enforcement procedures. Relevant provisions of EPCA specifically
include definitions (42 U.S.C. 6311), energy conservation standards (42
U.S.C. 6313), test procedures (42 U.S.C. 6314), labeling provisions (42
U.S.C. 6315), and the authority to require information and reports from
manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6316).
Federal energy efficiency requirements for covered equipment
established under EPCA generally supersede State laws and regulations
concerning energy conservation testing, labeling, and standards. (42
U.S.C. 6316(a) and (b); 42 U.S.C. 6297) DOE may, however, grant waivers
of Federal preemption in limited circumstances for particular State
laws or regulations, in accordance with the procedures and other
provisions set forth under EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6297(d); 42 U.S.C. 6316(a);
42 U.S.C. 6316(b)(2)(D))
Subject to certain criteria and conditions, DOE is required to
develop test procedures to measure the energy efficiency, energy use,
or estimated annual operating cost of covered equipment during a
representative average use cycle and that are not unduly burdensome to
conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2)) Manufacturers of covered equipment must
use the Federal test procedures as the basis for: (1) certifying to DOE
that their equipment complies with the applicable energy conservation
standards adopted pursuant to EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6316(b); 42 U.S.C. 6296),
and (2) making representations about the energy use or efficiency of
that equipment (42 U.S.C. 6314(d)). Similarly, DOE uses these test
procedures to determine whether the equipment complies with the
relevant energy conservation standards promulgated under EPCA. The DOE
test procedures for VRF multi-split systems appear at 10 CFR part 431,
subpart F.
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 sets industry energy efficiency levels for
small, large, and very large commercial package air-conditioning and
heating equipment, packaged terminal air conditioners, packaged
terminal heat pumps, warm air furnaces, packaged boilers, storage water
heaters, instantaneous water heaters, and unfired hot water storage
tanks (collectively referred to as ``ASHRAE equipment''). For each type
of listed equipment, EPCA directs that if ASHRAE amends ASHRAE Standard
90.1 with respect to the standard levels or design requirements under
that standard, DOE must adopt amended standards at the new ASHRAE
efficiency level, unless DOE determines, supported by clear and
convincing evidence,\7\ that adoption of a more-stringent level would
produce significant additional conservation of energy and would be
technologically feasible and economically justified. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)) If DOE makes such a determination, it must publish a
final rule to establish the more-stringent standards. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(B)(i))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ The clear and convincing threshold is a heightened standard,
and would only be met where the Secretary has an abiding conviction,
based on available facts, data, and DOE's own analyses, that it is
highly probable an amended standard would result in a significant
additional amount of energy savings, and is technologically feasible
and economically justified. American Public Gas Association v. U.S.
Dep't of Energy, No. 20-1068, 2022 WL 151923, at *4 (D.C. Cir.
January 18, 2022) (citing Colorado v. New Mexico, 467 U.S. 310, 316,
104 S.Ct. 2433, 81 L.Ed.2d 247 (1984)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although EPCA does not explicitly define the term ``amended'' in
the context of what type of revision to ASHRAE Standard 90.1 would
trigger DOE's obligation, DOE's longstanding interpretation has been
that the statutory trigger is an amendment to the standard applicable
to that equipment under ASHRAE Standard 90.1 that increases the energy
efficiency level for that equipment. See 72 FR 10038, 10042 (March 7,
2007). If the revised ASHRAE Standard 90.1 leaves the energy efficiency
level unchanged (or lowers the energy efficiency level), as compared to
the energy efficiency level specified by the uniform national standard
adopted pursuant to EPCA, regardless of the other amendments made to
the ASHRAE Standard 90.1 requirement (e.g., the inclusion of an
additional metric), DOE has stated that it does not have the authority
to conduct a rulemaking to consider a higher standard for that
equipment pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A), although this does not
limit DOE's authority to consider higher standards as part of a six-
year-lookback rulemaking analysis (pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C);
see discussion in the following paragraphs). See 74 FR 36312, 36313
(July 22, 2009) and 77 FR 28928, 28937 (May 16, 2012). If an amendment
to ASHRAE Standard 90.1 changes the metric for the standard on which
the Federal requirement was based, DOE would perform a crosswalk
analysis to determine whether the amended metric under ASHRAE Standard
90.1 resulted in an energy efficiency level that was more stringent
than the current DOE standard. Under EPCA, DOE must also review its
energy conservation standards for VRF multi-split systems every six
years and either: (1) issue a notice of determination that the
standards do not need to be amended, as adoption of a more-stringent
level is not supported by clear and convincing evidence; or (2) issue a
notice of proposed rulemaking including new proposed standards based on
certain criteria and procedures in subparagraph (B).\8\ (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(C))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ In relevant part, subparagraph (B) specifies that: (1) in
making a determination of economic justification, DOE must consider,
to the maximum extent practicable, the benefits and burdens of an
amended standard based on the seven criteria described in EPCA; (2)
DOE may not prescribe any standard that increases the energy use or
decreases the energy efficiency of covered equipment; and (3) DOE
may not prescribe an amended standard that interested persons have
established by a preponderance of evidence is likely to result in
the unavailability in the United States of any product type (or
class) of performance characteristics (including reliability,
features, sizes, capacities, and volumes) that are substantially the
same as those generally available in the United States. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(B)(ii)-(iii))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 18969]]
In deciding whether a more-stringent standard is economically
justified, under either the provisions of 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A) or 42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C), DOE must determine whether the benefits of the
standard exceed its burdens. DOE must make this determination after
receiving comments on the proposed standard, and by considering, to the
maximum extent practicable, the following seven factors:
(1) The economic impact of the standard on manufacturers and
consumers of products subject to the standard;
(2) The savings in operating costs throughout the estimated average
life of the covered products in the type (or class) compared to any
increase in the price, initial charges, or maintenance expenses for the
covered equipment that are likely to result from the standard;
(3) The total projected amount of energy savings likely to result
directly from the standard;
(4) Any lessening of the utility or the performance of the covered
product likely to result from the standard;
(5) The impact of any lessening of competition, as determined in
writing by the Attorney General, that is likely to result from the
standard;
(6) The need for national energy conservation; and
(7) Other factors the Secretary of Energy considers relevant.
(42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(ii)(I)-(VII))
EPCA, as codified, also contains what is known as an ``anti-
backsliding'' provision, which prevents the Secretary from prescribing
any amended standard that either increases the maximum allowable energy
use or decreases the minimum required energy efficiency of a covered
product. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(iii)(I)) Also, the Secretary may not
prescribe an amended or new standard if interested persons have
established by a preponderance of the evidence that the standard is
likely to result in the unavailability in the United States in any
covered product type (or class) of performance characteristics
(including reliability), features, sizes, capacities, and volumes that
are substantially the same as those generally available in the United
States. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(iii)(II)(aa)).
B. Background
1. Current Standards
EPCA defines ``commercial package air conditioning and heating
equipment'' as air-cooled, water-cooled, evaporatively-cooled, or
water-source (not including ground-water-source) electrically operated,
unitary central air conditioners and central air conditioning heat
pumps for commercial application. (42 U.S.C. 6311(8)(A); 10 CFR 431.92)
EPCA further classifies ``commercial package air conditioning and
heating equipment'' into categories based on cooling capacity (i.e.,
small, large, and very large categories). (42 U.S.C. 6311(8)(B)-(D); 10
CFR 431.92) ``Small commercial package air conditioning and heating
equipment'' means equipment rated below 135,000 Btu per hour (cooling
capacity). (42 U.S.C. 6311(8)(B); 10 CFR 431.92) ``Large commercial
package air conditioning and heating equipment'' means equipment rated:
(i) at or above 135,000 Btu per hour; and (ii) below 240,000 Btu per
hour (cooling capacity). (42 U.S.C. 6311(8)(C); 10 CFR 431.92) ``Very
large commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment'' means
equipment rated: (i) at or above 240,000 Btu per hour; and (ii) below
760,000 Btu per hour (cooling capacity). (42 U.S.C. 6311(8)(D); 10 CFR
431.92)
Pursuant to its authority under EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)) and
in response to updates to ASHRAE Standard 90.1, DOE has established the
category of VRF multi-split systems, which meets the EPCA definition of
``commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment,'' but
which EPCA did not expressly identify. See 10 CFR 431.92 and 10 CFR
431.97.
This final rule covers commercial and industrial equipment that
meets the definition of ``variable refrigerant flow systems,'' included
in the definition of ``basic model'' as codified at 10 CFR 431.92. More
specifically, ``variable refrigerant flow systems'' means all units
manufactured by one manufacturer within a single equipment class,
having the same primary energy source (e.g., electric or gas), and
which have the same or comparably performing compressor(s) that have a
common ``nominal'' cooling capacity and the same heat rejection medium
(e.g., air or water) (includes VRF water-source heat pumps). Id.
A ``variable refrigerant flow multi-split air conditioner'' means a
unit of commercial package air-conditioning and heating equipment that
is configured as a split-system air conditioner incorporating a single
refrigerant circuit, with one or more outdoor units, at least one
variable-speed compressor or an alternate compressor combination for
varying the capacity of the system by three or more steps, and multiple
indoor fan coil units, each of which is individually metered and
individually controlled by an integral control device and common
communications network and which can operate independently in response
to multiple indoor thermostats. Variable refrigerant flow implies three
or more steps of capacity control on common, inter-connecting piping.
10 CFR 431.92.
A ``variable refrigerant flow multi-split heat pump'' means a unit
of commercial package air-conditioning and heating equipment that is
configured as a split-system heat pump that uses reverse cycle
refrigeration as its primary heating source and which may include
secondary supplemental heating by means of electrical resistance,
steam, hot water, or gas. The equipment incorporates a single
refrigerant circuit, with one or more outdoor units, at least one
variable-speed compressor or an alternate compressor combination for
varying the capacity of the system by three or more steps, and multiple
indoor fan coil units, each of which is individually metered and
individually controlled by a control device and common communications
network and which can operate independently in response to multiple
indoor thermostats. Variable refrigerant flow implies three or more
steps of capacity control on common, inter-connecting piping. 10 CFR
431.92.
DOE adopted energy conservation standards for VRF multi-split
systems in a final rule published in the Federal Register on May 16,
2012 (May 2012 Final Rule). 77 FR 28928, 28995. DOE's initial standards
for VRF multi-split systems were prompted by ASHRAE's decision to
include minimum efficiency levels for VRF multi-split systems for the
first time in the 2010 edition of ASHRAE Standard 90.1 (ASHRAE Standard
90.1-2010). For four of the VRF water-source heat pump classes
(including VRF water-source heat pumps with cooling capacity less than
17,000 Btu/h and VRF water-source heat pumps with cooling capacity
greater than or equal to 135,000 Btu/h and less than 760,000 Btu/h),
DOE adopted the standard levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010, having
determined that the updates to ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 either raised
the energy efficiency levels above the existing Federal energy
conservation standards or set standards for equipment for which DOE did
not previously have standards. 77 FR 28928, 28938 (May 16, 2012). For
all other equipment classes of VRF multi-split systems, DOE maintained
the standards from the equipment class under which the corresponding
VRF multi-split system equipment class was previously regulated (i.e.,
air-cooled VRF multi-
[[Page 18970]]
split systems had previously been covered as small, large, and very
large air-cooled central air-conditioning heat pumps with electric
resistance heating, while water-source VRF multi-split heat pumps had
previously been covered as water-source heat pumps).
For the equipment addressed in this final rule, DOE's current
equipment classes for VRF multi-split systems are differentiated by
refrigeration cycle (air conditioners or heat pumps), condenser heat
rejection medium (air-cooled or water-source), cooling capacity, and
heating type (for air-cooled: ``No heating or electric resistance
heating'' or ``all other types of heating''; for water-source:
``without heat recovery,'' ``with heat recovery,'' or ``all''). DOE's
current standards for VRF multi-split systems are set forth at Table 13
to 10 CFR 431.97 and repeated in Table II-1 of this document.
Table II-1--Current Federal Energy Efficiency Standards for VRF Multi-Split Systems
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Compliance date: equipment
Equipment type Cooling capacity Heating type \1\ Efficiency level manufactured on and after . .
.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VRF Multi-Split Air Conditioners <65,000 Btu/h.......... All.................... 13.0 SEER........................ June 16, 2008.
(Air-Cooled). >=65,000 Btu/h and No Heating or Electric 11.2 EER......................... January 1, 2010.
<135,000 Btu/h. Resistance Heating.
All Other Types of 11.0 EER......................... January 1, 2010.
Heating.
>=135,000 Btu/h and No Heating or Electric 11.0 EER......................... January 1, 2010.
<240,000 Btu/h. Resistance Heating.
All Other Types of 10.8 EER......................... January 1, 2010.
Heating.
>=240,000 Btu/h and No Heating or Electric 10.0 EER......................... January 1, 2010.
<760,000 Btu/h. Resistance Heating.
All Other Types of 9.8 EER.......................... January 1, 2010.
Heating.
VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps (Air- <65,000 Btu/h.......... All.................... 13.0 SEER, 7.7 HSPF.............. June 16, 2008.
Cooled). >=65,000 Btu/h and No Heating or Electric 11.0 EER, 3.3 COP................ January 1, 2010.
<135,000 Btu/h. Resistance Heating.
All Other Types of 10.8 EER, 3.3 COP................ January 1, 2010.
Heating.
>=135,000 Btu/h and No Heating or Electric 10.6 EER, 3.2 COP................ January 1, 2010.
<240,000 Btu/h. Resistance Heating. ................................. .............................
All Other Types of 10.4 EER, 3.2 COP................ January 1, 2010.
Heating.
>=240,000 Btu/h and No Heating or Electric 9.5 EER, 3.2 COP................. January 1, 2010.
<760,000 Btu/h. Resistance Heating.
All Other Types of 9.3 EER, 3.2 COP................. January 1, 2010.
Heating.
VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps (Water- <17,000 Btu/h.......... Without heat recovery.. 12.0 EER, 4.2 COP................ October 29, 2012. October 29,
Source). 2003.
With heat recovery..... 11.8 EER, 4.2 COP................ October 29, 2012. October 29,
2003.
>=17,000 Btu/h and All.................... 12.0 EER, 4.2 COP................ October 29, 2003.
<65,000 Btu/h. All.................... 12.0 EER, 4.2 COP................ October 29, 2003.
>=65,000 Btu/h and
<135,000 Btu/h.
>=135,000 Btu/h and Without heat recovery.. 10.0 EER, 3.9 COP................ October 29, 2013.
<760,000 Btu/h.
With heat recovery..... 9.8 EER, 3.9 COP................. October 29, 2013.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps (Air-Cooled) with heat recovery fall under the category of ``All Other Types of Heating'' unless they also have electric
resistance heating, in which case they fall under the category for ``No Heating of Electric Resistance Heating.''
2. ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016
ASHRAE released the 2016 version of ASHRAE Standard 90.1 (ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2016) on October 26, 2016, which increased the heating
mode efficiency level (in terms of COP) for six of the current DOE VRF
multi-split system equipment classes:
(1) VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps, Water-source <17,000 Btu/h, Without
Heat Recovery;
(2) VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps, Water-source <17,000 Btu/h, With
Heat Recovery;
(3) VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps, Water-source >=17,000 Btu/h and
<65,000 Btu/h;
(4) VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps. Water-source >=65,000 Btu/h and
<135,000 Btu/h;
(5) VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps, Water-source >=135,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h, Without Heat Recovery; and
(6) VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps, Water-source >=135,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h, With Heat Recovery.
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 left the heating mode efficiency level
for the remaining six DOE equipment classes of VRF multi-split heat
pump systems with cooling capacity greater than or equal to 65,000 Btu/
h and the cooling mode efficiency levels in terms of EER for all DOE
equipment classes unchanged. (DOE notes that standards for 3-phase air-
cooled VRF heat pumps <65,000 Btu/h are being considered in a separate
energy conservation standards rulemaking (see Docket EERE-2022-BT-STD-
0008).
DOE published a notice of data availability and request for
information (NODA/RFI) in response to the amendments to ASHRAE Standard
90.1-2016 in the Federal Register on July 8, 2019 (July 2019 NODA/RFI).
84 FR 32328. In the July 2019 NODA/RFI, DOE compared the current
Federal standards for VRF multi-split systems (in terms of EER and COP)
to the levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 and requested comment on its
preliminary findings. 84 FR 32328, 32333-32334 (July 8, 2019). In
addition to evaluating amended energy conservation standards for the
six equipment classes triggered by the updated levels in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2016, DOE also examined the other 14 equipment classes of
VRF multi-split systems under its six-year-lookback authority (42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C)) and solicited data from stakeholders. 84 FR
32328, 32334 (July 8, 2019).
On October 24, 2019, ASHRAE officially released for distribution
and made public ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019. ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019
maintained the equipment class structure for VRF multi-split systems
from ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 and did not update efficiency levels for
any VRF equipment classes.
Subsequently, in January 2023, ASHRAE published ASHRAE Standard
90.1-2022. Once again, ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2022 maintained the
equipment class structure for VRF multi-split systems from ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2016 and maintained the IEER efficiency levels for all
VRF equipment classes.
[[Page 18971]]
3. ASRAC Negotiations
On April 11, 2018, DOE published in the Federal Register a notice
of its intent to establish a negotiated rulemaking working group
(Working Group) under the Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal
Advisory Committee (ASRAC), in accordance with the Federal Advisory
Committee Act \9\ and the Negotiated Rulemaking Act,\10\ to negotiate
an amended test procedure and amended energy conservation standards for
VRF multi-split systems. 83 FR 15514. The purpose of the Working Group
was to discuss and, if possible, reach consensus on a proposed rule
regarding the test procedure and energy conservation standards for VRF
multi-split systems, as authorized by EPCA. Id. The Working Group
comprised 21 voting members including manufacturers, energy efficiency
advocates, utilities, and trade organizations.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ 5 U.S.C. App. 2, Public Law 92-463.
\10\ 5 U.S.C. 561-570, Public Law 101-648.
\11\ A complete list of the ASRAC VRF Working Group members is
available by clicking on the ``Working Group'' tab at:
www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/appliance-standards-and-rulemaking-federal-advisory-committee#Variable%20Refrigerant%20Flow%20Multi-Split%20Air%20Conditioners%20and%20Heat%20Pumps%20Working%20Group.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On October 1, 2019, the Working Group reached consensus on a test
procedure term sheet (VRF TP Term Sheet; Docket No. EERE-2018-BT-STD-
0003-0044) that includes several recommendations. The following list
includes the most substantial recommendations:
(1) VRF multi-split systems should be rated with the Integrated
Energy Efficiency Ratio (IEER) metric to allow consumers to make
consistent comparisons with other equipment using the IEER metric
(e.g., rooftop air conditioner ratings).
(2) Use of the amended test procedure should not be required until
the compliance date of amended energy conservation standards.
(3) The Federal test procedure for VRF multi-split systems should
be consistent with the September 20, 2019 draft version of AHRI 1230,
with additional recommended amendments to be implemented after the
conclusion of ASRAC negotiations.
Following completion of the VRF TP Term Sheet, the Working Group
proceeded to negotiate recommended revised energy conservation
standards for VRF multi-split systems that accounted for the
translation from the EER metric to the IEER metric, as well as the
changes between the Federal test procedure that references AHRI 1230-
2010 and the recommended 2019 draft test procedure AHRI 1230 (which was
later published as AHRI 1230-2021). As described in greater detail in
section III.B of this document, DOE conducted a crosswalk analysis to
inform the development of standard levels for VRF multi-split systems
in terms of the new test procedure and metric. DOE presented the
results of its crosswalk analysis on November 5, 2019 (Docket No. EERE-
2018-BT-STD-0003-0061 at p. 45), and subsequently, the Working Group
reached consensus on an energy conservation standards term sheet (VRF
ECS Term Sheet; Docket No. EERE-2018-BT-STD-0003-0055) recommending:
(1) Amendments to the Federal minimum efficiency standards for VRF
multi-split systems (as presented in Table II-2 of this final rule) per
the test procedure recommended in the VRF TP Term Sheet.
(2) The compliance date of the recommended energy conservation
standards should be January 1, 2024 for all VRF multi-split system
equipment classes included in this rulemaking.
Table II-2--Recommended Efficiency Levels From VRF ECS Term Sheet
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Energy efficiency levels
Equipment class recommended \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VRF Air Conditioners, Air-cooled, 15.5 IEER.
>=65,000 Btu/h and <135,000 Btu/h.
VRF Air Conditioners, Air-cooled, 14.9 IEER.
>=135,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h.
VRF Air Conditioners, Air-cooled, 13.9 IEER.
>=240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h.
VRF Heat Pumps, Air-cooled, >=65,000 Btu/ 14.6 IEER, 3.3 COP.
h and <135,000 Btu/h, No Heating or
Electric Resistance Heating.
VRF Heat Pumps, Air-cooled, >=65,000 Btu/ 14.4 IEER, 3.3 COP.
h and <135,000 Btu/h, All Other Types
of Heating.
VRF Heat Pumps, Air-cooled, >=135,000 13.9 IEER, 3.2 COP.
Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h, No Heating or
Electric Resistance Heating.
VRF Heat Pumps, Air-cooled, >=135,000 13.7 IEER; 3.2 COP.
Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h, All Other
Types of Heating.
VRF Heat Pumps, Air-cooled, >=240,000 12.7 IEER, 3.2 COP.
Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h, No Heating or
Electric Resistance Heating.
VRF Heat Pumps, Air-cooled, >=240,000 12.5 IEER; 3.2 COP.
Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h, All Other
Types of Heating.
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source, <17,000 16.0 IEER, 4.3 COP.
Btu/h, Without Heat Recovery.
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source, <17,000 15.8 IEER, 4.3 COP.
Btu/h, With Heat Recovery.
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source, >=17,000 16.0 IEER, 4.3 COP.
Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h, Without Heat
Recovery.
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source, >=17,000 15.8 IEER, 4.3 COP.
Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h, With Heat
Recovery.
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source, >=65,000 16.0 IEER, 4.3 COP.
Btu/h and <135,000 Btu/h, Without Heat
Recovery.
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source, >=65,000 15.8 IEER, 4.3 COP.
Btu/h and <135,000 Btu/h, With Heat
Recovery.
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source, >=135,000 14.0 IEER, 4.0 COP.
Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h, Without Heat
Recovery.
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source, >=135,000 13.8 IEER, 4.0 COP.
Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h, With Heat
Recovery.
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source, >=240,000 12.0 IEER, 3.9 COP.
Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h, Without Heat
Recovery.
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source, >=240,000 11.8 IEER, 3.9 COP.
Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h, With Heat
Recovery.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The VRF ECS Term Sheet includes the notation ``COPH'' which
indicates coefficient of performance in heating mode at 47 [deg]F
outdoor ambient temperature (for air-cooled VRF multi-split heat
pumps) and at 68 [deg]F entering water temperature (for water-source
VRF multi-split heat pumps).
DOE notes that there are minor differences in equipment class
structure (related to cooling capacity, supplementary heating type, and
presence of heat recovery) between the VRF ECS Term Sheet, ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2019, and the current Federal energy conservation
standards for VRF multi-split systems. This topic is discussed in
greater detail in section II.B.3 of this document.
On May 18, 2021, AHRI published an updated industry test standard
for VRF multi-split systems, AHRI 1230-2021. Subsequently, on December
10, 2021, DOE published in the Federal Register the VRF TP NOPR
(December 2021 VRF TP NOPR), in which DOE proposed an amended test
procedure for VRF multi-split systems that incorporates by reference
AHRI 1230-2021 and
[[Page 18972]]
proposed to adopt IEER as the test metric for VRF multi-split systems.
86 FR 70644, 70652. DOE finalized these proposals in a test procedure
final rule published in the Federal Register on October 20, 2022
(October 2022 TP Final Rule). 87 FR 63860. In the October 2022 TP Final
Rule, DOE determined that the amendments to the test procedure would
alter the measured efficiency of VRF multi-split systems, as compared
to ratings using the current Federal regulated metric, EER (see 10 CFR
431.97). In that document, DOE stated that testing pursuant to the
amended test procedure would not be required until such time as
manufacturers were required to comply with amended energy conservation
standards that are denominated in terms of IEER, should such standards
be adopted. 87 FR 63860, 63880 (Oct. 20, 2022).
4. Proposed Standards
On March 1, 2022, DOE published a NOPR (March 2022 NOPR) in the
Federal Register that proposed to adopt the energy conservation
standards and equipment class structure for VRF multi-split systems as
adopted in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016. 87 FR 11335 (March 1, 2022).
Specifically, DOE proposed amended energy conservation standards VRF
multi-split systems that rely on the IEER metric and are equivalent to
those levels specified in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016. Id. at 87 FR
11336-11338. In the March 2022 NOPR, DOE outlined its plan to crosswalk
the existing VRF energy conservation standards (denominated in terms of
EER as the cooling metric) to the efficiency levels in ASHRAE Standard
90.1-2016 (denominated in terms of IEER) and requested comment. Id. at
87 FR 11342-11345. DOE preliminarily determined that it lacks the clear
and convincing evidence required by the statute to adopt standards more
stringent than the levels specified in the industry standard. Id. at 87
FR 11337. DOE received nine comments in response to the March 2022 NOPR
from the interested parties listed in Table II-3.
Table II-3--March 2022 NOPR Written Comments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment No. in
Commenter(s) Abbreviation the docket Commenter type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air-Conditioning, Heating, & AHRI...................... 77 Industry Trade
Refrigeration Institute. Association.
Appliance Standards Awareness Project, Joint Advocates........... 76 Efficiency Advocacy
American Council for an Energy- Organizations.
Efficient Economy, Northwest Energy
Efficiency Alliance.
Carrier................................. Carrier................... 74 Manufacturer.
Daikin Comfort Technologies North Daikin.................... 79 Manufacturer.
America, Inc.
GE Appliances--a Haier Company.......... GE........................ 78 Manufacturer.
Hydronic Industry Alliance--Commercial.. HIA-C..................... 67 Industry Trade
Association.
Lennox International, Inc............... Lennox.................... 75 Manufacturer.
New York State Energy Research and NYSERDA................... 73 State Agency.
Development Authority.
Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San CA IOUs................... 72 Utilities.
Diego Gas & Electric, Southern
California Edison (collectively
referred to as the ``California
Investor-owned Utilities'' or ``CA
IOUs'').
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A parenthetical reference at the end of a comment quotation or
paraphrase provides the location of the item in the public record.\12\
To the extent that interested parties have provided written comments
that are substantively consistent with any oral comments provided
during the March 23, 2022 public meeting webinar for the VRF multi-
split systems energy conservation standards NOPR, DOE cites the written
comments throughout this final rule. In this case, DOE did not identify
any oral comments provided during the webinar that are not
substantively reflected by written comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ The parenthetical reference provides a reference for
information located in the docket of DOE's rulemaking to develop
energy conservation standards for VRF multi-split systems. (Docket
No. EERE-2018-BT-STD-0003, which is maintained at
www.regulations.gov). The references are arranged as follows:
(commenter name, comment docket ID number, page of that document).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. General Discussion
DOE developed this final rule after considering oral and written
comments, data, and information from interested parties that represent
a variety of interests. The following discussion addresses issues
raised by these commenters.
A. Test Procedure
EPCA sets forth generally applicable criteria and procedures for
DOE's adoption and amendment of test procedures. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a))
Manufacturers of covered products must use these test procedures to
certify to DOE that their product complies with energy conservation
standards and to quantify the efficiency of their product. The IEER and
COP standards proposed in the March 2022 NOPR and outlined in section
II.B.4 of this document are measured according to the amended industry
test standard for VRF multi-split systems, AHRI 1230-2021, in alignment
with the VRF ECS Term Sheet discussed in section II.B.3 of this
document.
In response to the March 2022 NOPR, Lennox and Daikin commented
that they support the adoption of IEER, which is a part-load metric.
(Lennox, No. 75 at pp. 1-2; Daikin, No. 79 at p. 1) Daikin stated that
IEER is more representative of the operating cooling efficiency of a
VRF system. (Daikin, No. 79 at p. 1) Lennox further commented that the
IEER metric would allow consumers to make comparisons of energy
efficiency with other commercial air conditioners that utilize the IEER
metric. (Lennox, No. 75 at pp. 1-2) Conversely, HIA-C argued that the
standard should focus on certification of VRF performance at limits
compared to performance at part-loads, as opposed to comparison between
VRF systems or between VRF and other commercial air conditioners. (HIA-
C, No. 67 at p. 1)
In response, DOE notes that EPCA does not require the Department to
develop energy conservation standards that compare full-load and part-
load performance. Instead, DOE must develop energy conservation
standards that are as representative of real-world performance as
possible. For VRF multi-split systems, this means including both full-
load and part-load performance. Additionally, using the same
performance metric for multiple types of equipment that serve the same
purpose allows for consumers to make informed decisions when selecting
their system. Thus, DOE is finalizing its proposal to amend energy
conservation standards for VRF multi-split systems in terms of the IEER
metric.
[[Page 18973]]
In response to the March 2022 NOPR, Lennox expressed support for
DOE adopting the industry test procedure AHRI 1230-2021, stating that
it significantly improves the representativeness of the tested value
for VRF equipment. (Lennox, No. 75 at pp. 1-2) In contrast, AHRI
commented that DOE does not have the authority to propose adopting AHRI
1230-2021 as the Federal test procedure until such time as AHRI 1230-
2021 is referenced in ASHRAE Standard 90.1 as the appropriate test
standard for VRF systems, elaborating that EPCA requires DOE to adopt a
Federal test procedure that is consistent with the applicable test
procedure specified in the amended ASHRAE Standard 90.1. (AHRI, No. 77
at p. 2) AHRI and GE commented that DOE should support Addendum ay to
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 which updates the test procedure reference
for VRF multi-split systems in ASHRAE Standard 90.1 to AHRI 1230-
2021.\13\ (AHRI, No. 77 at p. 2; GE, No. 78 at p. 2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Addendum ay to ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019, which updates the
test procedure reference for VRF multi-split systems to AHRI 1230-
2021, has been incorporated into the recently published ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NYSERDA encouraged DOE to start looking ahead to the next test
procedure rulemaking and the potential for the VRF test procedure to
address cold climate performance. Along these lines, NYSERDA urged DOE
to add another low-temperature test point at 5 [deg]F (and as low as -
15 [deg]F) for this equipment, as the current 47 [deg]F and the
optional 17 [deg]F test condition are not low enough to ensure adequate
system performance in cold climates. (NYSERDA, No. 73 at pp. 2-3) HIA-C
similarly commented that DOE should clarify the temperatures at which
COP tests are performed so as to allow comparison between performance
at full and part loads. (HIA-C, No. 67 at p. 1) The commenter further
stated that the IEER metric does not address connected cassettes or
splits in combination, such that certain refrigerant volumes and tubing
lengths are not represented, and it recommended an intermediate step to
clarify the temperature at which a metric applies. (Id.)
DOE notes that all VRF test procedure issues have been handled in a
separate rulemaking. DOE addressed the content and authority of its
proposed test procedure amendments in the October 20, 2022 VRF TP Final
Rule. See 87 FR 63860.
B. Methodology for Efficiency Crosswalk Analysis
1. Crosswalk Background and Overview
Consistent with the recommendation of the Working Group, DOE is
amending the energy conservation standards for VRF multi-split systems
to rely on the IEER metric for cooling efficiency, and maintaining the
metric for heating efficiency (i.e., COP). As discussed in the March
2022 NOPR, the Department has concluded that a change of metrics would
be beneficial for a number of reasons, including that the IEER metric
provides a more representative measure of field performance of VRF
multi-split systems by weighting the full-load and part-load (75-
percent, 50-percent, and 25-percent of full-load capacity) efficiencies
by the average amount of time the equipment spends operating at each
load. 87 FR 11335, 11342 (March 1, 2022).
As stated, EPCA prohibits DOE from prescribing any amended standard
that either increases the maximum allowable energy use or decreases the
minimum required energy efficiency of covered equipment. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(B)(iii)(I)); commonly referred to as EPCA's ``anti-
backsliding provision'') In consideration of the IEER metric and to
ensure any potential amendment would not violate EPCA's ``anti-
backsliding'' provision, as part of the ASRAC Working Group activities,
DOE conducted a crosswalk analysis to validate both the translation of
the EER levels currently required by the DOE standards to corresponding
IEER levels, as well as the IEER efficiency levels as recommended by
the Working Group. The crosswalk analysis translates the current
Federal EER standards (measured per the current DOE test procedure) to
IEER levels of equivalent stringency (measured per the updated AHRI
Standard 1230). (Docket No. EERE-2018-BT-STD-0003-0056)
The energy conservation standards presented in this document were
developed based on an update to the relevant industry test standard
(i.e., the 2019 draft test procedure AHRI 1230 that was finalized as
ASHRAE 1230-2021). Compared to the current Federal test procedure
(which references ANSI/AHRI 1230-2010), AHRI 1230-2021 included two
substantive changes that impact the translation of standards in EER to
standards using IEER. Specifically, DOE considered the following
changes in its crosswalk analysis in addition to the metric change from
EER to IEER:
(1) Maximum sensible heat ratio (SHR) limits of 0.82 and 0.85 were
added for full-load and 75-percent, part-load conditions, respectively.
SHR represents the ratio of sensible cooling capacity (i.e., the
ability to change the temperature of indoor air) to the total cooling
capacity, which also includes latent cooling capacity (i.e., the
ability to remove moisture from indoor air). For example, an SHR of
0.80 indicates that 80 percent of the capacity of a system reduces the
temperature of the air and the remaining 20 percent dehumidifies the
air.
(2) A controls verification procedure (CVP) was added that verifies
that the values provided by manufacturers in the supplemental test
instruction (STI) for setting critical parameters during steady-state
testing are within the range of critical parameters that would be used
by the system's native controls at the same conditions.
On November 5, 2019, DOE presented its crosswalk findings to the
Working Group to inform the development of recommended standards levels
for VRF multi-split systems in terms of the new test procedure and
cooling metric. These findings demonstrated that the translation of the
current EER standards to the recommended IEER values would not decrease
the minimum required energy efficiency of VRF multi-split systems using
a minimally-compliant model. DOE also presented to the Working Group
anonymized and aggregated data provided by VRF multi-split system
manufacturers. These data showed a preliminary translation of ratings
to the IEER metric in terms of the updated test procedure for a
collection of VRF multi-split systems spanning four equipment classes.
The crosswalked results included the IEER efficiency level specified in
the VRF ECS term sheet for the selected classes. Detailed discussion of
the crosswalk presentation can be found in Docket No. EERE-2018-BT-STD-
0003-0056.
Given that translating the current EER levels to IEER according to
the updated test procedure does not provide for a single point answer
(as would thereby allow for a direct comparison), DOE stated in the
March 2022 NOPR that it believes it is reasonable to ensure that the
recommended value lies within the range resulting from DOE's evaluation
as a proxy for understanding whether there is a potential for
backsliding. Consequently, DOE tentatively determined that the
recommended IEER levels are at least equivalent in stringency to the
current EER levels. Further, given that IEER is a more comprehensive
metric (reflecting energy efficiency across a range of operating
conditions, as opposed to the efficiency at a single condition), DOE
tentatively determined that the recommended IEER
[[Page 18974]]
levels would not decrease the minimum required energy efficiency of a
VRF multi-split system. 87 FR 11335, 11343 (March 1, 2022). DOE
received no comments to the contrary in response to the March 2022
NOPR. Consequently, for the reasons previously explained, DOE maintains
this determination in the final rule.
2. Crosswalk Details and Results
As discussed in further detail in the March 2022 NOPR, DOE
conducted a crosswalk analysis to account for the translation from EER
to IEER, as well as changes in the updated industry test standard--
namely the addition of SHR limits and the introduction of the CVP. See
87 FR 11335, 11343-11345 (March 1, 2022). Because these three factors
have interacting effects on the measured cooling performance of VRF
multi-split systems, DOE modeled their interaction holistically and did
not examine incremental changes in performance due to any one factor.
DOE only conducted a crosswalk analysis for the VRF cooling mode
efficiency, as DOE did not propose to change the heating efficiency
metric (i.e., COP), nor did the changes to the test procedure for VRF
multi-split systems impact measured efficiency in heating mode. To
develop a crosswalk approach that is applicable to all equipment
classes of VRF multi-split systems, DOE analyzed a basic model
representative of equipment classes with high sales volume.\14\
Specifically, DOE selected an air-cooled VRF multi-split heat pump
system in the cooling capacity range greater than 135,000 Btu/h and
less than or equal to 240,000 Btu/h without heat recovery. DOE created
a performance model using VapCyc and CoilDesigner software \15\ to
evaluate capacity and efficiency of the selected system per the updated
industry test standard at full-load cooling and reduced load
conditions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ According to a report from Cadeo group, air-cooled VRF
multi-split heat pump systems in the cooling capacity range greater
than 135,000 Btu/h and less than or equal to 240,000 Btu/h without
heat recovery account for 12.4 percent of the VRF multi-split system
market. Air-cooled VRF multi-split systems in the same capacity
range equipped with heat recovery account for an additional 32.6
percent of the VRF multi-split system market. (EERE-2017-BT-TP-0018-
0002)
\15\ VapCyc and CoilDesigner are HVAC energy modeling software
programs. CoilDesigner is a detailed heat exchanger modeling
program. VapCyc integrates CoilDesigner heat exchanger simulations
with compressor and expansion models to complete a refrigeration
cycle model to simulate performance of an air conditioning or heat
pump system at specific operating conditions. (Available at:
www.optimizedthermalsystems.com.) (Last accessed Dec. 30, 2022)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE also sought to translate the current EER standards to
equivalent IEER standards when tested according to the updated industry
test standard. Consequently, DOE investigated ways to translate the SHR
requirements and CVP procedure introduced by the amended test procedure
for VRF multi-split systems. AHRI 1230-2021 sets SHR limits of 0.82 and
0.85 at the full-load cooling condition and the 75-percent part-load
cooling condition, respectively, but does not include SHR limits for
the 50-percent or 25-percent part-load cooling conditions. Because
manufacturers do not currently certify or publicize any information
about SHR at the full-load EER test condition, DOE was unable to
precisely determine SHR values representative of a baseline EER VRF
multi-split system. So, to account for the effect of the SHR limits in
the updated industry test standard in its crosswalk analysis, DOE
relied on the native controls test data to establish a range of
potential initial SHR values observed at the full-load and 75-percent
part-load IEER test conditions. 87 FR 11335, 11343-11344 (March 1,
2022).
To account for the addition of a CVP in AHRI 1230-2021, DOE
tentatively concluded that using information about the ranges of
operational settings observed during native controls testing to
represent a future system that would pass the CVP (i.e., a system for
which the certified critical parameter settings would be validated by a
CVP conducted with the system operating under native controls) was the
most accurate approach for estimating how manufacturers would certify
critical parameter control settings as part of testing to IEER as
measured by AHRI 1230-2021. Id. at 87 FR 11344.
For additional detail regarding the methods used in the crosswalk
for VRF multi-split systems, see section III.A.2 of the March 2022
NOPR. 87 FR 11335, 11343-11344 (March 1, 2022).
Based on the modeling conducted, the expected performance of the
representative equipment class of VRF multi-split systems when tested
according to AHRI 1230-2021 would be in the range of 13 to 16 IEER.
Because of the wider range of operation conditions captured in IEER as
well as the various strategies that manufacturers may employ to respond
to the test procedure changes, a single EER baseline value inherently
translates to a range of IEER values.
As discussed, the IEER metric captures performance at additional
part-load operating conditions not considered by the EER metric;
therefore, a single EER value translates to a range of potential IEER
values.\16\ IEER captures the impacts of design features and control
strategies that may not affect full-load operation but do affect part-
load operation. For example, VRF multi-split systems may use different
strategies for reducing capacity at partial loads like reducing the
number of thermally-active indoor units or slowing compressor speeds,
which may result in differential impacts on measured IEER, but which
would not have any impact on the measured full-load performance EER.
DOE also recognizes that there are a variety of paths that
manufacturers may take to account for the new test procedure, and that
the crosswalk analysis approximates how manufacturers in the aggregate
may respond to test procedure changes. For example, some manufacturers
may elect to meet the new SHR limitations by reducing evaporating
temperatures, while other manufacturers may meet the new SHR
limitations by reducing indoor airflow and decreasing the number of
thermally-active indoor units. Each strategy may have different trade-
offs in terms of overall system performance and measured energy
efficiency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ In a January 2016 energy conservation standards direct
final rule for ACUACs, DOE discussed a metric translation from EER
to IEER in which a single EER level corresponds to a range of IEERs.
81 FR 2420, 2452 (Jan. 15, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As described in section I of this document, the Working Group
recommended efficiency levels for VRF multi-split systems that align
with the efficiency levels specified in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 in
terms of IEER and COP. While DOE's crosswalk analysis showed that a
single EER baseline could result in a range of IEER values, the IEER
levels included in the VRF ECS Term Sheet (which the Working Group
recommended as an appropriate crosswalk of current Federal EER
standards) are within the range of DOE's crosswalked results. Based on
this analysis, in the March 2022 NOPR, DOE tentatively determined that
the recommended IEER levels are at least equivalent in stringency to
the current EER levels. 87 FR 11335, 11337 (March 1, 2022). Further,
given that IEER is a more comprehensive metric (reflecting energy
efficiency across a range of operating conditions, as opposed to the
efficiency at a single condition), DOE tentatively determined that the
recommended IEER levels would not decrease the minimum required energy
efficiency of a VRF multi-split system, thereby avoiding statutorily
impermissible backsliding with respect to the current Federal standards
in terms of EER. Id. at 87 FR 11345.
[[Page 18975]]
Finally, DOE determined that no changes to heating mode ratings in
terms of COP are expected from the changes to the test procedure for
VRF multi-split systems included in AHRI 1230-2021. Id.
In response to the March 2022 NOPR, AHRI, Carrier, and Lennox
commented that they support the proposed crosswalk analysis methodology
and results. (AHRI, No. 77 at p. 3; Carrier, No. 74 at p. 2; Lennox,
No. 75 at p. 2) AHRI and Carrier further commented that they felt that
DOE's initial testing supports their tentative conclusion that the
recommended IEER levels are at least equivalent in stringency to
current EER levels. (AHRI, No. 77 at p. 3; Carrier, No. 74 at p. 2)
Carrier commented that they agree with DOE that the recommended IEER
levels would not decrease the minimum required energy efficiency of VRF
systems. (Carrier, No. 74 at p. 2)
However, AHRI and Carrier argued that the proposed changes to the
test procedure impact the measured efficiency of VRF multi-split
systems in a way that increases the stringency of the standards from
the current EER standards as measured by AHRI 1230-2010 and leads to
energy savings. (AHRI, No. 77 at p. 3; Carrier, No. 74 at p. 2)
In response to these comments, DOE notes that, as discussed in this
section, the crosswalk from EER, as measured by AHRI 1230-2010 to IEER
as measured by AHRI 1230-2021, resulted in a range of values, which
includes the proposed standards. DOE was not provided data that shows
that the standards proposed in the March 2022 NOPR are higher in
stringency than the current EER levels. DOE also did not receive any
negative comments regarding its crosswalk analysis methodology, and,
therefore, the Department has not changed it in this final rule.
Accordingly, for the reasons previously discussed, DOE maintains its
conclusion that the recommended IEER levels are at least equivalent in
stringency to the current EER levels.
3. Equipment Class Structure for VRFs
In the July 2019 NODA/RFI, DOE discussed two areas where the
equipment class structure for VRF multi-split systems differs between
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 and the Federal standards. 84 FR 32328, 32334
(July 8, 2019). These differences were further examined in some detail
in the March 2022 NOPR. 87 FR 11335, 11345-11346 (March 1, 2022). The
differences can be summarized as follows:
(1) Capacity break points. For water-source VRF multi-split heat
pumps, the current Federal standards include VRF multi-split systems
with cooling capacity greater than or equal to 135,000 Btu/h and less
than 760,000 Btu/h in a single category. ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016
splits this grouping at 240,000 Btu/h to create capacity categories of
greater than or equal to 135,000 and less than 240,000 btu/h and
greater than or equal to 240,000 and less than 760,000 Btu/h. Also for
water-source VRF multi-split systems, the current Federal standards
include separate classes for systems with cooling capacity less than
17,000 Btu/h and for systems with cooling capacity between 17,000 Btu/h
and 65,000 Btu/h. ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 groups these classes
together into a single equipment class with cooling capacity less than
65,000 Btu/h.
(2) Heating type. The current Federal standards are disaggregated
for certain classes of VRF multi-split systems based on heating type.
For all air-cooled VRF multi-split air conditioners and heat pumps with
cooling capacity greater than or equal to 65,000 Btu/h, the Federal
cooling standards differ by 0.2 EER points depending on whether a
system is equipped with ``no heating or electric resistance heating''
or ``all other types of heating.'' For water-source VRF multi-split
heat pumps, some capacity classes disaggregate instead by systems with
heat recovery versus without heat recovery (also with a 0.2 EER
difference in the applicable standards classes). Other water-source VRF
multi-split heat pump standards are not disaggregated beyond the
specified capacity range. ASHRAE 90.1-2016 disaggregates standards for
air-cooled and water-source VRF multi-split heat pumps based on the
presence of heat recovery, instead of ``heating type.'' Air-cooled VRF
multi-split air conditioners do not have subdivided cooling efficiency
levels based on heating type in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016.
These differences are presented in Table III-1:
Table III-1--Comparison of Current DOE Efficiency Levels With ASHRAE Standard 90.1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASHRAE standard 90.1-2016/
Equipment type Cooling capacity Heating type DOE efficiency level 2019 efficiency level
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VRF Multi-Split Air Conditioners >=65,000 Btu/h and No Heating or Electric 11.2 EER......................... 11.2 EER, 15.5 IEER.
(Air-Cooled). <135,000 Btu/h. Resistance Heating.
All Other Types of 11.0 EER......................... No Standard.\3\
Heating.
>=135,000 Btu/h and No Heating or Electric 11.0 EER......................... 11.0 EER, 14.9 IEER.
<240,000 Btu/h. Resistance Heating.
All Other Types of 10.8 EER......................... No Standard.\3\
Heating.
>=240,000 Btu/h and No Heating or Electric 10.0 EER......................... 10.0 EER, 13.9 IEER.
<760,000 Btu/h. Resistance Heating.
All Other Types of 9.8 EER.......................... No Standard.\3\
Heating.
VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps (Air- >=65,000 Btu/h and No Heating or Electric 11.0 EER, 3.3 COP................ 11.0 EER, 14.6 IEER, 3.3 COP.
Cooled). <135,000 Btu/h. Resistance Heating \1\.
All Other Types of 10.8 EER, 3.3 COP................ 10.8 EER, 14.4 IEER, 3.3 COP.
Heating \1\ \2\.
>=135,000 Btu/h and No Heating or Electric 10.6 EER, 3.2 COP................ 10.6 EER, 13.9 IEER, 3.2 COP.
<240,000 Btu/h. Resistance Heating \1\.
All Other Types of 10.4 EER, 3.2 COP................ 10.4 EER, 13.7 IEER, 3.2 COP.
Heating \1\ \2\.
>=240,000 Btu/h and No Heating or Electric 9.5 EER, 3.2 COP................. 9.5 EER, 12.7 IEER, 3.2 COP.
<760,000 Btu/h. Resistance Heating \1\.
All Other Types of 9.3 EER, 3.2 COP................. 9.3 EER, 12.5 IEER, 3.2 COP.
Heating \1\ \2\.
VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps (Water- <17,000 Btu/h.......... Without heat recovery.. 12.0 EER, 4.2 COP................ 12.0 EER, 16.0 IEER, 4.3 COP.
Source).
With heat recovery..... 11.8 EER, 4.2 COP................ 11.8 EER, 15.8 IEER, 4.3 COP.
>=17,000 Btu/h and Without heat recovery.. 12.0 EER, 4.2 COP................ 12.0 EER, 16.0 IEER, 4.3 COP.
<65,000 Btu/h.
[[Page 18976]]
With heat recovery..... 11.8 EER, 15.8 IEER, 4.3 COP.
>=65,000 Btu/h and Without heat recovery.. 12.0 EER, 4.2 COP................ 12.0 EER, 16.0 IEER, 4.3 COP.
<135,000 Btu/h.
With heat recovery..... 11.8 EER, 15.8 IEER, 4.3 COP.
>=135,000 Btu/h and Without heat recovery.. 10.0 EER, 3.9 COP................ 10.0 EER, 14.0 IEER, 4.0 COP.
<240,000 Btu/h.
With heat recovery..... 9.8 EER, 3.9 COP................. 9.8 EER, 13.8 IEER, 4.0 COP.
>=240,000 Btu/h and Without heat recovery.. 10.0 EER, 3.9 COP................ 10.0 EER, 12.0 IEER, 3.9 COP
<760,000 Btu/h.
With heat recovery..... 9.8 EER, 3.9 COP................. 9.8 EER, 11.8 IEER, 3.9 COP.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In terms of current Federal standards, VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps (Air-Cooled) with heat recovery fall under the heating type ``All Other Types of
Heating'' unless they also have electric resistance heating, in which case it falls under the category for ``No Heating or Electric Resistance
Heating.''
\2\ In ASHRAE Standard 90.1, this equipment class is referred to as units with heat recovery rather than all other types of heating.
\3\ ASHRAE Standard 90.1 only includes standards for VRF air conditioners with ``electric resistance or none'' heating type. Because stakeholders have
expressed that it is unlikely that VRF air conditioners would ever be paired with other forms of supplemental heating, DOE's amended equipment classes
for VRF air conditioners are condensed using ``all types of heating'' to ensure no change in coverage or backsliding.
In the March 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to adopt the ASHRAE Standard
90.1-2016 equipment class structure for VRF multi-split systems in its
regulations at 10 CFR 431.97, staying consistent with EPCA's direction
to establish amended uniform national standards for the VRF multi-split
systems at the minimum levels specified in ASHRAE Standard 90.1. (42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(I)) 87 FR 11335, 11345-11347 (March 1, 2022).
In the March 2022 NOPR, DOE stated that to align with this class
structure, DOE would amend the existing DOE class structure by
expanding the number of VRF water-source heat pump classes, reducing
the number of air-cooled VRF air conditioner classes, and amending the
convention for heating type for heat pump systems with and without heat
recovery. Id. at 87 FR 11346.
DOE proposed a minor clarification in the language used to describe
the heating type for VRF multi-split system heat pumps to explicitly
designate which classes are with and without heat recovery. 87 FR
11335, 11346-11347 (March 1, 2022). ASHRAE 90.1-2016 currently includes
separate classes for systems with and without heat recovery, designated
as ``VRF multi-split systems'' or ``VRF multi-split system with heat
recovery,'' while DOE's proposal revised these descriptions to
explicitly state either ``heat pump without heat recovery'' or ``heat
pump with heat recovery.'' 87 FR 11335, 11346 (March 1, 2022).
DOE also proposed in the March 2022 NOPR to include separate
efficiency levels for VRF multi-split air conditioners that: (1) have
either electric resistance heat or no heat and (2) have any other type
of heating. Specifically, DOE proposed to label the condensed equipment
classes for VRF multi-split air conditioners as having ``All'' types of
heating, and to set IEER standards for the proposed condensed classes
that are equivalent in stringency to the EER standards for the class
with ``electric resistance or none'' heating type. 87 FR 11335, 11346-
11347 (March 1, 2022). DOE tentatively concluded that setting IEER
standards to cover ``all'' kinds of heating would not constitute an
increase of stringency for any models currently in existence because
DOE did not have any knowledge of VRF multi-split air conditioners on
the market that have ``all other types of heating'' (e.g., a furnace).
Id. Such approach was intended to eliminate any anti-backsliding
concerns that might otherwise arise if DOE were to adopt a class
structure that could be viewed as potentially reducing the current
extent of coverage of the VRF energy conservation standards.
Finally, in the March 2022 NOPR, DOE tentatively concluded that
adopting the proposed class structure and efficiency levels would not
result in a change in stringency for any classes. Id. This was because,
in cases where DOE is proposing to subdivide or condense equipment
classes relative to the existing DOE equipment class structure, the
IEER levels recommended by the Working Group are within the limits of
precision determined by DOE's crosswalk translation. For example, in
cases where the current DOE equipment class only includes a single EER
standard but ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 includes separate IEER standards
for classes with and without heat recovery, both of the ASHRAE Standard
90.1 IEER levels fall within the crosswalk range determined by DOE to
represent equivalent stringency to existing EER standard. Id.
In response, AHRI, Carrier, the Joint Advocates, and the CA IOUs
commented that they support DOE's proposed equipment class structure.
(AHRI, No. 77 at p. 3; Carrier, No. 74 at p. 2; Joint Advocates, No. 76
at p. 1; CA IOUs, No. 72 at p. 1) AHRI and Carrier stated that the
structure accurately reflects the market for VRFs. (AHRI, No. 77 at p.
3; Carrier, No. 74 at p. 2) Carrier also stated that alignment with the
industry standard would facilitate rulemakings in response to future
updates. (Carrier, No. 74 at p. 2) AHRI further commented that Addendum
ay includes harmonization with the additional clarification for heating
type. (AHRI, No. 77 at p. 3)
Based on comment responses, in this final rule, DOE is finalizing
its proposals to adopt the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 equipment class
structure for VRF multi-split systems in its regulations at 10 CFR
431.97, to clarify language used to describe the heating type for VRF
multi-split system heat pumps to explicitly designate which classes are
with and without heat recovery, and to include separate efficiency
levels for VRF multi-split air conditioners that: (1) have either
electric resistance heat or no heat and (2) have any other type of
heating.
IV. Estimates of Potential Energy Savings
As required under 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(i), for VRF multi-split
system equipment classes for which ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 set levels
more stringent than the current Federal standards, DOE performed an
assessment to determine the energy-savings potential of amending
Federal
[[Page 18977]]
standard levels to reflect the efficiency levels specified in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2016. In the July 2019 NODA/RFI, DOE presented the
findings of the energy savings potential for the six considered
equipment classes for which the Department was triggered. 84 FR 32328,
32335 (July 8, 2019). DOE tentatively determined, based on a report by
Cadeo Group,\17\ that four of the six affected classes--those with
cooling capacities that are less than 17,000 Btu/h or greater than or
equal to 135,000 Btu/h (with or without heat recovery), do not have any
market share and, thus, no energy savings potential from amended
standards. The Cadeo report showed that the remaining two affected
classes, with cooling capacities greater than 17,000 Btu/h and less
than 135,000 Btu/h, represented under three percent of the VRF multi-
split system market. DOE tentatively concluded that potential energy
savings for these equipment classes were de minimis. Id. DOE noted that
in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016, the COP was raised by 0.1 on both of
these equipment classes, and that most commercial buildings are cooling
dominant. Id. DOE is unaware of any additional information available in
the intervening period that would alter its initial understanding of
the energy savings potential of the VRF multi-split systems equipment
classes for which DOE was triggered by ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016. Given
this information, in this final rule DOE concludes that energy savings
for these equipment classes are de minimis. Consideration of more-
stringent efficiency levels than those specified in ASHRAE Standard
90.1 are discussed in section V.A of this document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ Cadeo Report, Variable Refrigerant Flow: A Preliminary
Market Assessment. See: www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2017-BT-TP-0018-0002. The report presents market share by VRF multi-split
system equipment class, based on confidential sales data given in
interviews with several major manufacturers of VRF multi-split
equipment and DOE's Compliance Certification Database.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Conclusions
A. Consideration of More-Stringent Efficiency Levels
When triggered by an update to ASHRAE Standard 90.1, EPCA requires
DOE to establish an amended uniform national standard for equipment
classes at the minimum level specified in the amended ASHRAE Standard
90.1 unless DOE determines, by rule published in the Federal Register
and supported by clear and convincing evidence, that adoption of a
uniform national standard more stringent than the amended ASHRAE
Standard 90.1 for the equipment class would result in significant
additional conservation of energy and is technologically feasible and
economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(I)-(II))
As discussed in section II.B.3 of this final rule, following
publication of the July 2019 NODA/RFI, the ASRAC Working Group reached
consensus on two term sheets containing recommendations regarding the
test procedure and energy conservation standards for VRF multi-split
systems. As discussed in section III.B of this document, the
recommended standards are consistent with the crosswalk conducted by
DOE to translate the existing Federal standards in terms of EER to
equivalent levels in terms of IEER, measured per AHRI 1230-2021. These
recommended efficiency levels also align with the IEER and COP levels
in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016. The Working Group did not consider more-
stringent efficiency levels.
In the March 2022 NOPR, DOE considered but did not estimate
potential energy savings that would occur from more-stringent
standards. To assess the magnitude of potential energy savings from
amended standards and determine which level, if any, of more-stringent
standards would be economically justified, DOE must be able to properly
represent the no-new-standards case--the case without amended
standards--and must be able to properly characterize the technology
options and costs associated with specific levels of efficiency. With
regards to VRF multi-split systems, this would require developing
efficiency data for the entire market in terms of IEER measured per
AHRI 1230-2021. 87 FR 11335, 11348 (March 1, 2022).
DOE considered two approaches for developing market-wide
performance data in terms of IEER measured per AHRI 1230-2021: (1) DOE
examined whether any such data exist in publicly-available sources, and
(2) DOE considered whether existing performance data in terms of EER
(measured per the current Federal test procedure) could be effectively
translated to IEER (measured per AHRI 1230-2021). Id.
On the first approach, DOE found that public data in terms of IEER
measured per AHRI 1230-2021 are not available, as the rating of VRF
multi-split systems using the updated metric and test procedure is not
currently required. DOE acknowledged that IEER performance data are
widely represented by VRF manufacturers, but that all such data are
measured per an earlier version of the industry test standard (AHRI
1230-2014) and, thus, not directly comparable. DOE also found that the
AHRI Directory did not yet require IEER representations measured per
AHRI 1230-2021. 87 FR 11335, 11348 (March 1, 2022).
On the second approach, DOE considered the results of its crosswalk
analysis to determine whether a market-wide translation of existing EER
data to IEER data (measured per AHRI 1230-2021) was possible. As
discussed in section III.A the NOPR, the combined effect of translating
the Federal cooling efficiency metric from EER to IEER and the effect
of test procedure changes between the current DOE test procedure (which
references AHRI 1230-2010) and the proposed DOE test procedure (which
would reference AHRI 1230-2021) is likely to produce different impacts
on measured efficiency across different manufacturers and different
models. As DOE's crosswalk analysis has shown, a minimally-compliant
VRF multi-split system with 10.8 EER can result in a range of
crosswalked IEER levels from 13 to 16, depending on control inputs
selected by the manufacturer. Additionally, an estimation of energy
savings potentials of more-stringent energy efficiency levels would
require developing efficiency data for the entire VRF multi-split
system market, which would be a much broader analysis than that
conducted for the crosswalk. The crosswalk analysis conducted to
support the Working Group recommendations and presented in the NOPR
only translated the baseline efficiency level between the metrics for a
single class of VRF multi-split system and did not translate all
efficiency levels currently represented in the market. As noted, there
are insufficient market data regarding the performance of VRF multi-
split systems measured in terms of IEER per AHRI 1230-2021. As such,
DOE preliminarily determined that it lacked clear and convincing
evidence to adopt more-stringent standard levels. Regardless of whether
DOE preliminarily determined that more-stringent standards would be
technologically feasible and economically justified, DOE would be
unable to adopt such standards absent a determination, supported by
clear and convincing evidence, that more-stringent standards would
result in significant additional energy savings. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(II)) Therefore, having preliminarily determined that
it lacks clear and convincing evidence as to the energy savings that
would result from more-stringent standards, DOE did not conduct
analysis as to the technological
[[Page 18978]]
feasibility or economic justification of such standards for VRF multi-
split systems. 87 FR 11335, 11348 (March 1, 2022).
In response to the March 2022 NOPR, AHRI commented that it supports
the proposed standards. (AHRI. No. 77 at pp. 1-2) The CA IOUs, Lennox,
Daikin, and Joint Advocates commented that they support DOE's proposal
to adopt the VRF ECS levels from the ASRAC Working Group term sheet.
(CA IOUs, No. 72 at p. 1; Lennox, No. 75 at p. 1; Daikin, No. 79 at p.
1; Joint Advocates, No. 76 at p. 1) The CA IOUs commented that they
acknowledge the challenges associated with the crosswalk analysis, and
that they agree that DOE lacks the evidence necessary to justify
efficiency levels above those in ASHRAE Standard 90.1. (CA IOUs, No. 72
at p. 1) Conversely, NYSERDA commented that it is not convinced that
the levels being set are the most efficient levels that DOE can justify
and urged DOE to reevaluate its VRF standards once a database of
equipment is available. (NYSERDA, No. 73 at p. 2)
After carefully considering these comments, DOE concludes that it
does not have the clear and convincing evidence necessary to justify
the adoption of more-stringent energy conservation standard levels for
VRF multi-split systems. To be able to properly characterize the
technology options and associated costs, DOE would require efficiency
data for the entire market in terms of IEER measured per AHRI 1230-
2021. As NYSERDA noted, DOE does not presently have such data
available. Consequently, DOE concludes that more-stringent standards
cannot be justified at this time. Therefore, DOE has not conducted
analysis as to the technological feasibility or economic justification
of more-stringent standards for VRF multi-split systems.
B. Review Under the Six-Year-Lookback Provision
As discussed, DOE is required to conduct an evaluation of each
class of covered equipment in ASHRAE Standard 90.1 every six years. (42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C)(i)) Accordingly, DOE is evaluating 12 of the
Federal VRF equipment classes for which ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 did
not increase the stringency of the standards. Energy conservation
standards for the two remaining classes of VRF multi-split systems
(i.e., three-phase, air-cooled VRF multi-split systems with cooling
capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h) are not addressed in this final rule
and instead will be addressed in a separate energy conservation
standards rulemaking. DOE may only adopt more-stringent standards
pursuant to the six-year-lookback review if the Secretary determines,
by rule published in the Federal Register and supported by clear and
convincing evidence, that the adoption of more-stringent standards
would result in significant additional conservation of energy and is
technologically feasible and economically justified. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(C)(i)(II); 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B); 42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(II))
For the reasons presented in the prior section, DOE has determined
that it lacks clear and convincing evidence that more-stringent
standards for these 12 equipment classes would result in significant
additional energy savings. Because DOE does not have sufficient data to
meet the ``clear and convincing'' threshold for these 12 classes, DOE
did not conduct an analysis of standard levels more stringent than the
current Federal standard levels for VRF multi-split systems that were
not amended in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016. See section V.A of this
document for further discussion of the consideration of energy
efficiency levels more stringent than the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016
levels.
C. Amended Energy Conservation Standards
Based on the foregoing, DOE is amending energy conservation
standards for VRF multi-split systems in terms of IEER and COP
equivalent to those specified for VRF multi-split systems in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2016, which align with the levels recommended in the
ASRAC Working Group's VRF ECS Term Sheet. The amended standards are
presented in Table I-1. Compliance with the amended standards is
required for VRF multi-split systems manufactured in, or imported into,
the United States starting January 1, 2024, which aligns with the
Working Group's recommendation in the VRF ECS Term Sheet.
As discussed, ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 includes more-stringent COP
standards for six water-source VRF multi-split heat pump classes. EPCA
provides that the compliance date for prescribing levels contained in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 shall be on or after a date that is two or three
years (depending on the equipment type or size) after the effective
date of the applicable minimum energy efficiency requirement in the
amended ASHRAE standard. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(D)) The effective date
for amended COP standards in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 was January 1,
2017. In the March 2022 NOPR, DOE acknowledged that the statute
originally tied calculation of a compliance date to either two or three
years after the effective date of amended ASHRAE Standard 90.1.
However, because these dates have passed, DOE proposed the date
recommended in the VRF ECS Term Sheet (i.e., January 1, 2024) as a
reasonable amount of lead time supported by a broad array of interested
stakeholders. DOE stated that if it received comments in response to
the NOPR that recommend alternative compliance date(s) later than
January 1, 2024, DOE would consider adopting alternative compliance
date(s) in the final rule. 87 FR 11335, 11349 (March 1, 2022).
In response to the March 2022 NOPR, AHRI commented that, given that
January 1, 2024 is rapidly approaching, DOE should consider using its
authority under 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(l) to make the proposed
energy conservation standard effective sooner than 18 months after the
rule is finalized. (AHRI, No. 77 at p. 2) Daikin encouraged DOE to
finalize the VRF ECS rulemaking quickly, as industry needs as much time
as possible to comply, especially with the revised VRF test procedure.
(Daikin, No. 79 at p. 1) The CA IOUs, NYSERDA, and Joint Advocates also
commented their support for the proposed compliance date of January 1,
2024. (CA IOUs, No. 72 at p. 1; NYSERDA, No. 73 at p. 1 Joint
Advocates, No. 76 at p. 1)
GE commented that, because of the amount of time that has passed
since the ASRAC Working Group term sheet was published, DOE should
postpone the compliance date, as one year of lead time is not
sufficient time for manufacturers to evaluate all products and make
necessary changes to meet the new standard according to the new test
procedure. (GE, No. 78 at p. 2) Similarly, Carrier commented that DOE
should consider shifting the compliance date by 12-18 months, so that
manufacturers have a minimum of two years between the publication of
the final rule and the compliance date to give manufacturers enough
time to implement the new test procedure and redesign their impacted
equipment accordingly. (Carrier, No. 74 at p. 1)
In response, DOE notes that manufacturers have been aware of the
updated levels since the ASRAC Working Group reached consensus on the
VRF ECS Term Sheet in 2019. While DOE acknowledges that the test
procedure changes will impact rated efficiencies of VRF multi-split
systems, the Department further notes that manufacturers have been
aware of these changes since at least the publication of
[[Page 18979]]
AHRI 1230-2021. Thus, DOE concludes that manufacturers have had
sufficient time to adjust to both the amended VRF energy conservation
standards and the new VRF test procedure. Therefore, in this final
rule, DOE maintains its compliance date of January 1, 2024, for amended
standards for VRF multi-split systems.
NYSERDA commented that DOE should consider beginning a new
standards rulemaking prior to the date mandated under the six-year-
lookback requirement, as this will allow for advancements in the energy
conservation standards for VRF multi-split systems based upon
certification data generated by application of the new test procedure.
(NYSERDA, No. 73 at p. 2)
On NYSERDA's point, DOE will consider appropriate timing of its
next proceeding for VRF multi-split systems in light of the relevant
statutory deadlines and compliance dates for any future rulemakings.
VI. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Executive Order (``E.O.'') 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and
Review,'' 58 FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993), as supplemented and reaffirmed by
E.O. 13563, ``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review,'' 76 FR 3821
(Jan. 21, 2011), requires agencies, to the extent permitted by law, to:
(1) propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination
that its benefits justify its costs (recognizing that some benefits and
costs are difficult to quantify); (2) tailor regulations to impose the
least burden on society, consistent with obtaining regulatory
objectives, taking into account, among other things, and to the extent
practicable, the costs of cumulative regulations; (3) select, in
choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, those approaches that
maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental,
public health and safety, and other advantages; distributive impacts;
and equity); (4) to the extent feasible, specify performance
objectives, rather than specifying the behavior or manner of compliance
that regulated entities must adopt; and (5) identify and assess
available alternatives to direct regulation, including providing
economic incentives to encourage the desired behavior, such as user
fees or marketable permits, or providing information upon which choices
can be made by the public. DOE emphasizes as well that E.O. 13563
requires agencies to use the best available techniques to quantify
anticipated present and future benefits and costs as accurately as
possible. In its guidance, the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
emphasized that such techniques may include identifying changing future
compliance costs that might result from technological innovation or
anticipated behavioral changes. For the reasons stated in the preamble,
this regulatory action is consistent with these principles.
Section 6(a) of E.O. 12866 also requires agencies to submit
``significant regulatory actions'' to OIRA for review. OIRA has
determined that this final rule does not constitute a ``significant
regulatory action'' under section 3(f) of E.O. 12866. Accordingly, this
action was not submitted to OIRA for review under E.O. 12866.
B. 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 (IRFA) and a
final regulatory flexibility analysis (FRFA) 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 E.O. 13272,
``Proper Consideration of Small Entities in Agency Rulemaking,'' 67 FR
53461 (August 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 rulemaking process.
68 FR 7990. DOE has made its procedures and policies available on the
Office of the General Counsel's website (www.energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel). DOE reviewed this final rule to amend the Federal
energy conservation standards for VRF multi-split systems under the
provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act and the policies and
procedures published on February 19, 2003. DOE certifies that this
final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. The factual basis for this certification is
set forth in the following paragraphs.
In this final rule, DOE is amending the existing Federal minimum
energy conservation standards for VRF multi-split systems under EPCA's
ASHRAE trigger requirement and the six-year lookback provision. Under
the trigger, EPCA directs that if ASHRAE amends ASHRAE Standard 90.1,
DOE must adopt uniform national amended standards at the new ASHRAE
efficiency level, unless DOE determines, by rule published in the
Federal Register and supported by clear and convincing evidence, that
adoption of a more-stringent level would produce significant additional
conservation of energy and would be technologically feasible and
economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)) Under the six-
year-lookback, DOE must also review energy efficiency standards for VRF
multi-split systems every six years and either: (1) issue a notice of
determination that the standards do not need to be amended based upon
the criteria in 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A) (i.e., that there is clear and
convincing evidence to show that adoption of a more-stringent level
would save significant additional energy and would be technologically
feasible and economically justified); or (2) issue a notice of proposed
rulemaking including new proposed standards based on certain criteria
and procedures in 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B). (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C))
In this document, DOE is updating the standards for VRF multi-split
systems at 10 CFR 431.97 to align with the most recent version of
ASHRAE Standard 90.1, including the updated COP levels for the six
classes of VRF multi-split water-source heat pumps on which DOE was
triggered. DOE is also expressing cooling efficiency standards in terms
of the IEER metric, as measured according to the amended industry test
procedure AHRI 1230-2021, and removing standard levels in terms of the
EER metric, as measured according to the current DOE test procedure.
Finally, DOE is amending the equipment class structure for VRF multi-
split systems to align with the equipment class structure present in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1, with regards to capacity break points,
supplementary heating type, and presence of heat recovery. The amended
standard levels have a compliance date applying to all VRF multi-split
systems manufactured on or after January 1, 2024. Table 14 to paragraph
(f)(2) of 10 CFR 431.97 accounts for all changes between the previous
Federal VRF multi-split system standards and those outlined in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2016 (as reaffirmed in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019).
DOE uses the Small Business Administration (SBA) small business
size standards to determine whether manufacturers qualify as small
businesses, which are listed by the North American Industry
Classification
[[Page 18980]]
System (NAICS).\18\ The SBA considers a business entity to be a small
business, if, together with its affiliates, it employs less than a
threshold number of workers specified in 13 CFR part 121.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ The size standards are listed by NAICS code and industry
description and are available at: www.sba.gov/document/support--table-size-standards (Last accessed on Dec. 30, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VRF multi-split system manufacturers are classified under NAICS
code 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. This employee
threshold includes all employees in a business's parent company and any
other subsidiaries.
Prior to the March 2022 NOPR, DOE conducted a focused inquiry into
small business manufacturers of the equipment covered by this
rulemaking. DOE used available public information to identify potential
small manufacturers that manufacture domestically. DOE identified
manufacturers using DOE's Compliance Certification Database \19\ and
the AHRI Directory database. DOE used this publicly-available
information to identify ten distinct original equipment manufacturers
``OEMs'' of the covered VRF multi-split system equipment. In reviewing
the ten OEMs, DOE did not identify any companies that met the SBA
criteria for a small entity. 87 FR 11335, 11349-11350 (March 1, 2022).
DOE requested comment regarding its tentative conclusions that there
are no small business OEMs of VRF multi-split systems, that adoption of
the prevailing industry standard levels would not result in any
significant economic impact, and, accordingly, that the proposed rule
would not have significant impacts on a substantial number of small
manufacturers. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ DOE's Compliance Certification Database is available at:
www.regulations.doe.gov/ccms (Last accessed Dec. 30, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response, AHRI commented that they are not aware of any small
business OEMs of VRF multi-split systems. (AHRI, No. 77 at p. 3)
Therefore, DOE concludes that this final rule will not have ``a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities'' and that
preparation of an IRFA/FRFA is not warranted. Additional information
about this final rule is addressed elsewhere in this document. DOE has
transmitted its 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).
C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
Manufacturers of VRF multi-split systems must certify to DOE that
their equipment complies with any applicable energy conservation
standards. In certifying compliance, manufacturers must test their
equipment according to the DOE test procedures for VRF multi-split
systems, 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 VRF multi-split systems. (See generally 10 CFR
part 429). The collection-of-information requirement for the
certification and recordkeeping is 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.
This final rule does not make any changes to the certification and
recordkeeping requirements for VRF multi-split system manufacturers.
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.
D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA),
DOE has analyzed this final rule in accordance with NEPA and DOE's NEPA
implementing regulations (10 CFR part 1021). DOE has determined that
this rule qualifies for categorical exclusion under 10 CFR part 1021,
subpart D, appendix B5.1 because it is a rulemaking that establishes
energy conservation standards for consumer products or industrial
equipment, none of the exceptions identified in categorical exclusion
B5.1(b) apply, no extraordinary circumstances exist that require
further environmental analysis, and it otherwise meets the requirements
for application of a categorical exclusion. See 10 CFR 1021.410.
Therefore, DOE has determined that promulgation of this final rule is
not a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the
human environment within the meaning of NEPA, and does not require an
environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement.
E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
E.O. 13132, ``Federalism,'' 64 FR 43255 (August 10, 1999), imposes
certain requirements on Federal 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 final 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
equipment that is the subject of this final 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. 6316(a) and (b); 42 U.S.C.
6297) Therefore, no further action is required by Executive Order
13132.
F. Review Under Executive Order 12988
With respect to the review of existing regulations and the
promulgation of new regulations, section 3(a) of E.O. 12988, ``Civil
Justice Reform,'' 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. 61 FR
4729 (Feb. 7, 1996). Regarding the review required by section 3(a),
section 3(b) of E.O. 12988 specifically requires that executive
agencies make every reasonable effort to ensure that the regulation:
(1) clearly
[[Page 18981]]
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 E.O. 12988 requires executive
agencies to review regulations in light of applicable standards in
section 3(a) and section 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,
this final rule meets the relevant standards of E.O. 12988.
G. 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 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 ``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 them. On March 18, 1997, DOE published
a statement of policy on its process for intergovernmental consultation
under UMRA. 62 FR 12820. DOE's policy statement is also available at:
www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/gcprod/documents/umra_97.pdf.
DOE examined this final rule according to UMRA and its statement of
policy and determined that this rule does not contain a Federal
intergovernmental mandate, nor is it expected to require expenditures
of $100 million or more in any one year by State, local, and Tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector. As a result,
the analytical requirements of UMRA do not apply.
H. 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 final 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.
I. Review Under Executive Order 12630
Pursuant to E.O. 12630, ``Governmental Actions and Interference
with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights,'' 53 FR 8859 (March
18, 1988), DOE has determined that this final rule would not result in
any takings that might require compensation under the Fifth Amendment
to the U.S. Constitution.
J. Review Under the 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 for Federal agencies to
review most disseminations of information to the public under
information quality 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). Pursuant to OMB Memorandum M-19-15, ``Improving
Implementation of the Information Quality Act'' (April 24, 2019), DOE
published updated guidelines which are available at: www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/12/f70/DOE%20Final%20Updated%20IQA%20Guidelines%20Dec%202019.pdf. DOE has
reviewed this final rule under the OMB and DOE guidelines and has
concluded that it is consistent with applicable policies in those
guidelines.
K. Review Under Executive Order 13211
E.O. 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 OIRA at OMB,
a Statement of Energy Effects for any significant energy action. A
``significant energy action'' is defined as any action by an agency
that promulgates 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 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.
DOE has concluded that this regulatory action, which sets forth
amended energy conservation standards for VRF multi-split systems, is
not a significant energy action because it is not a significant
regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. Moreover, the standards
are not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy, nor has it been designated as such by
the Administrator at OIRA. Accordingly, DOE has not prepared a
Statement of Energy Effects.
L. Review Under the Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review
On December 16, 2004, OMB, in consultation with the Office of
Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), issued its Final Information
Quality Bulletin for Peer Review (the Bulletin). 70 FR 2664 (Jan. 14,
2005). The Bulletin establishes that certain scientific information
shall be peer reviewed by qualified specialists before it is
disseminated by the Federal Government, including influential
scientific information related to agency regulatory actions. The
purpose of the Bulletin is to enhance the quality and credibility of
the Government's scientific information. Under the Bulletin, the energy
conservation standards rulemaking analyses are ``influential scientific
information,'' which the Bulletin defines as ``scientific information
the agency reasonably can determine will have, or does have, a clear
and substantial impact on important public policies or private sector
decisions.'' Id. at 70 FR 2667.
In response to OMB's Bulletin, DOE conducted formal peer reviews of
the energy conservation standards development process and the analyses
that are typically used and has prepared a Peer Review report
pertaining to the energy conservation standards
[[Page 18982]]
rulemaking analyses.\20\ Generation of this report involved a rigorous,
formal, and documented evaluation using objective criteria and
qualified and independent reviewers to make a judgment as to the
technical/scientific/business merit, the actual or anticipated results,
and the productivity and management effectiveness of programs and/or
projects. Because available data, models, and technological
understanding have changed since 2007, DOE has engaged with the
National Academy of Sciences to review DOE's analytical methodologies
to ascertain whether modifications are needed to improve the
Department's analyses. DOE is in the process of evaluating the
resulting December 2021 NAS report.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ The 2007 ``Energy Conservation Standards Rulemaking Peer
Review Report'' is available at: energy.gov/eere/buildings/downloads/energy-conservation-standards-rulemaking-peer-review-report-0 (Last accessed Oct. 3, 2022).
\21\ The December 2021 NAS report is available at
www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/review-of-methods-for-setting-building-and-equipment-performance-standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
M. Congressional Notification
As required by 5 U.S.C. 801, DOE will report to Congress on the
promulgation of this final rule prior to its effective date. The report
will state that it has been determined that the rule is not a ``major
rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
VII. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of this final
rule.
List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 431
Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business
information, Energy conservation, Household appliances, Imports,
Intergovernmental relations, Laboratories, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Small businesses.
Signing Authority
This document of the Department of Energy was signed on January 30,
2023, by Francisco Alejandro Moreno, Acting Assistant Secretary for
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, 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 March 21, 2023.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, DOE amends part 431 of
chapter II, subchapter D, of title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, as set forth below:
PART 431--ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAM FOR CERTAIN COMMERCIAL AND
INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT
0
1. The authority citation for part 431 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291-6317; 28 U.S.C. 2461 note.
0
2. Section 431.97 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (f); and
0
b. Redesignating ``Table 14'' as ``Table 15'' in paragraph (g).
The revision reads as follows:
Sec. 431.97 Energy efficiency standards and their compliance dates.
* * * * *
(f)(1) Each variable refrigerant flow air conditioner or heat pump
manufactured on or after the compliance date listed in table 13 of this
section and prior to January 1, 2024, must meet the applicable minimum
energy efficiency standard level(s) set forth in table 13 of this
section.
Table 13 to Paragraph (F)(1) to Sec. 431.97--Minimum Efficiency Standards for Variable Refrigerant Flow Multi-
Split Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Compliance date:
Equipment type Cooling capacity Heating type \1\ Efficiency level equipment manufactured
on and after . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VRF Multi-Split Air <65,000 Btu/h.... All.............. 13.0 SEER........ June 16, 2008.
Conditioners (Air-Cooled). >=65,000 Btu/h No Heating or 11.2 EER......... January 1, 2010.
and <135,000 Btu/ Electric
h. Resistance
Heating.
All Other Types 11.0 EER......... January 1, 2010.
of Heating.
>=135,000 Btu/h No Heating or 11.0 EER......... January 1, 2010.
and <240,000 Btu/ Electric
h. Resistance
Heating.
All Other Types 10.8 EER......... January 1, 2010.
of Heating.
>=240,000 Btu/h No Heating or 10.0 EER......... January 1, 2010.
and <760,000 Btu/ Electric
h. Resistance
Heating.
All Other Types 9.8 EER.......... January 1, 2010.
of Heating.
VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps <65,000 Btu/h.... All.............. 13.0 SEER, 7.7 June 16, 2008.
(Air-Cooled). >=65,000 Btu/h No Heating or HSPF. January 1, 2010.
and <135,000 Btu/ Electric 11.0 EER, 3.3 COP
h. Resistance
Heating.
All Other Types 10.8 EER, 3.3 COP January 1, 2010.
of Heating.
>=135,000 Btu/h No Heating or 10.6 EER, 3.2 COP January 1, 2010.
and <240,000 Btu/ Electric
h. Resistance
Heating.
All Other Types 10.4 EER, 3.2 COP January 1, 2010.
of Heating.
>=240,000 Btu/h No Heating or 9.5 EER, 3.2 COP. January 1, 2010.
and <760,000 Btu/ Electric
h. Resistance
Heating.
All Other Types 9.3 EER, 3.2 COP. January 1, 2010.
of Heating.
VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps <17,000 Btu/h.... Without Heat 12.0 EER, 4.2 COP October 29, 2012.
(Water-Source). Recovery. October 29, 2003.
With Heat 11.8 EER, 4.2 COP October 29, 2012.
Recovery. October 29, 2003.
>=17,000 Btu/h All.............. 12.0 EER, 4.2 COP October 29, 2003.
and <65,000 Btu/
h.
[[Page 18983]]
>=65,000 Btu/h All.............. 12.0 EER, 4.2 COP October 29, 2003.
and <135,000 Btu/
h.
>=135,000 Btu/h Without Heat 10.0 EER, 3.9 COP October 29, 2013.
and <760,000 Btu/ Recovery.
h.
With Heat 9.8 EER, 3.9 COP. October 29, 2013.
Recovery.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ VRF multi-split heat pumps (air-cooled) with heat recovery fall under the category of ``All Other Types of
Heating'' unless they also have electric resistance heating, in which case it falls under the category for
``No Heating or Electric Resistance Heating.''
(2) Each variable refrigerant flow air conditioner or heat pump
(except air-cooled systems with cooling capacity less than 65,000 Btu/
h) manufactured on or after January 1, 2024, must meet the applicable
minimum energy efficiency standard level(s) set forth in table 14 of
this section.
Table 14 to Paragraph (F)(2) to Sec. 431.97--Updated Minimum Efficiency Standards for Variable Refrigerant
Flow Multi-Split Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Equipment type Size category Heating type Minimum efficiency
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VRF Multi-Split Air Conditioners (Air- >=65,000 and <135,000 All.................... 15.5 IEER.
Cooled). Btu/h.
>=135,000 and <240,000 All.................... 14.9 IEER.
Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and All.................... 13.9 IEER.
<760,000 Btu/h.
VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps (Air- >=65,000 and <135,000 Heat Pump without Heat 14.6 IEER, 3.3 COP.
Cooled). Btu/h. Recovery.
Heat Pump with Heat 14.4 IEER, 3.3 COP.
Recovery.
>=135,000 and <240,000 Heat Pump without Heat 13.9 IEER, 3.2 COP.
Btu/h. Recovery. 13.7 IEER, 3.2 COP.
Heat Pump with Heat
Recovery.
>=240,000 Btu/h and Heat Pump without Heat 12.7 IEER, 3.2 COP.
<760,000 Btu/h. Recovery. 12.5 IEER, 3.2 COP.
Heat Pump with Heat
Recovery.
VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps (Water- <65,000 Btu/h.......... Heat Pump without Heat 16.0 IEER, 4.3 COP.
Source). Recovery. 15.8 IEER, 4.3 COP.
Heat Pump with Heat
Recovery.
>=65,000 and <135,000 Heat Pump without Heat 16.0 IEER, 4.3 COP.
Btu/h. Recovery. 15.8 IEER, 4.3 COP.
Heat Pump with Heat
Recovery.
>=135,000 and <240,000 Heat Pump without Heat 14.0 IEER, 4.0 COP.
Btu/h. Recovery. 13.8 IEER, 4.0 COP.
Heat Pump with Heat
Recovery.
>=240,000 Btu/h and Heat Pump without Heat 12.0 IEER, 3.9 COP.
<760,000 Btu/h. Recovery. 11.8 IEER, 3.9 COP.
Heat Pump with Heat
Recovery.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2023-06178 Filed 3-29-23; 8:45 a.m.]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
