Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners and Packaged Terminal Heat Pumps, 30836-30887 [2023-08897]

Download as PDF 30836 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 10 CFR Parts 429 and 431 [EERE–2019–BT–TP–0027] RIN 1904–AE65 Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners and Packaged Terminal Heat Pumps Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking and request for comment. AGENCY: The U.S. Department of Energy (‘‘DOE’’) proposes to amend the test procedures for Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners (‘‘PTACs’’) and Packaged Terminal Heat Pumps (‘‘PTHPs’’) to establish seasonal energy efficiency metrics for heating and cooling. DOE also proposes to revise the current test procedure to measure dehumidification energy use of make-up air PTACs and PTHPs. DOE is seeking comment from interested parties on the proposal. DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this proposal no later than July 11, 2023. See section V, ‘‘Public Participation,’’ for details. DOE will hold a webinar on Tuesday, June 6, 2023, from 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. See section V, ‘‘Public Participation,’’ for webinar registration information, participant instructions, and information about the capabilities available to webinar participants. ADDRESSES: Interested persons are encouraged to submit comments using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov under docket number EERE–2019–BT–TP–0027. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Alternatively, interested persons may submit comments, identified by docket number EERE– 2019–BT–TP–0027, by any of the following methods: Email: PTACHP2019TP0027@ ee.doe.gov. Include the docket number EERE–2019–BT–TP–0027 in the subject line of the message. Postal Mail: Appliance and Equipment Standards Program, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, Mailstop EE–5B, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC, 20585–0121. Telephone: (202) 287–1445. If possible, please submit all items on a compact disc (‘‘CD’’), in which case it is not necessary to include printed copies. Hand Delivery/Courier: Appliance and Equipment Standards Program, U.S. lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, 1000 Independence Ave SW, Washington, DC 20585. Telephone: (202) 287–1445. If possible, please submit all items on a CD, in which case it is not necessary to include printed copies. No telefacsimiles (‘‘faxes’’) will be accepted. For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information on this process, see section V of this document. Docket: The docket for this activity, which includes Federal Register notices, public meeting attendee lists and transcripts (if a public meeting is held), comments, and other supporting documents/materials, is available for review at 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/EERE2019-BT-TP-0027. The docket web page contains instructions on how to access all documents, including public comments, in the docket. See section V for information on how to submit comments through www.regulations.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Lucas Adin, 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) 287– 5904. Email: ApplianceStandardsQuestions@ ee.doe.gov Ms. Amelia Whiting, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General Counsel, GC–33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585–0121. Telephone: (202) 586–2588. Email: Amelia.Whiting@hq.doe.gov. For further information on how to submit a comment, review other public comments and the docket, or participate in a public meeting (if one is held), contact the Appliance and Equipment Standards Program staff at (202) 287– 1445 or by email: ApplianceStandardsQuestions@ ee.doe.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE proposes to maintain material previously approved for incorporation by reference in part 431: AHRI 310/380– 2014, and update ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–1983 (RA 2014), ANSI/ ASHRAE Standard 37–2009 and ANSI/ ASHRAE Standard 58–1986. DOE PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 incorporates by reference the following industry standards into 10 CFR part 431: AHRI Standard 310/380–2017, ‘‘Standard for Packaged Terminal AirConditioners and Heat Pumps,’’ July 2017 (‘‘AHRI 310/380–2017’’). ANSI/ ASHRAE Standard 16–2016, ‘‘Method of Testing for Rating Room Air Conditioners, Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners, and Packaged Terminal Heat Pumps for Cooling and Heating Capacity,’’ ANSI approved November 1, 2016 (‘‘ANSI/ASHRAE 16–2016’’). Copies of AHRI 310/380–2014 and AHRI 310/380–2017 can be obtained from the Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (‘‘AHRI’’), 2311 Wilson Blvd., Suite 400, Arlington, VA 22201 (703) 524–8800, or online at: www.ahrinet.org/standards. See section IV.M of this document for a further discussion of these standards. Table of Contents I. Authority and Background A. Authority B. Background II. Synopsis of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking III. Discussion A. Scope of Applicability B. Proposed Organization of the PTAC/HP Test Procedure C. Updates to Industry Standards 1. AHRI 310/380–2017 2. ANSI/ASHRAE 16–2016 D. Definitions E. Operation at Part Load Conditions and Integrated Metrics 1. Market Size of PTACs and PTHPs With Part-Load Operation Capability 2. Potential Part-Load Efficiency Metrics 3. Low-Ambient Heating F. Proposed Cooling Metric and Test Procedure 1. Test Conditions 2. Cooling Tests 3. Cyclic Losses 4. SCP Calculation 5. Cooling Temperature Bins and Weights G. Proposed Heating Metric and Test Procedure 1. Test Conditions 2. Heating Tests 3. Evaluating Cut-In and Cut-Out Temperatures 4. Defrost Degradation 5. SHP Calculation 6. Heating Temperature Bins and Weights H. Dehumidification of Fresh Air 1. Market Size of Make-Up Air PTACs and PTHPs 2. Dehumidification Energy Use 3. Proposed Test Procedure I. Fan-Only Mode J. Use of Psychrometric Testing K. Test Procedure Costs and Impact L. Compliance Date IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 14094 B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules 1. Description of Why Action Is Being Considered 2. Objective of, and Legal Basis for, Rule 3. Description and Estimate of Small Entities Regulated 4. Description and Estimate of Compliance Requirements 5. Duplication Overlap, and Conflict With Other Rules and Regulations 6. Significant Alternatives to the Rule 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 Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 2001 K. Review Under Executive Order 13211 L. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974 M. Description of Materials Incorporated by Reference V. Public Participation A. Attendance at the Public Meeting B. Procedure for Submitting Prepared General Statements for Distribution C. Conduct of the Public Meeting D. Submission of Comments E. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 I. Authority and Background Package terminal air conditioners (‘‘PTACs’’) and package terminal heat pumps (‘‘PTHPs’’) (collectively ‘‘PTAC/ HPs’’) are included in the list of ‘‘covered equipment’’ for which DOE is authorized to establish and amend energy conservation standards and test procedures. (42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(I)) DOE’s current test procedures for PTACs and PTHPs are currently prescribed at title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (‘‘CFR’’), part 431, section 96(g) ‘‘Test Procedures for Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners and Packaged Terminal Heat Pumps,’’ with additional provisions provided in section 96 paragraphs (c) and (e). The following sections discuss DOE’s authority to establish test procedures for PTACs and PTHPs and relevant background information regarding DOE’s consideration of test procedures for this equipment. A. Authority The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended (‘‘EPCA’’),1 authorizes DOE to regulate the energy efficiency of a number of consumer products and 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. VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 certain industrial equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6291–6317) Title III, Part C 2 of EPCA, added by Public Law 95–619, Title IV, § 441(a), established the Energy Conservation Program for Certain Industrial Equipment, which sets forth a variety of provisions designed to improve energy efficiency. This equipment includes PTACs and PTHPs, the subject of this document. (42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(I)) The energy conservation program under EPCA consists essentially of four parts: (1) testing, (2) labeling, (3) Federal energy conservation standards, and (4) certification and enforcement procedures. Relevant provisions of EPCA include definitions (42 U.S.C. 6311), test procedures (42 U.S.C. 6314), labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6315), energy conservation standards (42 U.S.C. 6313), and the authority to require information and reports from manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6316; 42 U.S.C. 6296). The Federal testing requirements consist of test procedures that manufacturers of covered equipment must use 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 other representations about the efficiency of that equipment (42 U.S.C. 6314(d)). Similarly, DOE uses these test procedures to determine whether the equipment complies with relevant standards promulgated under EPCA. 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 42 U.S.C. 6316(b); 42 U.S.C. 6297). DOE may, however, grant waivers of Federal preemption for particular State laws or regulations, in accordance with the procedures and other provisions of EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6316(b)(2)(D)) Under 42 U.S.C. 6314, EPCA sets forth the criteria and procedures DOE must follow when prescribing or amending test procedures for covered equipment. EPCA requires that any test procedures prescribed or amended under this section must be reasonably designed to produce test results which reflect energy efficiency, energy use, or estimated annual operating cost of a given type of covered equipment during a representative average use cycle and requires that test procedures not be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2)) With respect to small, 2 For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code, Part C was redesignated Part A–1. PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 30837 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 ‘‘ASHRAE equipment’’), EPCA requires DOE to use industry test procedures developed or recognized by the Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (‘‘AHRI’’) or the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers (‘‘ASHRAE’’), as referenced in ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1, ‘‘Energy Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings.’’ (‘‘ASHRAE Standard 90.1’’) (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(4)(A)) Further, if such an industry test procedure is amended, DOE is required to amend its test procedure to be consistent with the amended industry test procedure, unless it determines, by rule published in the Federal Register and supported by clear and convincing evidence, that the amended test procedure would be unduly burdensome to conduct or would not produce test results that reflect the energy efficiency, energy use, and estimated operating costs of that equipment during a representative average use cycle. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(4)(B)) EPCA also requires that, at least once every seven years, DOE evaluate test procedures for each type of covered equipment, including PTACs and PTHPs, to determine whether amended test procedures would more accurately or fully comply with the requirements for the test procedures to not be unduly burdensome to conduct and be reasonably designed to produce test results that reflect energy efficiency, energy use, and estimated operating costs during a representative average use cycle. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(1)(A)) In addition, if the Secretary determines that a test procedure amendment is warranted, the Secretary must publish proposed test procedures in the Federal Register and afford interested persons an opportunity (of not less than 45 days’ duration) to present oral and written data, views, and arguments on the proposed test procedures. (42 U.S.C. 6314(b)) DOE is publishing this notice of proposed rulemaking (‘‘NOPR’’) in satisfaction of the seven-year review requirement specified in EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(1)(A)(ii)) B. Background DOE’s existing test procedures for PTACs and PTHPs appear at title 10 of E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 30838 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules the CFR part 431, subpart F, section 96(g). For PTACs and PTHPs, DOE currently specifies the energy efficiency ratio (‘‘EER’’) as the energy efficiency descriptor for cooling efficiency. Table 1 to 10 CFR 431.96. EER is the ratio of the produced cooling effect of the PTAC or PTHP to its net work input, expressed in Btu/watt-hour, and measured at standard rating conditions. 10 CFR 431.92. For PTHPs, DOE specifies the coefficient of performance (‘‘COP’’) as the energy efficiency descriptor for heating efficiency. Table 1 to 10 CFR 431.96. COP is the ratio of the produced heating effect of the PTHP to its net work input, expressed in watts/watts, and measured at standard rating conditions. 10 CFR 431.92. The test procedures were most recently amended after AHRI published AHRI Standard 310/380–2014, ‘‘Standard for Packaged Terminal AirConditioners and Heat Pumps’’ (‘‘AHRI 310/380–2014’’) in February 2014. The 2014 version of the standard updated and superseded AHRI Standard 310/ 380–2004. In a final rule published on June 30, 2015 (‘‘June 2015 TP final rule’’), DOE amended the test procedures for PTACs and PTHPs. 80 FR 37136, 37136–37149. In the June 2015 TP final rule, DOE incorporated by reference certain sections of AHRI 310/ 380–2014. Id. at 80 FR 37148. DOE also incorporated by reference (1) American National Standard Institute (‘‘ANSI’’)/ ASHRAE Standard 16–1983 (RA 2014), ‘‘Method of Testing for Rating Room Air Conditioners and Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners’’ (‘‘ASHRAE 16– 1983’’); (2) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 58– 1986 (RA2014), ‘‘Method of Testing for Rating Room Air Conditioner and Packaged Terminal Air Conditioner Heating Capacity’’ (‘‘ASHRAE 58– 1986’’); and (3) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 37–2009, ‘‘Methods of Testing for Rating Electrically Driven Unitary Air-Conditioning and Heat Pump Equipment’’ (‘‘ASHRAE 37–2009’’). Id. Additionally, DOE amended the PTAC and PTHP test procedures to specify an optional break-in period; explicitly require that wall sleeves be sealed; allow for the pre-filling of the condensate drain pan; require that measurements of cooling capacity be conducted using electrical instruments accurate to ± 0.5 percent of reading; and require testing with 14-inch deep wall sleeves and the filter option most representative of a typical installation. Id. at 80 FR 37149. In July 2017, AHRI published AHRI Standard 310/380–2017, ‘‘Packaged Terminal Air-Conditioners and Heat Pumps’’ (‘‘AHRI 310/380–2017’’). The 2017 version of the standard updated and superseded AHRI Standard 310/ 380–2014. The 2017 version of the standard incorporated DOE’s additional PTAC and PTHP test procedure specifications listed previously. The current DOE test procedures for PTACs and PTHPs are therefore consistent with AHRI 310/380–2017. EPCA requires DOE to use industry test procedures developed or recognized by AHRI or ASHRAE as referenced in ASHRAE Standard 90.1. The latest update to ASHRAE Standard 90.1, published on October 24, 2019 (‘‘ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019’’) updated the AHRI Standard 310/380 reference to the 2017 edition. As discussed, the DOE test procedures for PTACs and PTHPs are already consistent with AHRI 310/380–2017. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(4)(A)) EPCA also requires that, at least once every 7 years, DOE evaluate test procedures for each type of covered equipment, including PTACs and PTHPs, to determine whether amended test procedures would more accurately or fully comply with the requirements for the test procedures to not be unduly burdensome to conduct and be reasonably designed to produce test results that reflect energy efficiency, energy use, and estimated operating costs during a representative average use cycle. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(1)) Under this seven-year lookback provision, DOE initiated a test procedure rulemaking for PTACs and PTHPs to collect data and information to determine whether there is clear and convincing evidence that would justify the adoption of procedures other than those referenced in ASHRAE 90.1–2019. On December 8, 2020, DOE published an early assessment request for information (‘‘RFI’’) in which it sought data and information pertinent to whether amended test procedures would (1) more accurately or fully comply with the requirement that the test procedure produces results that measure energy use during a representative average use cycle for the equipment without being unduly burdensome to conduct, or (2) reduce testing burden. See 85 FR 78967 (‘‘December 2020 Early Assessment RFI’’). Based on the comments received on the December 2020 Early Assessment RFI and DOE’s review of the test procedures for PTACs and PTHPs, DOE determined it appropriate to continue the test procedure rulemaking after the early assessment process. On May 25, 2021, DOE published in the Federal Register a RFI (‘‘May 2021 RFI’’) in which DOE requested comments, information, and data about a number of issues, including (1) the market size of PTAC and PTHP units that include make-up air dehumidification, the equipment designs of PTACs and PTHPs that provide make-up air dehumidification, and the energy use associated with this function of PTACs and PTHPs; (2) the market size of PTAC and PTHP units that are capable of partload operation and the energy use associated with part-load operation of PTACs and PTHPs; (3) the power use associated with fan-only mode operation of PTACs and PTHPs and whether fan-only operation reflects energy use during a representative average use cycle; and (4) lowtemperature performance for cold climate PTHPs and whether and how the test procedure should be updated for such equipment. 86 FR 28005. DOE received comments in response to the May 2021 RFI from the interested parties listed in Table I.1. Discussion of the relevant comments, and DOE’s responses, are provided in the appropriate sections of this document. A parenthetical reference at the end of a comment quotation or paraphrase provides the location of the item in the public record.3 lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 TABLE I.1—LIST OF COMMENTERS WITH WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS IN RESPONSE TO THE MAY 2021 RFI Commenter(s) Reference in this NOPR Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute ................................. Appliance Standards Awareness Project, Natural Resources Defense Council. California Investor Owned Utilities .............................................................. AHRI ................................................. Joint Advocates ................................ Trade Association. Efficiency Organizations. CA IOUs ........................................... Utility. 3 The parenthetical reference provides a reference for information located in the docket of DOE’s rulemaking to develop test procedures for PTACs VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 and PTHPs. (Docket NO. EERE–2019–BT–TP–0027, which is maintained at www.regulations.gov). The references are arranged as follows: (commenter PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 Commenter type name, comment docket ID number, page of that document). E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 30839 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules TABLE I.1—LIST OF COMMENTERS WITH WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS IN RESPONSE TO THE MAY 2021 RFI—Continued Commenter(s) Reference in this NOPR Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance ......................................................... LG Electronics USA .................................................................................... NEAA ................................................ LG ..................................................... II. Synopsis of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking In this NOPR, DOE is proposing to relocate the existing test procedures for PTACs and PTHPs from 10 CFR 431.96(g) to a new appendix H to subpart F of part 431, ‘‘Uniform test method for measuring the energy consumption of package terminal air conditioners and heat pumps,’’ (‘‘appendix H’’) that would include the relevant test procedure requirements for measuring existing efficiency metrics: (1) EER for cooling mode and (2) COP for heating mode. DOE is also proposing to establish a new appendix H1 to subpart F of part 431, ‘‘Uniform test method for measuring the energy consumption of package terminal air conditioners and heat pumps,’’ (‘‘appendix H1’’) that would include the relevant test procedure requirements for PTACs and PTHPs for measuring seasonal cooling and heating efficiency via new efficiency metrics: (1) seasonal cooling performance (‘‘SCP’’) for cooling mode and (2) seasonal heating performance (‘‘SHP’’) for heating mode and provide test procedure requirements for making representations of dehumidification energy use via a new efficiency metric, dehumidification efficiency (‘‘DE’’). The current DOE test procedures for PTACs and PTHPs would be relocated from § 431.96(g) to appendix H without change, and the Commenter type Efficiency Organizations. Manufacturer. new test procedures would be established at appendix H1. Appendix H1 would provide the test procedure for representations based on SCP, SHP and DE and would be mandatory at such time as compliance is required with amended energy conservation standards based on SCP and SHP, should DOE adopt standards using such metrics. In conjunction, DOE is proposing to amend Table 1 of 10 CFR 431.96 to identify the newly added appendices H and H1 as the applicable test procedures for PTAC/HPs. DOE’s proposed actions are summarized in Table II.1 compared to the current test procedure as well as the reason for the proposed change. TABLE II.1—SUMMARY OF CHANGES IN PROPOSED TEST PROCEDURE RELATIVE TO CURRENT TEST PROCEDURE Current DOE test procedure Proposed test procedure Located at 10 CFR 431.96(g) ........................................... Current test procedure unchanged but relocated to appendix H. The proposed new test procedure would be located in appendix H1. Updates incorporation by reference to AHRI 310/380– 2017 and maintains other existing references in appendix H.. In appendix H1 incorporates by reference AHRI 310/ 380–2017, ANSI/ASHRAE 16–2016 and ANSI/ ASHRAE 37–2009. Maintains existing metrics in appendix H. In appendix H1, includes provisions for determining seasonal efficiency metrics, SCP and SHP. Maintains existing approach in appendix H. In appendix H1, defines make-up PTAC/HPs and includes provisions to measure dehumidification energy use. Incorporates by reference AHRI 310/380–2014, ANSI/ ASHRAE 16–1983, ANSI/ASHRAE 58–1986, ANSI/ ASHRAE 37–2009. Includes provisions for determining full-load efficiency metrics, EER and COP. lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 Does not define make-up PTAC/HPs nor includes provisions to measure dehumidification energy use of these units. DOE has tentatively determined that the proposed amendments described in section III of this NOPR regarding the establishment of appendix H would not alter the measured efficiency of PTAC/ HPs or require retesting solely as a result of DOE’s adoption of the proposed amendments to the test procedure, if made final. DOE has tentatively determined, however, that the proposed test procedure amendments in appendix H1 would, if adopted, alter the measured efficiency of PTAC/HPs. DOE has tentatively determined that these amendments will provide efficiency measurements more representative of the energy efficiency of PTACs and PTHPs and are not unduly burdensome to conduct. Further, use of the proposed appendix H1 would not be required until the compliance date of VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 amended standards denominated in terms of SCP and SHP. Discussion of DOE’s proposed actions are addressed in further detail in section III of this NOPR. III. Discussion A. Scope of Applicability This rulemaking applies to PTACs and PTHPs. DOE defines PTAC as a wall sleeve and a separate un-encased combination of heating and cooling assemblies intended for mounting through the wall. 10 CFR 431.92. It includes a prime source of refrigeration, separable outdoor louvers, forced ventilation, and heating availability by builder’s choice of hot water, steam, or electricity. Id. DOE defines PTHP as a PTAC that utilizes reverse cycle refrigeration as its prime heat source PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 Attribution Improves readability. Updates to the applicable industry test procedures. More representative test procedure. More representative test procedure. and has a supplemental heat source available, including hot water, steam, or electric resistant heat. Id. B. Proposed Organization of the PTAC/ HP Test Procedure The current DOE test procedures for PTACs and PTHPs appear at 10 CFR 431.96(g). The current test procedure for cooling mode incorporates by reference AHRI 310/380–2014, with the following sections applicable to the DOE test procedure: sections 3, 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, and 4.4; ANSI/ASHRAE 16–1983 and ANSI/ ASHRAE 37–2009. 10 CFR 431.96(g)(1). The current test procedure for heating mode testing incorporates by reference AHRI 310/380–2014, with the following sections applicable to the DOE test procedure: sections 3, 4.1, 4.2 (except sections 4.2.1.2(b)), 4.3, and 4.4; and E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 30840 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 58–1986. 10 CFR 431.96(g)(2). The current test procedures also include additional provisions in paragraphs (c) and (e) of 10 CFR 431.96. Paragraph (c) of 10 CFR 431.96 specifies provisions for an optional compressor break-in period, and paragraph (e) of 10 CFR 431.96 details what information sources can be used for unit set-up and provides specific set-up instructions for refrigerant parameters (e.g., superheat) and air flow rate.4 DOE is proposing to relocate and centralize the current test procedure for PTACs and PTHPs from 10 CFR 431.96(g) to a new appendix H. As proposed, appendix H would not amend the current test procedure. DOE’s current test procedure incorporates by reference AHRI 310/380–2014, but the most recent version of ASHRAE Standard 90.1, ASHRAE Standard 90.1– 2019, recognizes AHRI 310/380–2017 as the test procedure for PTACs and PTHPs. AHRI 310/380–2017 differs from AHRI 310/380–2014 only in that it includes the additional test provisions that DOE has already prescribed at 10 CFR 431.96(c), (e) and (g). Therefore, the current DOE test procedures for PTAC/ HPs are already consistent with AHRI 310/380–2017. However, to improve readability, DOE is proposing to update the incorporate by reference from AHRI 310/380–2014 to AHRI 310/380–2017 and to remove the redundant test provision references to 10 CFR 431.96(c), (e) and (g). The test procedure as proposed for appendix H would be updated to reference AHRI 310/380–2017 and provide instructions for determining EER and COP. Consistent with the existing test procedure, DOE is proposing to continue to reference ANSI/ASHRAE 16–1983, ANSI/ ASHRAE 58–1986 and ANSI/ASHRAE 37–2009 in the proposed appendix H. As proposed, DOE would require that PTACs and PTHPs be tested according to appendix H until the compliance date of any future amended energy conservation standards for PTACs and PTHPs. DOE also is proposing in parallel an amended test procedure for PTACs and PTHPs in a new appendix H1 to subpart F of 10 CFR part 431. Appendix H1 would include test instructions for determining the new seasonal cooling and heating metrics, SCP and SHP, 4 The amendatory instructions in the June 2015 TP final rule for PTACs and PTHPs includes the reference to AHRI Standard 310/380–2014 in paragraphs (c) and (e), indicating that the requirements do apply to this equipment, even though the current CFR does not include this reference. 80 FR 37136, 37149 (June 30, 2015). VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 respectively, and provide test instructions for making representations of dehumidification energy use in terms of the dehumidification metric, DE. As proposed, DOE would not require that PTACs or PTHPs be tested according to the test procedure in proposed appendix H1 until the compliance date of any future amended energy conservation standards for PTACs and PTHPs. C. Updates to Industry Standards 1. AHRI 310/380–2017 As noted previously, DOE’s current test procedure for PTACs and PTHPs is codified at 10 CFR 431.96 and incorporates by reference AHRI 310/ 380–2014, with additional test provisions at 10 CFR 431.96(c), (e) and (g). The most recent version of ASHRAE Standard 90.1, ASHRAE Standard 90.1– 2019, recognizes AHRI 310/380–2017 as the test procedure for PTACs and PTHPs. In response to the May 2021 RFI, AHRI expressed their view that ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 and AHRI Standard 310/380–2017 are reasonably designed to measure energy use during a representative use cycle and that the design of PTACs and PTHPs and their usage patterns have not changed significantly since the last DOE rulemaking. (AHRI, No. 14 at p. 2) AHRI commented that AHRI 310/380–2017 was incorporated by reference into the 2019 edition of ASHRAE 90.1, and that DOE must now act to incorporate AHRI Standard 310/380–2017 by reference without any modifications. Id. AHRI noted that the Secretary has discretion to consider modifications to the test procedure cited in ASHRAE, but similar to energy conservation standards, for ‘‘ASHRAE products’’ any deviation from the industry test procedure must be, ‘‘supported by clear and convincing evidence’’ that the industry procedure was (a) not reasonably designed to produce test results which reflect energy efficiency; or (b) unduly burdensome to conduct. Id. AHRI asserted that AHRI 310/380–2017 met neither of these criteria since no manufacturer has submitted a waiver to DOE for use of a modified version of the current test procedure, which indicates that the results of the existing test procedure remain representative of actual energy use or efficiency; and all products defined as PTACs and PTHPs are able to be tested in accordance with AHRI 310/380. Id. DOE notes that the only difference between AHRI 310/380–2014 and AHRI 310/380–2017 is that AHRI 310/380– 2017 includes the same additional test provisions that DOE has already PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 prescribed at 10 CFR 431.96(c), (e) and (g). Therefore, the current DOE test procedure, which incorporates by reference AHRI 310/380–2014 and includes these additional provisions, is consistent with AHRI 310/380–2017. However, as discussed in section III.B of this proposed rule, to improve readability, DOE is proposing to update the existing incorporation by reference provisions in 10 CFR 431.95 to reference AHRI 310/380–2017 and to remove the applicability of the redundant test provisions at 10 CFR 431.96(c), (e) and (g). Appendix H would reference AHRI 310/380–2017 and provide instructions for determining EER and COP that are consistent with the existing DOE test procedure. As mentioned previously, DOE is undertaking this rulemaking to satisfy the seven-year review requirement for test procedures in 42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(1)(A). Under this process, if DOE determines that an amended test procedure would more fully or accurately comply with the requirements in 42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2) and (3), DOE shall prescribe an amended test procedure. Further, as PTACs are subject to the provisions in EPCA for ASHRAE equipment, DOE’s determination must be supported by clear and convincing evidence. Based on an evaluation of the current test methodology and products on the market, DOE has tentatively determined that an amended test procedure may produce test results that more fully or accurately reflect energy efficiency and energy use of PTAC/HPs during a representative average use cycle and would not be unduly burdensome to conduct. In particular, DOE notes that AHRI 310/380–2017 does not include test provisions to measure the potential benefit of designs that can operate at part load (i.e., variable speed products). As discussed in more detail in section III.E of this notice, DOE is aware of several variable-speed PTAC/HP models on the market that can provide efficiency benefits at part-load conditions which are not captured by the test conditions in AHRI 310/380– 2017. AHRI 310/380–2017 also does not provide a measure of seasonal cooling and heating efficiency, but instead relies on the single-point ratings of EER and COP—at 95 °F outdoor temperature for EER and at 47 °F outdoor temperature for COP. As PTACs and PTHPs in the field operate year round in cooling or heating mode, seasonal performance, which considers more than one outdoor temperature and the potential for partload operation when the building load is low at moderate outdoor temperatures, would be more E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules representative of average use as compared to a single-point rating. However, AHRI 310/380–2017 does not include test conditions or provisions to capture either of these factors, which would affect seasonal cooling or heating efficiency. Finally, AHRI 310/380–2017 does not address PTAC/HPs that provide ‘‘make-up air,’’ i.e., outside air brought in to provide ventilation, or provide test instructions to determine the dehumidification energy use associated with these units. While DOE is proposing to incorporate by reference certain sections of AHRI 310/380–2017 into appendix H1 (sections 3, 4 and 5), DOE has additionally tentatively determined that there is clear and convincing evidence to propose deviations from AHRI 310/ 380–2017 and to establish amended test procedures at appendix H1. lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 2. ANSI/ASHRAE 16–2016 As mentioned, the current test procedure for cooling mode incorporates by reference ANSI/ ASHRAE 16–1983 and the current test procedure for heating mode incorporates ANSI/ASHRAE 58–1986. On October 31, 2016, ASHRAE published ANSI/ASHRAE 16–2016, ‘‘Method of Testing for Rating Room Air Conditioners, Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners, and Packaged Terminal Heat Pumps for Cooling and Heating Capacity’’ (‘ANSI/ASHRAE 16–2016’’). ANSI/ASHRAE 16–2016 is substantively the same as ANSI/ ASHRAE Standard 16–1983 but also incorporates the method of test for obtaining heating capacity for rating room air-conditioners and PTAC/HP heating capacity as prescribed in ANSI/ ASHRAE Standard 58–1986. For appendix H, DOE is proposing to maintain the reference to ANSI/ ASHRAE 16–1983 and ANSI/ASHRAE 58–1986. For appendix H1, DOE is proposing to incorporate by reference the updated ANSI/ASHRAE 16–2016 for both the cooling and heating test procedures. D. Definitions DOE currently defines PTAC as a wall sleeve and a separate un-encased combination of heating and cooling assemblies intended for mounting through the wall. 10 CFR 431.92. It includes a prime source of refrigeration, separable outdoor louvers, forced ventilation, and heating availability by builder’s choice of hot water, steam, or electricity. Id. DOE defines PTHP as a PTAC that utilizes reverse cycle refrigeration as its prime heat source and has a supplemental heat source available, VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 including hot water, steam, or electric resistant heat. Id. In the May 2021 RFI, DOE requested comment on the definitions of PTACs and PTHPs and whether any of the terms should be amended, and if so, how. 86 FR 28005, 28007. In particular, DOE requested comment on whether the terms are sufficient to identify which equipment is subject to the test procedure and whether any test procedure amendments are required to ensure that all such equipment can be appropriately tested in accordance with the test procedure. Id. In response, AHRI stated that they have no recommended changes to the definitions of PTACs and PTHPs. (AHRI, No. 14 at p. 4) NEEA recommended that DOE amend the definition of PTACs and PTHPs to include ‘dual-ducted’ units, which the commenter explained are units that use two through-the-wall ducts in place of an outdoor mounted section. NEAA further noted that these products are marketed as replacements for PTAC/HPs and are similarly permanently installed through-the-wall air conditioners or heat pumps. NEEA provided product literature for two such units. (NEAA, No. 17 at p. 1–2) DOE reviewed the product literature provided by NEEA and tentatively concludes that these products do not meet the PTAC and PTHP definitions because they do not have a separate unencased assembly of heating/cooling, do not have a wall sleeve and have no separable outdoor louvers. See 10 CFR 431.92. While the two unit ducts go ‘through the wall’, the unit itself is mounted on the inside of the conditioned space. Additionally, DOE considers that broadening the PTAC and PTHP definitions to include these products is not appropriate since the product literature for these two units indicates that these are covered under other air conditioning product categories. Therefore, DOE is not proposing to include the units identified by NEEA within the definitions of PTAC and PTHP. E. Operation at Part Load Conditions and Integrated Metrics As stated, EPCA requires that the test procedures for PTACs and PTHPs be the generally accepted industry testing procedures developed or recognized by AHRI or ASHRAE, as referenced in ASHRAE Standard 90.1. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(4)(A)) EPCA also requires that test procedures prescribed by DOE be reasonably designed to produce test results which reflect energy efficiency during a representative average use cycle, and must not be unduly PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 30841 burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2)) DOE’s current test procedures for PTACs and PTHPs do not have provisions to measure the potential benefit of designs that can operate at part load, nor does the test address unit cooling performance at part-load outdoor temperature conditions that represent many of the hours of the cooling season. Additionally, the current DOE test procedures do not have provisions to measure performance at low-ambient outdoor temperature conditions for the heating season. For PTACs and PTHPs, ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 specifies minimum efficiency levels expressed in terms of the full-load metrics of EER and COP. ‘‘Full-load’’ refers to testing at a single test condition, under which the compressor operates continuously at 100 percent of its full capacity. Under DOE’s current test procedure, full load efficiency is measured at the standard rating conditions as prescribed in AHRI 310/ 380–2014. In contrast, for cooling, ‘‘partload’’ refers to testing at a reducedtemperature test condition in which the cooling load of the space would generally be less than the full cooling capacity of the compressor. Any temperatures below the standard rating condition could potentially be considered part-load cooling conditions. For heating, ‘‘part-load’’ refers to testing at a temperature test condition in which the heating load of the space is less than the full heating capacity of the compressor. Any temperatures which do not require the full heating capacity could potentially be considered partload heating conditions. 1. Market Size of PTACs and PTHPs With Part-Load Operation Capability DOE is aware of several variablespeed PTAC and PTHP models on the market that can provide an efficiency benefit at part-load conditions. In the May 2021 RFI, DOE requested information on the market availability and market size for PTACs and PTHPs that incorporate two-stage, multi-stage, or fully variable-speed compressors that enable more efficient part-load operation. 86 FR 28005, 28009–28010. AHRI commented that it surveyed its members to determine the relative market share of PTACs and PTHPs that incorporate two-stage, multi-stage, or fully variable-speed compressors and that their data, which constituted a representative sample of the PTAC and PTHP market, indicated that 0.7 percent of PTAC and PTHP shipments incorporate these enhanced compressors. (AHRI, No. 14 at p. 7) E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 30842 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 The CA IOUs commented there has been an increase in variable-speed compressor technology across a whole host of commercial and residential air conditioner products and PTACs and PTHPs are no exception to the growth of variable-speed compressor technology. (CA IOUs, No. 15 at p. 2) The CA IOUs noted that at least five manufacturers already sell variable speed products, and that number is likely to grow. Id. Additionally, they stated that the hotel industry has also published articles speaking to the benefits of new PTAC/HPs that incorporate variable-speed compressors. Id. The Joint Advocates asserted that PTACs and PTHPs are rarely required to operate at full load and an amended test procedure that captures part-load performance would thus be more representative and would also capture the potential efficiency gains associated with variable-speed compressors. (Joint Advocates, No. 16 at p. 1) The Joint Advocates encouraged DOE to adopt efficiency metrics that reflect annual energy consumption including part-load operation. Id. DOE notes that while the shipments data provided by AHRI suggests that only a small fraction of PTACs and PTHPs incorporate variable speed compressor technology currently, DOE’s review of its compliance certification management system (‘‘CCMS’’) 5 database and current product literature indicates that these products are already present in the market and may continue to increase in market share. As a result, inclusion of part-load performance in the test procedure may provide a more representative measure of unit performance over the cooling or heating season. The next section discusses potential part-load cooling and heating efficiency metrics for PTACs and PTHPs. 2. Potential Part-Load Efficiency Metrics For measurement of part-load performance for PTACs and PTHPs, the proposed DOE test procedure at appendix H1 would require a part-load or seasonal efficiency metric. Several categories of air conditioning and heating equipment are already rated under DOE test procedures using metrics that account for cooling partload or seasonal performance. For example, commercial unitary air conditioners (‘‘CUACs’’) are rated using the part-load metric integrated energy efficiency ratio (‘‘IEER’’) (see appendix 5 DOE’s Compliance Certification Management System Database is available at www.regulations.doe.gov/ccms. VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 A to subpart F of 10 CFR part 431); and central air conditioners (‘‘CACs’’) and heat pumps(‘‘CHPs’’) (‘‘collectively CAC/HPs’’) are rated using the seasonal energy efficiency ratio (‘‘SEER2’’) (see appendix M1 to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430 (‘‘appendix MI’’)). Room air conditioners (‘‘RACs’’) are rated using the combined energy efficiency ratio (‘‘CEER’’).6 While the CEER metric is not a part-load or seasonal metric, amendments to the DOE test procedure provide for the application of a performance adjustment factor to a variable-speed model’s CEER rating (i.e., ‘‘performance-adjusted CEER’’) that reflects seasonal efficiency benefits (see appendix F to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430).7 Similar to the EER cooling metric, the COP heating metric for PTHPs measures heating efficiency only at full load operation. For the reasons described previously with regard to cooling efficiency, using a heating efficiency metric that accounts for only full-load operation does not measure the partload operation in PTHPs that may be enabled by the incorporation of twostage, multi-stage, or variable-speed compressors. Heating Season Performance Factor (‘‘HSPF2’’) is a metric that serves as a counterpart to SEER2 and accounts for seasonal performance in the heating season for residential central heat pumps. It reflects seasonal performance by averaging test results from multiple load points, depending on system configuration (single-speed, twocapacity, or variable-speed), with varying outdoor conditions and staging levels to represent the product’s average efficiency throughout the heating season (see appendix M1). In the May 2021 TP RFI, DOE requested comment on how to best measure part-load cooling performance for PTACs and PTHPs, specifically the number of tests that are appropriate to represent the part-load capabilities of the unit; the outdoor ambient conditions that best represent real world performance; the averaging weights that should be applied to each condition; whether a cyclic test component should be incorporated and whether an optional test for multi-capacity rating should be incorporated. 86 FR 28005, 6 CEER is an energy efficiency metric for room air conditioners that integrates standby/inactive and off mode energy use with the active mode energy use. 10 CFR 430.23(f)(3); appendix F to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430 sections 2 and 5.2.2. 7 DOE published a final rule on March 29, 2021, amending the test procedure for room air conditioners to establish test provisions for measuring the energy use of variable-speed units during a representative average use cycle. 86 FR 16446. PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 28010. DOE also requested feedback on the appropriateness and potential applicability of the IEER, SEER 8 and performance-adjusted CEER as appropriate metrics for PTACs and PTHPs and whether a test procedure for PTACs and PTHPs that uses any of these would produce test results that reflect the energy efficiency of that equipment during a representative average use cycle. Id. DOE also requested information on the costs that would be associated with a test procedure that uses any of these metrics. Id. Additionally, DOE requested comment on whether any other seasonal efficiency metrics that incorporate partload performance would produce test results that reflect the energy efficiency of PTACs and PTHPs during a representative average use cycle, and if so, which outdoor temperature rating conditions would be appropriate for testing PTACs and PTHPs. Id. For the heating metric, DOE requested comment on how to best measure partload and seasonal heating performance for PTHPs, specifically the number of tests that are appropriate to represent the part-load capabilities of the unit; the outdoor ambient conditions that best represent real world performance; the averaging weights that should be applied to each condition; whether a cyclic test component should be incorporated; whether an optional test for multi-capacity rating should be incorporated; and whether a test to evaluate the PTHP in defrost cycles is required 86 FR 28005, 28011. DOE also requested information on whether HSPF 9 would be an appropriate metric for PTHPs, or if any other seasonal heating efficiency metrics that would produce test results that reflect the energy efficiency of PTHPs during a representative average use cycle would be appropriate, and if so, which outdoor temperature rating conditions would be appropriate for testing PTHPs. Id. DOE also requested comment on the costs that would be associated with the use of any such seasonal heating efficiency metric to rate PTHP performance. Id. The Joint Advocates encouraged DOE to adopt cooling and heating efficiency metrics that attempt to reflect the annual energy consumption of PTACs 8 In the May 2021 RFI, DOE referred to SEER instead of SEER2. SEER2 has the same definition as SEER but reflects the amendments made to the test procedure in appendix M1, which change the measured efficiency values compared to appendix M to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430. 9 In the May 2021 RFI, DOE referred to HSPF instead of HSPF2. HSPF2 has the same definition as HSPF but reflects the amendments made to the test procedure in appendix M1, which change the measured efficiency values compared to appendix M. E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules and PTHPs in typical applications and to adopt an amended test procedure that tests all PTACs and PTHPs the same way, regardless of whether a unit is single-speed, two-stage, multi-stage or variable speed as this will provide comparable efficiency ratings. (Joint Advocates, No. 16 at p. 1) NEEA suggested that DOE adopt partload metrics aligned with the AHRI Standard 210/240 as referenced in appendix M1. (NEEA, No. 17 at p. 2) NEAA stated that aligning with appendix M1 is the best course of action in the current rulemaking as PTACs and PTHPs are most likely to be substitutes for smaller residential products of similar capacities. Id. NEEA further stated that multiple manufacturers are already making representations of SEER and HSPF for PTAC/HPs, showing the market demand for a residential partload metric. Id. NEEA noted that a partload metric would allow for the benefits of inverter driven, variable speed PTACs and PTHPs to be more accurately represented and that there were several variable speed products on the market from at least six manufacturers. (NEEA, No. 17 at p. 3) NEEA asserted that the fact that these variable speed products have emerged in the absence of a partload test procedure shows strong market demand for these products and shifting to a part-load metric would allow for these products to fairly compete with single speed products and would likely lead to the introduction of more variable speed products. Id. The CA IOUs also recommended that DOE utilize appendix M1 to measure the cooling and heating efficiencies of PTACs and PTHPs. The CA IOUs asserted that consumers often compare PTAC/HPs with CAC/HPs when choosing a method to cool or heat and cool a single space such as multifamily housing or lodging facilities because there are models with similar capacities in both product types and that these products are typically selected in the construction design process to provide conditioning year-round. (CA IOUs, No. 15 at p. 2) The CA IOUs stated that manufacturers recognize the similarity of these products and provide ‘‘SEER equivalent’’ performance information for their PTAC and PTHPs. Id. The CA IOUs highlighted that a survey of more than 160 buildings in Manhattan found that in new buildings more PTAC and PTHPs were installed compared to RACs, and that PTAC and PTHPs were more likely to be designed into the building rather than part of a retrofit to address a need for cooling—which is similar to the selection and installation of CAC/HPs and indicates that PTAC/ HPs and RACs are less likely to be VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 substituted for each other. Id. The CA IOUs stated that they therefore believe it is most important to be able to compare PTAC/HPs with CAC/HPs. Id. Additionally, the CA IOUs commented that the test procedures for CUACs and RACs only measure cooling capacity and efficiency, but PTHPs need a test procedure for both cooling and heating, noting that appendix M1 provides both the SEER2 metric for cooling and HSPF2 for heating, as well as part-load conditions. Id. LG also recommended the DOE adopt AHRI Standard 210/240 as referenced in appendix M1, but recommended using this test procedure only for part-load cooling performance and not for heating performance, because PTACs and PTHPs contain electric heat. (LG, No. 18 at p. 1) LG stated that while DOE categorized PTACs and PTHPs as commercial products, these products are usually installed in hotel rooms and people consider the hotel room as a vacation home—therefore their usage was close to the residential air conditioner. Id. NEAA recommended that DOE adopt a load-based test procedure for all heat pumps and air conditioners including PTHPs and PTACs, stating that while a part-load test procedure aligned with appendix M1 will be a step towards better accounting for the performance of PTHPs and PTACs, it will not account for the effectiveness of the unit’s controls or fully reflect how these units are likely to perform in the real world. (NEEA, No.17 at p.4). The Joint Advocates also encouraged DOE to investigate a load-based test procedure, which they stated would provide a realistic representation of how all units perform in the field, including capturing the importance of control strategies. (Joint Advocates, No. 16 at p. 2). In response to NEEA, the CA IOUs and LG’s suggestion regarding the use of appendix M1 for PTACs and PTHPs, DOE’s notes that there are differences between PTAC/HPs and CAC/HPs that suggest that the direct use of appendix M1 as the test procedure for PTAC/HPs is inappropriate. The primary application for CAC/HPs is residential single-family homes which may have multiple zones, whereas the primary application for PTAC/HPs is lodging, typically serving single zones (i.e., each individual hotel room). This difference in the use cases results in substantially different cooling and heating building load lines for these two air-conditioning and heating categories. As such, the test conditions and weighting factors in appendix M1 are not suitable to capture PTAC and PTHP operation. DOE agrees that SEER2 and HSPF2 are PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 30843 comprehensive metrics that provide efficiency ratings representative of an entire season, and the publication of ‘SEER-equivalent’ and ‘HSPFequivalent’ ratings for PTAC/HPs suggest a desire for similar seasonal ratings for PTAC/HPs. However, DOE has provisionally determined that seasonal cooling and heating metrics for PTACs and PTHPs, even if similar to the SEER2 and HSPF2 metrics, respectively, should reflect the different average use operation for PTAC/HP applications. This is further discussed in sections III.F and III.G of this document. In response to NEEA and the Joint Advocates’ suggestions that DOE investigate a load-based test procedure, DOE notes that it is unaware of a comprehensive evaluation of load-based testing of PTACs or similar equipment that satisfactorily demonstrates repeatability and reproducibility. DOE is aware of ongoing work addressing questions about whether the current DOE and industry test procedures for several air conditioning and heat pump equipment are fully representative of field operation and would be better served by a load-based test procedure.10 These efforts have been largely focused on residential CAC/HPs, where the market presence of variable-speed units has considerably more history and greater market share, and therefore a load-based test procedure may hold potential value. In comparison, the increased test burden resulting from a load-based test procedure would not be appropriate for PTAC/HPs, given the modest share of variable-speed PTAC/ HPs in the market. As such, on the basis of insufficient test procedure development leading to repeatability and reproducibility concerns, and the increased test burden associated with a load-based test procedure, DOE has provisionally determined that introducing a load-based test procedure for PTAC/HPs would not be appropriate at this time. However, DOE will continue to investigate load-based 10 A dynamic load-based test method differs from the steady-state test method currently used in DOE test procedures for air conditioning and heat pump equipment. In a steady-state test method, the indoor room is maintained at a constant temperature throughout the test. In this type of test, any variable-speed or variable-position components of air conditioners and heat pumps are set in a fixed position, which is typically specified by the manufacturer. In contrast, a dynamic load-based test has the conditioning load applied to the indoor room using a load profile that approximates how the load varies for units installed in the field. In this type of test, an air conditioning system or heat pump is allowed to automatically determine and vary its control settings in response to the imposed conditioning loads, rather than relying on manufacturer-specified settings. E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 30844 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules testing and monitor future efforts related to this topic. AHRI noted that it was unreasonable for DOE to expect stakeholders to develop a procedure in 30 days through a response to the RFI and were unable to any provide information on how to measure part-load performance of PTACs and PTHPs. (AHRI, No. 14 at p. 7) AHRI urged DOE to join the ASHRAE Standard 16 committee and engage in the consensus-standards development process for the method of test for PTACs and PTHPs. Id. AHRI noted that all cooling metrics suggested in the May 2021 RFI would carry with them a significant increase in the test burden when compared to the full load EER metric of AHRI Standard 310/380. (AHRI, No. 14 at p. 8) AHRI attached a table comparing the required tests for each metric. Id. AHRI also stated that the residential metrics, SEER for CAC/ HPs and performance-adjusted CEER for RACs, present the potential to cause confusion if applied to commercial products and that perhaps the best option would be to develop an entirely new part-load metric suited to PTAC/ HPs, through a consensus standards process. Id. AHRI agreed that variable speed products may benefit from a part load metric, but stated that the additional test burden required by a part load metric for single stage products is unwarranted. Id. AHRI asserted that the PTAC and PTHP market is overwhelmingly single stage, where a full load rating is most appropriate. Id. AHRI noted that full load metrics have not been eliminated in ASHRAE Standard 90.1 as new part load metrics, such as IEER, have been introduced and federally regulated. Instead, through building standards, states have regulated both full and part-load metrics for a single product for those in which both metrics have been published in ASHRAE Standard 90.1. Id. AHRI also stated that a part-load metric for any piece of equipment should be specific to the unit’s average use operation for the most common applications and that no cooling metric DOE suggested in May 2021 RFI is primarily for use in hotels— the application where the majority of PTACs and PTHPs are used. AHRI commented that some metrics, including SEER and performanceadjusted CEER, are for residential applications and that PTACs and PTHPs are commercial products and have vastly different operating hours and use patterns than residential equipment. (AHRI, No. 14 at p. 9). For the heating metric, AHRI did not provide a response on the appropriateness of HSPF or any other seasonal metric. (AHRI, No. 14 at VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 p. 10) AHRI stated that it was not possible to quantify the cost implications for a new test procedure prior to the test procedure being developed. Id. In response to AHRI’s statement that the PTAC and PTHP market is overwhelmingly single stage where a full-load rating is most appropriate and that the additional test burden required by a part load metric for single stage products is unwarranted, DOE notes that EPCA requires DOE to amend a test procedure if DOE determines that the amended test procedure would more fully or accurately reflect energy use during a representative average use cycle and not be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(1)(A)) Comments received on the May 2021 RFI suggest that the current full-load cooling and heating metrics (EER and COP) may not effectively capture the energy efficiency during a representative average use cycle, regardless of whether a PTAC/HP is single-stage, multi-stage or variable capacity, because PTAC/HPs often operate at part-load and at several different temperature conditions during the cooling or heating season. Therefore, a full-load standard rating condition may not fully capture the performance of a PTAC/HP. However, DOE also recognizes that EPCA requires that test procedures must not be unduly burdensome to conduct and DOE understands that a new test procedure incorporating multiple test conditions will introduce more test burden when compared to the full load single condition EER or COP metric of AHRI Standard 310/380. As described in section III.K of this NOPR, DOE has tentatively determined that the increase in test procedure costs will not be unduly burdensome to manufacturers, especially given the flexibility to utilize alternate efficiency determination methods (‘‘AEDMs’’) to rate models. DOE agrees with AHRI that the part-load metric for any piece of equipment should be specific to the unit’s average use operation for the most common applications. Accordingly, DOE initially determines that the best option would be to develop an entirely new part-load metric for PTACs and PTHPs, which would be specific to the use cases for PTAC/HPs and would include consideration of different load levels and outdoor temperature conditions. In summary, DOE is proposing cooling and heating metrics which incorporate part-load seasonal performance and are appropriate based on the use case for PTACs and PTHPs. Sections III.F and III.G of this NOPR PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 detail DOE’s proposed cooling and heating metrics, respectively. 3. Low-Ambient Heating Heat pumps generally perform less efficiently at low ambient outdoor temperatures than they do at moderate ambient outdoor temperatures. DOE is aware of residential CAC/HP models that are optimized for operation in cold climates and can operate at temperatures as low as ¥20 degrees Fahrenheit (‘‘°F’’). DOE understands that there has been interest in coldclimate PTHPs. For example, the New York State Clean Heat Program (‘‘NYS Clean Heat’’) requires a manufacturerreported COP greater than 1.75 at 5 °F 11 and the Northeast Energy Efficiency Partnership (‘‘NEEP’’) recently included a PTAC/HP cold climate specification requiring a COP of 1.5 at 5 °F.12 DOE is aware of at least one PTHP model that is optimized for cold climates and can operate at temperatures as low as ¥5 °F. A conventional PTHP model switches its heat source from reverse-cycle vapor compression heating to electric resistance heating, which is less efficient than vapor compression heating, at an outdoor ambient temperature of around 32 °F. A PTHP design that is optimized for operation in cold climates could provide energy savings compared to conventional PTHP models by enabling the use of the more efficient vapor compression heating, rather than electric resistance heating, at lower ambient temperatures. However, DOE’s current COP test metric for heating efficiency requires testing only at the standard rating condition of 47 °F dry bulb for the outdoor side. Thus, DOE’s COP metric does not account for the efficiency improvement that could result from using reverse-cycle heating at low ambient temperatures. In the May 2021 RFI, DOE requested information on several issues related to low-ambient heating, specifically information on the comparison of the seasonal heating load and seasonal cooling load for a typical PTAC/PTHP installation; information on the range of low-temperature cutout for compressor operation of PTHPs, including the percentage of PTHPs that continue to operate the compressor at outdoor temperatures below 32 °F, below 20 °F, and below 10 °F; information on the design changes necessary for a typical PTHP (that has a 32 °F low-temperature cutout) to be converted for satisfactory field performance operation at a 17 °F 11 See: https://ma-eeac.org/wp-content/uploads/ NYS-Clean-Heat-Manual-NEGPA.pdf. 12 See: https://neep.org/sites/default/files/mediafiles/ccpthp_spvhp_specification_v1.pdf. E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules outdoor test condition and whether the design optimization of PTHPs for coldclimate operation impacts the COP as measured under the DOE test procedure; and feedback on any other test methods that would produce test results that reflect the energy efficiency of these units during a representative average use cycle, as well as information on the test burden associated with such test methods. 86 FR 28005, 28011. AHRI commented that it is aware of units operating down to 25 °F, and other manufacturers have published the lowtemperature cutout for compressor operation of PTHPs at 42 °F, 38 °F, and 32 °F. (AHRI, No. 14 at p. 11–12) Regarding the design changes necessary for a PTHP to be converted to operate at a 17 °F condition, AHRI stated that the PTHP standard wall sleeve size limits component sizing such as a heat exchanger and fan, but one possibility would to be to install variable speed compressors and to further optimize by installing electronic expansions valves (‘‘EEV’’) in place of capillary tubes. (AHRI, No. 14 at p. 12) They stated that additional changes would include the addition of an inverter board, enclosure for new board, wire harness, software, compressor, and possibly additional thermistors. Id. AHRI commented that these design changes have not been demonstrated as a valid methodology at this writing to their knowledge. Id. AHRI also stated that if the test procedure were to be amended to require testing at the 17 °F test condition it would negatively impact COP for single speed units as the capillary tubes can only be optimized for a single set point—however, variable speed units with electronic expansion valves would be able to be optimized for multiple outdoor conditions. Id. AHRI stated that heating testing at very low temperatures can become quite costly. Based on their analysis conducted to review the costs associated with Natural Resources Canada’s proposal to make the H42 (5 °F heating mode) test in appendix M1 for residential heat pumps mandatory as part of evaluating HSPF2, AHRI found that the cost to upgrade a laboratory to test to the new condition will require significant investment and imposes new testing costs to manufacturers. (AHRI, No. 14 at p. 12) AHRI stated that currently laboratories do not have the capacity to test equipment to the proposed test condition of 5 °F and estimated that the cost to upgrade one laboratory could reach $75,000 USD and needs to be repeated across each laboratory intending on testing to 5 °F heating mode test condition. Id. They further noted that the total costs to VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 upgrade labs necessary to test equipment to this new condition in a timely manner is between $7.5 to $13.1M USD. (AHRI, No. 14 at p. 10–11) The CA IOUs, Joint Advocates and NEEA encouraged DOE to capture performance at lower ambient temperatures. The CA IOUs noted that results from their market research aligned with DOE’s assessment that, while there are products that operate below freezing, it is a small subset of the market. (CA IOUs, No. 15 at p. 3). The CA IOUs highlighted three products that operate in vapor compression mode below freezing, two of which switch to an electric resistant heater at 25 °F while the other is able to operate in vapor compression mode down to ¥5 °F. Id. The CA IOUs reiterated their suggestion that PTHPs be tested per appendix M1 which requires single-speed and variable-speed products to be tested at 47 °F, 35 °F, and 17 °F to calculate HSPF2. Id. The CA IOUs recommended that units that cannot be tested at the lower temperatures use a default COP of 1.0, the efficiency of electric resistant heat, for the lower temperatures to calculate HSPF2. Id. They stated that requiring testing and reporting of performance at these three additional temperatures would also allow designers to know the temperature at which the PTHP will switch over to electric resistance heat, especially if the PTHP is also providing makeup air to the room. Id. NEEA recommended a part-load test aligned with appendix M1 at an outdoor test condition of 17 °F. (NEEA, No. 17 at p. 3) Additionally, NEEA suggested that DOE account for energy used in defrost and energy used in electric resistance boost functionality, which the commenter described as a feature which turns on the electric resistance at outdoor temperatures where the heat pump can provide adequate heating, thus resulting in unnecessary energy use. Id. The Joint Advocates also encouraged DOE to capture defrost performance, which they said would differentiate the performance of different defrost strategies. (Joint Advocates, No. 16 at p. 2). In response to AHRI’s comment that design changes to operate below a 17 °F condition have not been demonstrated as a valid methodology for PTHPs, as noted earlier in this section, DOE is aware of at least one commercialized PTHP that can operate at temperatures as low as ¥5 °F. Additionally, while the required design changes to operate at low ambient conditions may not yet be widely present in PTHPs, other categories of heat pumps (such as central HPs) have demonstrated that PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 30845 these design changes are possible. Regarding AHRI’s comment that heating testing at very low temperatures can become quite costly and that currently laboratories do not have the capacity to test equipment to the proposed test condition of 5 °F, DOE notes that several CAC/HP manufacturers already conduct testing at this temperature for the H42 test in appendix M1 and provide ratings in the CCMS. Additionally, DOE notes that commercial equipment, which includes PTACs and PTHPs, can benefit from AEDMs to rate their equipment and therefore do not need to physically test more than 2 units per basic model. However, DOE understands the significant increase in burden associated with mandating tests at low temperatures. Based on the comments received, DOE tentatively concludes that while there are PTAC/HPs that can operate below freezing (32 °F), they represent only a small subset of the market and most of these cut-off heat pump operation around 25 °F. If contemporary PTAC/HPs would be required to operate at conditions below freezing, for example at 17 °F, they would require significant design changes or complete re-design. Therefore, testing at low ambient heating conditions may not be appropriate as a requirement for all PTHPs. However, DOE also understands that for those PTHPs that are designed for cold climate operation (as noted, DOE is aware of at least one such PTHP), it may be beneficial to provide a means within the test procedure to make representations of operational performance at low-ambient conditions, similar to the approach currently used for low-temperature operation for central heat pumps. Section III.G details DOE’s heating test procedure incorporating optional low-ambient heating and an adjustment to account for defrost performance degradation. F. Proposed Cooling Metric and Test Procedure As noted, several categories of air conditioning and heating equipment are already rated under DOE test procedures using metrics that account for part-load or seasonal performance. As discussed in section III.E.2 of this document, several commenters suggested that DOE adopt appendix M1, and subsequently the SEER2 metric for PTAC/HPs. In the May 2021 RFI, DOE noted that PTACs and PTHPs may be considered as an alternative to CAC/HPs and products and equipment rated with SEER2 are generally used in residential or small commercial applications, often with smaller internal loads that require minimal or no cooling at low ambient E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 30846 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 outdoor air temperatures. 86 FR 28005, 28010. SEER2 reflects seasonal performance by averaging test results from up to five different load points, depending on system configuration (single-speed, two-capacity, or variablespeed), with varying outdoor conditions and staging levels to represent the product’s average efficiency throughout the cooling season (see appendix M1). The test procedure also includes optional cyclic testing to evaluate cycling losses. Based on comments received by stakeholders that manufacturers are interested in making ‘SEER-equivalent’ representations, DOE has initially determined that a cooling metric that incorporates seasonal performance similar to the SEER2 metric is appropriate for PTAC/HPs. However, DOE considers that the test conditions, cooling building load line, hours of cooling, methods of calculations, cycling losses and other aspects of the test procedure will differ for PTAC/HPs as compared to CAC/HPs and are better informed by use cases specific to PTAC/HPs. Additionally, test burden associated with CAC/HP testing per appendix M1 may be higher than appropriate for the relatively lower national energy use associated with PTAC/HPs as compared to CAC/HPs. DOE is therefore proposing to define a new seasonal cooling metric for PTAC/ HPs, seasonal cooling performance (‘‘SCP’’), which presents a better match of PTAC/HP performance rather than CAC/HP and reduces test burden as compared to CAC/HP testing. The proposed definition of this new metric, which would be included in 10 CFR 431.92, reads as follows: Seasonal cooling performance (SCP) means the total heat removed from the conditioned space during the cooling season, expressed in Btu’s, divided by the total electrical energy consumed by the package terminal air conditioner or heat pump during the same season, expressed in watt-hours. SCP is determined in accordance with appendix H1 to this subpart. The following sections detail the key differences for the SCP metric as compared to the SEER2 metric. 1. Test Conditions As discussed previously, DOE recognizes that throughout the cooling season, PTACs and PTHPs operate under various outdoor temperature conditions. DOE also understands that these varying outdoor conditions present a range of reduced cooling loads in the conditioned space. To effectively capture performance at these varying outdoor conditions and associated loads, DOE proposes a test procedure VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 with three test conditions at dry-bulb outdoor temperatures of 95 °F, 82 °F and 75 °F. These are denoted as the ‘‘A’’, ‘‘B’’ and ‘‘C’’ conditions, respectively. DOE notes that these additional temperatures were informed by weather analysis conducted for 16 cities representing ASHRAE climate zones 1 through 7. For each condition, DOE established a temperature range and then evaluated a representative temperature within that range. This representative temperature was evaluated as a weighted average by multiplying the mean temperature in the respective temperature range for each city, by the prevalence of the commercial buildings energy consumption survey (‘‘CBECS’’) small hotel prototype in that city, which is the primary application for PTAC/HPs. Issue 1: DOE requests comment on its proposed A (95 °F), B (82 °F) and C (75 °F) test conditions to represent reduced cooling conditions experienced by PTACs and PTHPs in the field. These conditions are paired with three compressor speeds to denote the different cooling capacities at which the unit will run to modulate to the required cooling load: full, intermediate, and low. For example, a Blow test would mean a test conducted at the ‘‘B’ condition (82 °F) and set to a low compressor speed. For tests run at the full compressor speed, the test will require the room thermostat to be set at a lower temperature than the indoor condition i.e., 75 °F. DOE understands that for setting the low and intermediate compressor speeds, special control override instructions will be required from manufacturers. Therefore, because maintaining fixed compressor speeds is critical to the repeatability of the PTAC/ HP cooling test procedure, DOE may, in a separate rulemaking addressing certification, require manufacturers to provide in each certification report for a two-speed or variable-speed system basic model, all necessary instructions to maintain the low and intermediate compressor speeds required for each test condition when testing that basic model. This approach is similar to the DOE requirements for RACs and CAC/ HPs when testing with reduced compressor speeds. However, DOE is not addressing certification in this rulemaking and may address this issue in a separate future rulemaking. Issue 2: DOE requests comment on whether setting the unit thermostat down to 75 °F (i.e., a 5 °F differential to the indoor condition of 80 °F) is sufficient to ensure that the compressor runs at full speed. DOE requests comment on whether manufacturers will be able to provide override PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 instructions to ensure operation at the low and intermediate compressor speeds. DOE’s review of several PTAC/HP models suggests that PTAC/HPs offer at least two user-selectable indoor fan speeds: high and low, and two userselectable modes: cycling (or auto) fan and constant fan modes. In the cycling fan mode, the indoor fan cycles with the compressor while in the constant fan mode, the indoor fan runs continuously regardless of the compressor operation. DOE is proposing to require that all tests be done with the fan control selections that set the fan speed to high and the indoor fan to cycle with the compressor. However, DOE understands that fan staging may also vary based on compressor staging for two-stage and variable speed PTAC/HPs, and may need to be fixed. Issue 3: DOE requests comment on whether fan speed may vary with staging and whether it may have to be ‘‘fixed’’ at the right speed. 2. Cooling Tests DOE understands that the PTAC/HP market has a mixed presence of singlespeed, two-speed, or variable-speed systems, with most units employing a single-speed compressor. Therefore, DOE is proposing that each of these systems be tested with a different subset of conditions to effectively measure performance. DOE is using appendix M1 as the basis for the required cooling tests for each system type, but with necessary modifications to reduce test burden as appropriate. For example, as discussed in section III.F.3 of this document, DOE is not proposing cyclic tests but instead requiring the use of a default degradation coefficient. To prevent confusion between twospeed and variable-speed systems, DOE is proposing to define variable speed PTAC/HP as follows: Variable speed PTAC/HP means a packaged terminal air-conditioner or heat pump with a compressor that uses a variable-speed drive to vary the compressor speed to achieve variable capacities or three or more capacities for any operating condition for which the compressor would be running. For units having a single-speed compressor, and consequently one compressor speed, DOE is proposing to require two full-speed tests conducted at the A and C conditions, with the compressor running at its nominal, full speed. Table III.1 sets out the test condition for systems employing singlespeed compressors. DOE considers that the A and C conditions would be sufficient to develop a performance curve for the purpose of interpolation. E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 30847 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules In order to reduce test burden, DOE is not proposing to require testing at the B condition. TABLE III.1—COOLING MODE TEST CONDITIONS FOR UNITS HAVING A SINGLE-SPEED COMPRESSOR Air entering indoor unit temperature (°F) Test description Dry bulb Afull Test—required ........................................................... Cfull Test—required ........................................................... For units having a two-speed compressor or a variable-speed compressor that operate at two speed levels at any given outdoor temperature, DOE is proposing to require two fullspeed tests conducted at the A and B Air entering outdoor unit temperature (°F) Wet bulb 80 80 Dry bulb 67 67 conditions, and two low-speed tests conducted at the B and C conditions. These pairings of test conditions and speeds are intended to be representative of actual field operation. Table III.2 sets out the test condition for systems Compressor speed Wet bulb 95 75 75 60 Full. Full. employing two-speed compressors or a variable-speed compressor that operate at two speed levels at any given outdoor temperature. TABLE III.2—COOLING MODE TEST CONDITIONS FOR UNITS HAVING A TWO-SPEED COMPRESSOR * Air entering indoor unit temperature ( °F) Test description Dry bulb Afull Test—required ........................................................... Bfull Test—required ........................................................... Blow Test—required ........................................................... Clow Test—required .......................................................... Air entering outdoor unit temperature ( °F) Wet bulb 80 80 80 80 Dry bulb 67 67 67 67 Compressor speed Wet bulb 95 82 82 75 75 65 65 60 Full. Full. Low. Low. * This includes units with compressors that achieve no more than two capacity levels using variable speed technology for any one of the test conditions used for the tests. For units having variable-speed compressors with three or more speed levels at any given outdoor temperature, the same tests as set for the two-speed systems will apply—but with an additional optional intermediate speed test at the B condition i.e., the Bint test. This optional intermediate test is included to provide an opportunity for a variable-speed unit to test improved performance as compared to the performance interpolated between the low speed and the high speed at the B condition. Table III.3 sets out the test condition for systems employing variable-speed compressors with three or more speed levels at any given outdoor temperature. TABLE III.3—COOLING MODE TEST CONDITIONS FOR UNITS HAVING A VARIABLE-SPEED COMPRESSOR WITH THREE OR MORE SPEED LEVELS AT ANY GIVEN OUTDOOR TEMPERATURE Air entering indoor unit temperature ( °F) Test description Dry bulb lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 Afull Test—required ........................................................... Bfull Test—required ........................................................... Blow Test—required ........................................................... Bint Test—optional ............................................................ Clow Test—required .......................................................... Issue 4: DOE requests comment on its proposed cooling tests for single-speed, two-speed and variable-speed compressor systems. 3. Cyclic Losses Under part-load operation, in which the cooling load of the space is less than the full cooling capacity of the compressor and the compressor cannot modulate compressor speed to match VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 Air entering outdoor unit temperature ( °F) Wet bulb 80 80 80 80 80 Dry bulb 67 67 67 67 67 capacity to the required load, the compressor cycles on and off (for singlespeed systems) or operates between different compressor speeds (for twostage or variable speed systems). This cycling behavior introduces inefficiencies, i.e., ‘‘cycling losses.’’ In appendix M1 and AHRI Standard 210/ 240–2023, ‘‘Performance Rating of Unitary Air-conditioning & Air-source Heat Pump Equipment’’ (‘‘AHRI 210/ PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 Compressor speed Wet bulb 95 82 82 82 75 75 65 65 65 60 Full. Full. Low. Intermediate. Low. 240–2023’’), the inefficiencies associated with cycling losses in CAC/ HPs are represented by a degradation coefficient (CD). The cooling degradation coefficient is denoted by CDc and heating degradation coefficient is denoted as CDH. In appendix M1 and AHRI 210/240–2023, this degradation coefficient can be optionally evaluated E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules via cyclic testing, or a default degradation coefficient can be used.13 As ASHRAE Standard 16–2016 does not include test provisions to conduct cyclic tests, DOE is not proposing to include cyclic tests as part of the new test procedure at appendix H1. To represent the cycling losses of a PTAC/ HP, a degradation coefficient is required. CAC/HP systems are differently configured as compared to PTAC/HPs and therefore, the use of the default degradation coefficients from appendix M1 and AHRI 210/240–2023 may not be appropriate for PTAC/HPs. To investigate cycling losses and evaluate a default degradation coefficient particular to PTAC/HPs, DOE conducted testing with several singlespeed PTHPs and one variable-speed PTHP under different cooling conditions at reduced loads. DOE installed each PTHP in a calorimetric test chamber, set the unit thermostat just below 80 °F, and applied a range of fixed cooling loads to the indoor chamber.14 15 The calorimeter chamber was configured so that the indoor chamber temperature could vary but averaged out at the standard indoor In Figure III–1, the distance of each data point from the x-axis represents the change in efficiency relative to the fullload efficiency for each unit at an outdoor condition of 82 °F/65 °F. The single-speed PTHP efficiency decreases in correlation with a reduction in cooling load, reflecting cycling losses that become relatively larger as the cooling load decreases. In contrast, the efficiency of the variable-speed PTHP remains steady as the cooling load decreases, reflecting the lack of cycling losses associated with lower compressor speeds. Based on this data, DOE evaluated the cooling degradation coefficient for each single-speed PTHP unit as defined in Appendix M1,16 and then obtained an average, as shown in Table III.4. 13 Previous versions of AHRI Standard 210/240, including the version referenced in Appendix M1, AHRI 210/240–2008, also address the degradation coefficient in the same manner. 14 A cooling load is ‘‘applied’’ by adjusting and fixing the rate of heat added to the indoor test chamber to a level at or below that of the nominal cooling capacity of the test unit. 15 This approach aims to represent a consumer installation in which the amount of heat added to a room may be less than the rated cooling capacity of the room AC (e.g., electronics or lighting turned VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 condition of 80 °F/67 °F (dry-bulb/wetbulb), thereby allowing the test unit to maintain the target indoor chamber temperature by adjusting its cooling operation in response to the changing temperature of the indoor chamber. Figure III–1 shows the efficiency losses for each unit at varying cooling loads at an outdoor condition of 82 °F/65 °F, relative to the performance of each unit as tested at the full-load condition at 82 °F/65 °F. TABLE III.4—COOLING DEGRADATION COEFFICIENTS FOR DIFFERENT SINGLE-SPEED UNITS Unit identifier PTHP 1 ................................. PTHP 2 ................................. PTHP 3 ................................. PTHP 4 ................................. Average ................................ PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 Cooling degradation coefficient (CDC) 0.12 0.47 0.35 0.26 0.30 off, people or pets leaving the room, and external factors such as heat transfer through walls and windows reducing with outdoor temperature). 16 See section 3.5.3—Cooling-Mode CyclicDegradation Coefficient Calculation. E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 EP12MY23.000</GPH> lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 30848 30849 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules Based on the observed data, the average value of the cooling degradation coefficients is different from the default value (0.2) assigned in appendix M1 and AHRI 210/240–2023 for single-speed systems. DOE did not conduct similar testing for heating mode, but considers that a similar degradation in performance would be observed. Therefore, DOE is proposing that the default cooling and heating degradation coefficient for the PTAC/HP test procedure be 0.30, as calculated based on DOE’s testing. Issue 5: DOE requests comment on its proposed value of the cooling and heating degradation coefficients. 4. SCP Calculation As mentioned, DOE’s proposed cooling metric, SCP, represents a measure of cooling efficiency across the entire season, as opposed to a single test condition. The SCP metric involves the evaluation and summation of the total cooling provided and the power consumed using a binned analysis similar to the one used for the SEER2 metric for CACs. These quantities are calculated for each individual temperature bin using the appropriate calculation methods depending on the operating characteristics of the type of system i.e., single-speed, two-speed or variable-speed. Bin temperatures and bin hours are discussed in section III.F.5 of this document. Similar to appendix M1, DOE is also proposing a relationship to represent the cooling building load line for PTAC/ HPs, which enables the calculation of the quantities mentioned previously. The PTAC/HP cooling building load line is specific to the use cases for PTAC/HPs, primarily small hotels and midrise apartments, and represents the averaged cooling load at different temperatures evaluated as a national average. For this analysis, DOE considered an equal weighting of the small hotel and the midrise apartment use cases. Similar to the cooling building load line in appendix M1, the building load line for PTAC/HPs includes a 10 percent assumption for oversizing. Issue 6: DOE requests comment on its proposed approach to calculate SCP using a similar binned analysis as that of SEER2. DOE also requests comment on the proposed cooling building load line; specifically, whether an equal weighting of the small hotel and midrise apartment use cases is appropriate. 5. Cooling Temperature Bins and Weights As mentioned, the values of the total cooling provided and the power consumed are evaluated for each individual temperature bin. Table III.5 shows DOE’s proposed temperature bins and associated weighting factors to represent the number of cooling hours per year spent at each bin. These temperature bins and fractional hours are based on DOE’s analysis of building energy use associated with PTAC/HP use cases, primarily the small hotel and the midrise apartment prototypes and are a national average. TABLE III.5—DISTRIBUTION OF FRACTIONAL HOURS WITHIN COOLING SEASON TEMPERATURE BINS Bin temperature range °F Bin number, j 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ................................................................................................................................. ................................................................................................................................. ................................................................................................................................. ................................................................................................................................. ................................................................................................................................. ................................................................................................................................. ................................................................................................................................. ................................................................................................................................. Issue 7: DOE requests comment on its proposed temperature bins and associated fractional bin hours for cooling. lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 G. Proposed Heating Metric and Test Procedure Similar to the cooling metric discussed in section III.F, DOE has initially determined that a heating metric that incorporates seasonal heating performance (similar to the HSPF2 metric) for CAC/HPs is appropriate for PTAC/HPs. HSPF2 reflects seasonal performance by averaging test results from different load points, depending on system configuration (single-speed, twocapacity, or variable-speed), with varying outdoor conditions and staging levels to represent the product’s average efficiency throughout the heating season (see appendix M1). However as noted earlier, DOE considers that the direct adoption of VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 65–69 70–74 75–79 80–84 85–89 90–94 95–99 100–104 HSPF2 as detailed in appendix M1 is not suitable for PTAC/HPs, as there are differences in the use cases for PTAC/ HPs and the test burden associated with CAC/HP testing per appendix M1 may be much higher than appropriate to gauge heating performance of PTAC/ HPs. DOE is proposing to define a new heating metric for PTAC/HPs called seasonal heating performance (SHP) as follows: Seasonal Heating Performance (SHP) means the total heat added to the conditioned space during the heating season, expressed in Btu’s, divided by the total electrical energy consumed by the package terminal heat pump during the same season, expressed in watthours. SHP is determined in accordance with appendix H1 to this subpart. 1. Test Conditions Similar to the cooling season, PTACs and PTHPs operate under various outdoor temperature conditions and PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 Representative temperature for bin °F 67 72 77 82 87 92 97 102 Fraction of total temperature bin hours, nj/N 0.229 0.238 0.220 0.150 0.094 0.047 0.014 0.007 load points in the heating season. To effectively capture performance at these varying outdoor conditions and associated loads, DOE proposes a test procedure with three heating test conditions at dry-bulb temperatures of 47 °F, 17 °F and 5 °F. These are denoted as the ‘‘H1’’, ‘‘H3’’ and ‘‘H4’’ conditions, respectively. As discussed in section III.E.3 of this document, DOE understands that very few PTHPs are able to operate in heat pump mode at temperatures below freezing, and therefore could not be tested at the ‘‘H3’’ and ‘‘H4’’ conditions. Therefore, DOE is proposing that (1) tests at the H4 condition be optional and (2) for those units that are unable to test at the ‘‘H3’’ condition, a substitute test, denoted as ‘‘HL’’ be utilized. The HL test is conducted at a target dry-bulb temperature equal to the average of the E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 30850 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules cut-out 17 and cut-in 18 temperatures for a particular PTHP unit. The corresponding wet-bulb temperature is chosen such that it corresponds to a maximum of 60 percent relative humidity (‘‘RH’’) level. DOE considers that a maximum 60 percent RH level would be low enough to prevent significant frost build up, but high enough that it would not be unduly burdensome for test labs to achieve. Details on evaluating the cut-in and cutout temperatures is presented in section III.G.3 of this document. Tolerances as set in Table 2B of ANSI/ASHRAE 37– 2009 apply to these test conditions. Depending on compressor capacity control attributes, the three test conditions (H1, H3 or HL and H4) are paired with up to three compressor speeds to denote the different heating capacities that the unit will run at to modulate to the required heating load: full, intermediate, and low. For example, a H1,low test would denote a test conducted at the ‘‘H1’ condition (47 °F) and set to a low compressor speed for variable-speed and twocapacity compressor systems. The full compressor speed for the heating mode tests would be evaluated by setting the room thermostat at a higher temperature than the required indoor condition i.e., at 75 °F. Manufacturers will need to provide special control override instructions to set the low and intermediate compressor speeds for heating. Similar to the cooling tests, DOE is proposing to require that all heating tests be done with the fan control selections that set the fan speed to high and the indoor fan to cycle with the compressor. Issue 8: DOE requests comment on its proposed H1 (47 °F), H3 (17 °F) or HL and H4 (5 °F) test conditions to represent different heating outdoor conditions experienced by PTACs and PTHPs in the field. Issue 9: DOE requests comment on whether setting the unit thermostat up to 75 °F (i.e., a 5 °F differential to the indoor condition of 70 °F) is sufficient to ensure that the compressor runs at full speed for heating mode. 2. Heating Tests Similar to the cooling tests in section III.F.2 of this document, DOE is using appendix M1 as the basis for the required heating tests for each system type—single-speed, two-speed, variablespeed, but with necessary modifications to reduce test burden as appropriate. Firstly, as discussed in more detail in section III.G.4 of this document, DOE is not including tests in the temperature range which presents a potential for heavy frost accumulation—for example, at 35 °F. Additionally, while Appendix M1 includes heating tests at lower ambient conditions (17 °F and 5 °F), these conditions can either be substituted i.e. using the HL test instead of testing at 17 °F, or are optional (5 °F). For units having a single-speed compressor, and consequently one compressor speed, DOE is proposing to require two full-speed tests conducted at the H1 and H3 (or HL) conditions, with the compressor running at its nominal, full speed. Table III.6 sets out the test condition for systems employing singlespeed compressors. TABLE III.6—HEATING MODE TEST CONDITIONS FOR UNITS HAVING A SINGLE-SPEED COMPRESSOR Air entering indoor unit temperature (°F) Test description Dry bulb H1, H3, HL, full full full 1 To Test—required ................................................................ Test—required ................................................................ Test 1 ............................................................................... 70 70 70 Air entering outdoor unit temperature (°F) Wet bulb Dry bulb Wet bulb 60 max ......... 60 max ......... 60 max ......... 47 ................. 17 ................. See note 2 ... 43 ................. 15 ................. See note 3 ... Compressor speed Full. Full. Full. be conducted only if the unit is unable to test at H3 conditions. the average of the cut-in and cut-out temperatures. a wet-bulb temperature corresponding to a maximum 60% RH level. 2 Use 3 Use For units having a two-speed compressor or a variable-speed compressor that operate at two speed levels at any given outdoor temperature, DOE is proposing three full-speed tests conducted at the H1, H3 (or HL) and H3 conditions, with the H3 condition test optional. DOE is also proposing to require two low-speed tests conducted at the H1 and H3 (or HL) conditions. Table III.7 sets out the test condition for systems employing two-speed compressors. TABLE III.7—HEATING MODE TEST CONDITIONS FOR UNITS HAVING A TWO-CAPACITY COMPRESSOR * Air entering indoor unit temperature (°F) Test description lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 Dry bulb H1,full Test—required .................................................................. H3, full Test—required ................................................................ HL, full Test 1 ............................................................................... H4, full Test—optional ................................................................. H1,low Test—required ................................................................. H3, low Test—required ................................................................ 17 Cut-out temperature refers to the temperature at which the unit compressor stops i.e., ‘cuts out’ operation to prevent compressor damage. VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 Air entering outdoor unit temperature (°F) Wet bulb 70 70 70 70 70 70 60 60 60 60 60 60 max max max max max max ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... Dry bulb Wet bulb 47 ................. 17 ................. See note 2 ... 5 ................... 47 ................. 17 1 ............... 43 ................. 15 ................. See note 3 ... 4 ................... 43 ................. 15 2 ............... 18 Cut-in temperature refers to the temperature at which the unit compressor restarts i.e., ‘cuts in’ operation after it has reached a cut-out event. PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 Compressor speed Full. Full. Full. Full. Low. Low. 30851 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules TABLE III.7—HEATING MODE TEST CONDITIONS FOR UNITS HAVING A TWO-CAPACITY COMPRESSOR *—Continued Air entering indoor unit temperature (°F) Test description Dry bulb HL, low Test 1 .............................................................................. 70 Air entering outdoor unit temperature (°F) Compressor speed Wet bulb Dry bulb Wet bulb 60 max ......... See note 2 ... See note 3 ... Low. * This includes units with compressors that achieve no more than two capacity levels using variable speed technology for any one of the test conditions used for the tests. 1 To be conducted only if the unit is unable to test at H conditions. 3 2 Use the average of the cut-in and cut-out temperatures. 3 Use a wet-bulb that corresponds to a maximum 60% RH level. For units having variable-speed compressors with three or more speed levels at any given outdoor temperature, the same tests as set for the two-speed systems will apply—but with an additional optional intermediate speed test at the H3 (or HL) condition. TABLE III.8—HEATING MODE TEST CONDITIONS FOR UNITS HAVING A VARIABLE-SPEED COMPRESSOR Air entering indoor unit temperature (°F) Test description Dry bulb H1,full Test—required ................................................................ H3, full Test—required ............................................................... HL, full Test 1 ............................................................................. H4, full Test—optional ............................................................... H1,low Test—required ............................................................... H3, low Test—required .............................................................. HL, low Test 1 ............................................................................. H3,int Test—optional ................................................................. HL, int Test—optional 1 .............................................................. Air entering outdoor unit temperature (°F) Wet bulb 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 max max max max max max max max max ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ Dry bulb Wet bulb 47 ................ 17 ................ See note 2 .. 5 .................. 47 ................ 17 ................ See note 2 .. 17 ................ See note 2 .. 43 ................ 15 ................ See note 3 .. 4 .................. 43 ................ 15 ................ See note 3 .. 15 ................ See note 3 .. Compressor speed Full. Full. Full. Full. Low. Low. Low. Intermediate. Intermediate. 1 To be conducted only if the unit is unable to test at H3 conditions. the average of the cut-in and cut-out temperatures. 3 Use a wet-bulb that corresponds to a maximum 60% RH level. 2 IUse lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 Issue 10: DOE requests comment on its proposed heating tests for singlespeed, two-speed and variable-speed compressor systems. 3. Evaluating Cut-In and Cut-Out Temperatures As mentioned in section III.G.2 of this document, for those units that are unable to test at the H3 condition, the HL test would be required. The HL test is conducted at a target dry-bulb temperature equal to the average of the cut-in and cut-out temperatures for a particular PTHP unit and the wet-bulb temperature is chosen such that it corresponds to a maximum 60 percent RH level. To evaluate the cut-out and cut-in temperatures, DOE is proposing to utilize the verification test procedure used in the residential cold-climate heat pump technology challenge 19 (‘‘CCHP Challenge’’). DOE’s proposal requires that the unit be set to operate in heating mode with the thermostat set at 75 °F and the conditioned space at the 19 Available at: www.energy.gov/sites/default/ files/2021-10/bto-cchp-tech-challenge-spec102521.pdf. VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 standard heating-mode test temperature of 70 °F. The outdoor chamber temperature is then reduced to a level that is 3 °F warmer than the expected cut-out temperature 20 and paused for 3 minutes to allow conditions to stabilize. The outdoor chamber temperature is reduced in steps or continuously at an average rate of 1 °F every 5 minutes. The average outdoor coil air inlet temperature when the HP operation stops is noted as the cut-out temperature. The outdoor temperature is held constant for 5 minutes where the cut-out occurred to allow for any compressor short cycle timer to expire— then the outdoor chamber temperature is increased by 1 °F every 5 minutes. The temperature ramp is continued until 5 minutes after the HP operation restarts. The average outdoor coil air inlet temperature when the HP operation restarts is noted as the cut-in temperature. For this evaluation of the cut-out and cut-in temperatures, the outdoor chamber would need to be sufficiently 20 This information is often indicated in the unit installation manual or product brochure. PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 dried out to prevent frost collection. A remotely controlled circulating fan would also be required to provide the temperature ramp after the cut-out occurs. Issue 11: DOE requests comment on its proposed method to evaluate cut-out and cut-in temperatures. 4. Defrost Degradation DOE’s proposed heating test procedure does not include tests in the temperature range which presents a potential for heavy frost accumulation i.e., (‘‘frost zone’’). Tests in the frost zone need to account for performance impact of frost accumulation and address unit energy use to operate a defrost cycle. When a PTHP unit operates a defrost cycle, it reverses the heating cycle i.e., it operates in cooling mode, removing heat from the indoor space to supply to the outdoor coils and remove frost. This operation impacts the unit’s efficiency because the effective heating capacity is reduced. When testing CHPs, appendix M1 requires that one test be conducted at a frost zone temperature. Specifically, appendix M1 calls for testing at an E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 30852 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 outdoor condition of 35 °F DB temperature and 33 °F WB temperature. When operating at this condition, the frost accumulation is sufficiently rapid that performance can be affected noticeably before a full 30-minute test can be completed. In addition, capturing the full impact of frost on performance requires conducting a test that includes a full cycle of both heating with frost accumulation and defrost. As noted, such a test is specified in appendix M1 as the ‘‘transient’’ test, which follows the test method described for the ‘T’ test in ANSI/ASHRAE 37–2009. DOE understands that there is additional test burden associated with running a transient test as compared to a steadystate test and this burden may not be appropriate for PTHPs due to their relatively lower energy use as compared to CHPs. For these reasons, DOE is proposing not to include transient heating tests. However, DOE understands that PTHPs in the field do operate in the frost zone and consequently, are impacted by frost. To ensure that the heating test procedure is reasonably designed to produce test results which reflect energy efficiency during a representative average use cycle, DOE has provisionally determined that it would be more appropriate to apply a representative defrost degradation to the seasonal heating efficiency metric than to require testing to determine the impact. Specifically, DOE is proposing to adjust the calculated capacity and power for the representative temperature bins associated with frost accumulation, i.e., 17 °F to 40 °F. This will be achieved by applying defrost coefficients to the capacity and power obtained from the H1 and H3 (or HL) tests. DOE does not currently have defrost data for PTHPs. Thus, DOE is proposing to use an approach for defrost degradation based on the capacity and power adjustments from appendix M1 for CAC/HPs for determination of fullcapacity performance of variable-speed CHPs in 35 °F conditions. Specifically, section 3.6.4.c of appendix M1 calls for calculation of full-speed performance at 35 °F by calculating capacity and power using the interpolation from the 17 °F and 47 °F tests, and then adjusting the evaluated heating capacity and power by 10 percent and 1.5 percent, VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 respectively. Similarly, for PTHPs, DOE is proposing that the heating capacity and power at 35 °F be evaluated from the interpolation of H1 (47 °F) and H3 (17 °F), or HL tests, with the same adjustments applied to capacity (10%) and power (1.5%). The evaluation of heating capacity and power at temperature bins associated with frost accumulation i.e., 17 °F to 40 °F, would then be interpolated using the performance at 35 °F. Issue 12: DOE requests comment on its proposed defrost adjustment coefficients; specifically, DOE requests feedback on its approach to use appendix M1 to inform the adjustment values for performance at 35 °F. DOE requests data on defrost degradation particular to PTHPs. 5. SHP Calculation DOE’s proposed heating metric, SHP, represents a measure of heating efficiency across the entire season, as opposed to a single test condition. The SHP metric involves the evaluation and summation of the total heating provided and the power consumed using a binned analysis similar to the one used for the HSPF2 metric. Similar to HSPF2, the SHP calculation determines energy use for each bin based on the heating load for the bin, whether the PTHP would be operating in heat pump mode, using electric resistance heat, or both—and the heat pump capacity, power input, and degradation (if applicable). These quantities are calculated for each individual temperature bin using the appropriate formula for each bin depending on the operating characteristics of the type of system i.e., single-speed, two-speed or variablespeed. For each bin, it is assumed that the total heating provided would exactly match the building load. Bin temperatures and bin hours are discussed in section III.G.6 of this document. DOE understands that some units would use the HL test instead of testing at the H3 condition (17 °F). Additionally, different units would undergo the HL test at different temperatures, depending on their respective cut-in and cut-out temperatures. This may appear to present a concern of a non-standardized test condition impacting the SHP calculation. However, DOE notes that since the H3 or HL tests would be used PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 in addition to the other test conditions to interpolate performance in the various bins, and electric heat would supplement unit capacity to ensure total heating matches the building load in all bins, the evaluated SHP values would still allow for a meaningful comparison between units. Specifically, for a unit that tests using the HL test, heat pump performance would be determined down to the cutoff temperature using the performance at the ‘‘L’’ temperature, and all heating below the cut-out temperature would be calculated based on its being provided by electric resistance heating. This results in consistent comparison of PTHPs using the HL test and other PTHPs using the H3 test, because for all calculations the total delivered heating would match the building load, and energy input for bins below the cut-out temperature would be calculated assuming provision using electric resistance heat. DOE is also proposing a relationship to represent the heating building load line for PTAC/HPs. Similar to the cooling building load line, the PTAC/HP heating building load line represents the averaged heating load at different temperatures evaluated as a national average and utilizes an equal weighting of the small hotel and the midrise apartment prototypes. Issue 13: DOE requests comment on its proposed approach to calculate SHP using a similar binned analysis as that of HSPF2. DOE also requests comment on the proposed heating building load line; specifically, whether an equal weighting of the small hotel and midrise apartment use cases is appropriate. 6. Heating Temperature Bins and Weights The values of the total heating provided and the power consumed are evaluated for each individual temperature bin. Table III.9 shows DOE’s proposed temperature bins and associated weighting factors to represent the number of hours per year spent at each bin for heating. These temperature bins and fractional hours are based on DOE’s analysis of building energy use associated with PTAC/HP use cases, primarily the small hotel and midrise apartment prototypes, and are a national average. E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 30853 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules TABLE III.9—DISTRIBUTION OF FRACTIONAL HOURS WITHIN HEATING SEASON TEMPERATURE BINS Bin temperature range °F Bin number, j 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ................................................................................................................................. ................................................................................................................................. ................................................................................................................................. ................................................................................................................................. ................................................................................................................................. ................................................................................................................................. ................................................................................................................................. Issue 14: DOE requests comment on its proposed temperature bins and associated fractional bin hours for heating. lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 H. Dehumidification of Fresh Air In typical hotel installations, the PTAC or PTHP unit provides cooling and heating to individual rooms or suites within the hotel and the hotel hallways and common areas are usually serviced by a separate air conditioning system. In older building designs, fresh air ventilation is supplied to hotel rooms via the corridors to which the rooms are connected. In these designs, air is exhausted from each hotel room by a bathroom exhaust fan and is replaced by ‘‘make-up’’ air supplied via the corridor and conditioned by the heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (‘‘HVAC’’) system that serves the corridor. Make-up air from the corridor enters the hotel rooms by passing through an undercut or grill in the hotel room door. Building designs that supply make-up air via corridors generally are no longer permissible under the building codes adopted in most U.S. states. Chapter 10, Section 1018.5 of the 2009 International Building Code (‘‘IBC’’) states that, with some exceptions, ‘‘corridors shall not serve as supply, return, exhaust, relief or ventilation air ducts.’’ 21 The International Code Council (‘‘ICC’’) tracks the adoption of the IBC by state. The ICC reports that, as of July 2022, only seven states had not fully adopted the 2009 version or a more recent version of the IBC.22 These IBC code requirements have precipitated the introduction of PTAC and PTHP models that are designed to draw outdoor air into the unit, dehumidify the outdoor 21 International Code Council. 2009 International Building Code. Available at: https:// codes.iccsafe.org/content/chapter/4641/. 22 International Code Council (2022). ‘‘International Codes—Adoption by State.’’ Available at: www.mitek-us.com/wp-content/ uploads/2022/08/Master-I-Code-AdoptionChart.pdf. VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 39–35 34–30 29–25 24–20 19–15 14–10 9–5 air, and introduce the dehumidified air into the conditioned space. These models are commonly referred to as ‘‘make-up air PTACs’’ or ‘‘make-up air PTHPs.’’ The following paragraphs discuss issues regarding the market size and energy consumption of make-up air PTACs and PTHPs. 1. Market Size of Make-Up Air PTACs and PTHPs DOE has identified two different designs of make-up air PTAC and PTHP units on the market. In the first design, the PTAC or PTHP includes a dehumidifier module situated in the outdoor portion of the unit between the unit’s outdoor heat exchanger and the panel that divides the indoor and outdoor portions of the unit. The dehumidifier module contains a compressor and refrigerant loop that are separate from the main refrigerant loop that the PTAC or PTHP uses to provide cooling to the conditioned space. In this design, outdoor air flows through the dehumidifier module, which removes moisture from the air, and into the conditioned space. In the second identified design, the make-up air PTAC or PTHP does not include a dehumidifier module. Instead, the unit incorporates a variable-speed compressor that can operate at speeds less than full speed. In this design, outdoor air is drawn through the unit and across the unit’s primary evaporator coil; dehumidification is provided by the unit’s main refrigerant loop, and the unit’s variable-speed compressor adjusts its capacity to provide humidity control by matching compressor operation to the required load of sensible 23 or latent 24 cooling, such that the unit removes moisture from the air without cooling the air to a temperature well below the setpoint. 23 ‘‘Sensible cooling’’ refers to cooling that reduces air temperature without removing moisture from the air. 24 ‘‘Latent cooling’’ refers to cooling that only removes moisture from the air. PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 Representative temperature for bin °F 37 32 27 22 17 12 7 Fraction of total temperature bin hours, nj/N 0.337 0.298 0.192 0.108 0.051 0.008 0.006 In the May 2021 TP RFI, DOE requested comment on how ‘‘make-up air PTAC’’ and a ‘‘make-up air PTHP’’ could be defined, and what characteristics could be used to distinguish make-up air PTACs and PTHPs from other PTACs and PTHPs. 86 FR 28005, 28008. DOE also requested comment on the market size each of the PTAC and PTHP design options it has identified that provide dehumidification of fresh air and whether there were any other design pathways by which a PTAC or PTHP can provide dehumidification of outdoor air and, if alternative designs exist, the market size of these alternative designs. Id. DOE also requested data on the relative market share of make-up air PTACs/PTHPs within the three PTAC and PTHP capacity ranges: <7,000 Btu/ h; ≥7,000 Btu/h and ≤15,000 Btu/h; and >15,000 Btu/h. 86 FR 28005, 28009. AHRI stated that the market for PTACs and PTHPs introducing conditioned outside air is very small. (AHRI, No. 14 at p. 4) AHRI commented that based on the survey they conducted to determine the market size for units providing dehumidification of outdoor air, AHRI estimates between 2.9 and 8.6 percent of PTAC/HPs sold include conditioned outdoor air capabilities across the PTAC and PTHP entire market, irrespective of equipment capacity and of these, an even smaller percentage include dehumidification capabilities. Id. AHRI stated that their survey did not have enough data to aggregate the proportion among the capacity bins, but it constituted a representative sample of the PTAC and PTHP market and indicated 3.8 percent of PTAC and PTHP shipments include make-up air for all equipment capacities. (AHRI, No. 14 at p. 7) They stated that this small market share is not expected to increase significantly, and it was their belief that DOE’s analysis of this issue relying solely on building codes fails to appropriately account for alternate methods of providing makeup air based on the shipment numbers that are likely dominant in the market. Id. E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 30854 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules Regarding definitions for make-up air PTACs and PTHPs, AHRI commented that they disagree that revisions are necessary, but offered information regarding different technologies that introduce makeup air through a PTAC or PTHP. (AHRI, No. 14 at p. 4–5) AHRI noted that the primary technologies for introducing outside air through a PTAC or PTHP are based on a separate module that includes a dehumidification coil— with air either being forced into the room or a vent damper introducing ventilation air into the unit through induction (i.e., standard PTAC with open damper). Id. AHRI further noted that forced air introduction and induced air via a vent damper may or may not condition the outside air and may have a simple vent opening in its bulkhead which allows outside air to be drawn in by the negative pressure of the room caused by running the bathroom’s exhaust fan. Id. AHRI commented that in the case of a dehumidification module, outdoor air is introduced through a module with its own compressor, fan, and dehumidification coils, with air being pushed through a module with a small fan(s) and an automated damper door will open and close to prevent draft while not in use. Id. AHRI further commented that most PTACs and their internal make-up air modules are equipped to accept signals from an occupancy detection system and that units with dehumidification modules are sometimes also referred to as ‘‘two-stage systems.’’ Id. NEAA commented that PTAC/HPs with make-up air capabilities are already available from at least four manufacturers and are likely to become more prevalent as the new construction and retrofit markets shift to meet this code requirement. (NEAA, No. 17 at p. 2) NEEA stated that there are also products on the market that are not specifically marketed for their ventilation capabilities, but which do allow for the introduction of outside air when the unit is operating. Id. NEAA noted that the distinguishing characteristic of these products is the introduction and conditioning of outside air. Id. In response to AHRI, DOE notes that while the market for make-up air PTACs and PTHPs may be small currently, new IBC code requirements and increased focus on ventilation, may lead to increased demand for these units. While there are other alternate methods of providing make up air, such as through a dedicated outdoor air system, DOE understands that implementing these alternate methods may require significant changes to existing buildings. As such, using make up air VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 PTAC/HPs may be the preferred option to comply with new building codes. Therefore, DOE has initially determined that a test procedure to account for the dehumidification function of this equipment is appropriate. 2. Dehumidification Energy Use As previously mentioned, neither the current DOE test procedure nor the industry test procedures, AHRI Standard 310/380–2014 or AHRI Standard 310/380–2017, account for any additional energy associated with the dehumidification of make-up air traversing the unit. When a unit is operating in cooling mode, the dehumidification function may add heat to the room, thus increasing the cooling load on the unit. In addition, introducing make-up air to the room while the unit is operating in heating mode could increase a unit’s energy consumption if the unit uses electric resistance heating to heat the make-up air. The amount of energy consumed by a dehumidification function depends on a variety of factors, including the airflow rate, the amount of time the dehumidification function is engaged, how the dehumidification function is controlled, and the ambient air temperature, among others. In the May 2021 TP RFI, DOE sought comment on the impacts on the energy consumption of PTACs and PTHPs that dehumidify incoming outdoor air for units that include a dehumidification module, a variable-speed compressor, or any other design that dehumidifies outdoor air and introduces it to the conditioned space, in both cooling and heating mode. 86 FR 28005, 28009. DOE also requested comment on how to quantify the energy consumption associated with the dehumidification function of make-up air PTACs/PTHPs for an average use cycle and what indoor and outdoor temperature and humidity conditions might be appropriate for this characterization. Id. NEAA commented that the introduction of outside air will generally increase energy use and the conditioning of this air should be captured by the test procedure. (NEAA, No. 17 at p. 2) NEEA stated that it is important to include this energy use because designers may be comparing makeup air PTACs with other ventilation options and that if this energy use is not captured by the test procedure, it would lead to an unfair comparison between PTAC or PTHPs and other ventilation options by not fully reflecting the energy used by these units. Id. The Joint Advocates also encouraged DOE to incorporate the additional energy use associated with PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 make-up air PTACs and PTHPs so that the test procedure is representative for these units (Joint Advocates, No. 16 at p. 1) AHRI stated that there is no standard test procedure for measuring the energy component of a PTAC associated with the introduction and dehumidification of outdoor air. (AHRI, No. 14 at p. 5) They identified many factors to consider including, ambient environmental conditions, the quantity and the relative humidity of the outdoor air being supplied to the room, and the set of conditions that must be satisfied first before a dehumidification process is initiated. Id. AHRI stated that it was unreasonable to request stakeholders to essentially develop a test procedure through the notice and comment process for any product, much less an ‘‘ASHRAE product’’, and that these test procedures should be developed by a technical committee through consensusprocess with relevant experts, including manufacturers, testing laboratory staff, and other experts present to discuss issues. Id. DOE agrees with NEAA and Joint Advocates that the introduction of outside air will generally increase energy use and the conditioning of this air should be considered as part of the test procedure. However, DOE also recognizes the challenges identified by AHRI regarding the evaluation of the make-up air operation via a test procedure. DOE notes that it participates in the AHRI Standard 310/ 380 committee and has worked with stakeholders to develop industry test procedures for PTAC/HPs in the past and is willing to do so in the future, including for operation in dehumidification mode. The next section presents DOE’s proposed test procedure for measuring the dehumidification energy use of make-up air PTAC/HPs. 3. Proposed Test Procedure To ensure that the test procedures prescribed by DOE are reasonably designed to produce test results which reflect energy efficiency during a representative average use cycle for PTAC or PTHP employing the make-up air function, DOE is proposing a test procedure for manufacturers to make representations of dehumidification energy use for make-up PTACs and PTHPs. a. Definitions Comments received in response to the May 2021 RFI suggest that the key feature of a make-up air PTAC or PTHP is the ability to introduce and condition outside air. While PTACs and PTHPs E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 which do not have dehumidification capabilities also have provisions to bring in outside air through the unit bulkhead,25 they do not condition the outdoor air before the outdoor air enters the conditioned space. Therefore, DOE considers that the conditioning of outside air is the defining aspect to distinguish make-up air PTAC/HPs from non make-up air PTAC/HPs. DOE is proposing to define make-up air PTACs and make-up PTHPs as follows: Make-up Air PTAC means a PTAC for which a portion of the total airflow is drawn in from outside the conditioned space and in which this outside air passes through a dehumidifying or cooling coil, either before or after mixing with the air drawn into the unit from the conditioned space, but before being discharged from the unit. Make-up Air PTHP means a PTHP for which a portion of the total airflow is drawn in from outside the conditioned space and in which this outside air passes through a dehumidifying or cooling coil, either before or after mixing with the air drawn into the unit from inside the conditioned space, but before being discharged from the unit. As discussed in section III.H.1 of this document, DOE has identified two designs of make-up air units—the first design employs a separate dehumidifier module, i.e., an ‘‘add-on dehumidifier’’ to provide dehumidification, while the second design relies on the main refrigeration circuit to provide dehumidification, i.e., it utilizes an ‘‘integrated dehumidifier’’. DOE is proposing to define and include these terms in appendix H1 as follows: Add-on Dehumidifier means a dehumidification system of a make-up air PTAC or PTHP that has its own complete dehumidification system and does not use the main PTAC/HP system indoor coil for any portion of the outdoor air dehumidification. Integrated Dehumidifier means a dehumidification system of a make-up air PTAC or PTHP for which some of the dehumidification of the outdoor air is provided by the main PTAC/HP system indoor coil. Issue 15: DOE requests comment on its proposed definitions for make-up air PTAC, make-up air PTHP, add-on dehumidifier and integrated dehumidifier. b. Make-Up Air Setup To help DOE evaluate a test procedure for make-up air operation, DOE requested information and data in the May 2021 TP RFI regarding various aspects of the make-up air function, including: the typical range of make-up air volume flowing through a make-up air PTAC/PTHP and whether this airflow varies while the dehumidification function is engaged; how make-up air flowing through the unit is heated while the unit is operating in heating mode; how makeup air dehumidification is controlled for units with a dehumidifier module and units without a dehumidifier module, specifically, what conditions trigger the unit to engage make-up air dehumidification and how do make-up air PTACs/PTHPs interact with variables like occupancy or exhaust fan controls; the typical amount of time that make-up air PTAC/HPs engage the dehumidification function; how the cooling and dehumidification modes are coordinated for make-up air PTACs/ PTHPs, whether dehumidification and cooling are typically performed simultaneously or separately, and the impact that any such coordination has on energy consumption; and the range of dehumidification capacities (in pints of water/day) for make-up air PTACs/ PTHPs in the market and the test conditions used to rate dehumidification capacity. 85 FR 28005, 28009. DOE also requested comment on what instructions the test procedures should provide regarding how to prepare and setup a PTAC or PTHP makeup air unit for testing under the current DOE test procedure, which does not test the makeup air function of the unit. Id. AHRI stated that dehumidification modules typically introduce 25 to 50 cubic feet per min (‘‘CFM’’) of outdoor air, but airflow rates may vary depending on the design of the make-up air feature. (AHRI, No. 14 at p. 6) Regarding the time that the dehumidification mode is engaged, ARHI commented that there are different control strategies to control make-up air introduction and could be based on outdoor air conditions, room occupation, or other means and without some level of research, it is not possible to empirically determine what is ‘‘typical’’. Id. AHRI stated that they were unable to comment on dehumidification capacities (in pints of water/day) as there is currently no consensus method to measure dehumidification capacities for make-up air PTACs/PTHPs in the market. Id. DOE did not receive any further comments on other aspects of the makeup air function. DOE’s review of product literature suggests typical publicized dehumidification rates of 4–5 pints per day, although as AHRI noted there is currently no consensus method to measure dehumidification capacities for make-up air PTACs/PTHPs in the market. DOE also found that some make-up air PTACs or PTHPs use control schemes based on outdoor air temperature and relative humidity to decide when to engage the dehumidification function. DOE notes that the 2022 edition of the ASHRAE ventilation standard, ASHRAE 62.1, ‘‘Ventilation and Acceptable Indoor Quality’’ (‘‘ASHRAE 62.1–2022’’) prescribes minimum ventilation rates in Table 6–1 of the standard. The minimum ventilation rates include an occupancy-based outdoor air rate based on expected number of people in the space and/or an outdoor air rate based on floor area. For hotels, the occupancybased outdoor air rate is 5 CFM per person and the floorspace based outdoor air rate is 0.06 CFM per square foot. Based on a typical hotel room occupancy of 2 persons and a floor area of 300 square feet, the total required ventilation airflow would amount to 28 CFM. DOE conducted a review of product literature marketing PTACs and PTHPs with make-up air capabilities and concluded that all such units are capable of introducing at least 30 CFM of air, with airflow ranges from 30 to 75 CFM. Therefore, DOE has tentatively concluded that 30 CFM is the appropriate representative airflow to use in the development of the test procedure. DOE understands that a key challenge associated with the testing of make-up air PTAC/HPs is the introduction and measurement of the make-up air. Some make-up PTAC/HPs have fans to provide the make-up air, while others rely on a negative pressure differential within the room. To standardize the rate and means of make-up air intake, DOE’s proposed test procedure requires the use of a makeup air inlet duct assembly to draw air into the make-up air intake for the PTAC/HP unit. The inlet duct assembly would include a nozzle airflow measuring apparatus and an inlet plenum, with interconnecting duct sections. The air flow measuring apparatus would be used to measure and feed air into the plenum. Figure III– 2 details the setup of the inlet duct 25 DOE’s research indicates that this bulkhead opening is often sealed during installation to prevent moisture ingress. VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 30855 E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 30856 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules assembly and the nozzle airflow measuring apparatus. DOE’s proposal requires that the inlet plenum have interior dimensions of at least 12 inches high and at least 12 inches wide in the plane perpendicular to the air flow, and an interior dimension of at least 24 inches between the edges of the inlet and outlet ducts that are closest to each other. The inlet plenum would be insulated to prevent variance in the air temperature in the plenum as compared to the make-up air inlet. Nozzle airflow measuring apparatus as described in section 6.2 of ASHRAE 37–2009 in addition to an adjustable fan, would be used to adjust the inlet plenum pressure. The nozzle airflow measuring apparatus would take in outdoor room air and move it into the unit under test in a blow-through arrangement. Additionally, a transfer fan would transfer makeup air from the indoor room back to the outdoor room. The transfer fan would be adjustable to allow setting of the needed pressure differential when the target makeup air is passing through the test unit. Setting up of the 30 CFM make-up air flow rate would require adjustments of both the inlet plenum pressure and the transfer fan. To measure the pressure differential between the outdoor room and the inlet air plenum, static pressure taps shall be placed at four locations around the inlet air plenum as shown in Figure III–2, and consistent with section 6.5 of ASHRAE 37–2009. The pressure taps would be manifolded together as indicated in section 6.5.3 of ASHRAE 37–2009. Temperature measurements of the outdoor inlet dry bulb and wet bulb temperatures would be made at the inlet of the nozzle airflow measurement apparatus, consistent with ASHRAE 16– 2016. Issue 16: DOE requests comment on the required make-up airflow rate of 30 CFM and the proposed test setup for the make-up inlet assembly. c. Test Conditions and Measurements DOE did not receive any comments regarding the test conditions for a dehumidification test. In the absence of any information, DOE considers that the standard test conditions used for DOE’s current test procedure—80 °F/67 °F (dry-bulb/wet-bulb) in the conditioned space and 95 °F/6 °F (dry-bulb/dew point) for the outdoor entering air, are appropriate. These conditions ensure that the outdoor air would have a higher humidity ratio than the indoor air and would present the need for dehumidification. Table III.10 and Table III.11 set out the test conditions and tolerances. TABLE III.10—DEHUMIDIFICATION TEST CONDITIONS Air entering indoor side of unit temperature (°F) Dry bulb Dew Point Dry bulb Wet bulb 95 67 80 67 VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM Make-up air flow (scfm) 30 12MYP2 EP12MY23.001</GPH> lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 Air entering makeup air inlet temperatures (°F) 30857 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules TABLEIII.11—DEHUMIDIFICATION TEST TOLERANCES Variation of arithmetic average from specified conditions (test condition tolerance) Reading lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 Air entering makeup air inlet dry bulb (°F) .................................................................................................. Dew point (°) ................................................................................................................................................ Add-on dehumidification system test: Air entering indoor side dry bulb (°) ..................................................................................................... Wet bulb (°) .......................................................................................................................................... Integrated dehumidification system test: Air entering indoor side dry bulb (°) ..................................................................................................... Wet bulb (°) .......................................................................................................................................... Makeup airflow (scfm) ................................................................................................................................. Makeup airflow Nozzle pressure drop (%) .................................................................................................. The evaluation of dehumidification energy use requires the measurement of condensate removed by the make-up air unit and the power consumed during the operation i.e., the liters of water removed per watt-hours (‘‘Wh’’). Moisture removal is part of the associated latent capacity of a PTAC/HP unit, and units which do not have makeup air capabilities also collect condensate. For most PTAC/HPs, the collected condensate is ‘slung’ back onto the condenser coils to provide an evaporative benefit and improve efficiency. Therefore, to collect and measure condensate that is strictly associated with the dehumidification portion of the make-up air unit, this slinging operation needs to be either bypassed or taken into account. The two separate designs of make-up air PTAC/HPs discussed in section III.H.1 of this document necessitate different methodologies to measure dehumidification energy use. For systems that use an add-on dehumidifier, DOE’s proposed test procedure requires isolating the add-on dehumidifier of the unit under test from the main refrigeration circuit, thereby also avoiding the slinging operation. This can be achieved by setting the unit thermostat to a high temperature setting, and if necessary, moving the sensor such that it is in sufficiently cool air to prevent main system start. A preliminary power measurement would be made with the PTAC/HP in fan-only mode or with the thermostat and fan controls set such that the indoor fan is energized, but the compressor and outdoor fan are not—this measurement would establish the background power to be subtracted from the test measurement including the dehumidifier operating. The unit is then operated at the test conditions mentioned previously and the VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 thermostatic drain plug is removed to allow the collection and measurement of condensate—with measurements at intervals of no more than 10 minutes. Equilibrium test conditions would be maintained within tolerances shown in Table III.11 for not less than one hour before recording data for the test. The dehumidification test would then be conducted over a 1-hour period, with no parameter exceeding the allowable tolerances specified in Table III.11 of this document. Measurements of test conditions, input power and energy, and airflow are taken at least every 60 seconds and logged. The condensate is collected in a bucket placed on a scale with a mass measurement resolution of 1 gram. The collection bucket is covered to limit re-evaporation. This test will yield the value of collected condensate, wd,add. For systems that use an integrated dehumidifier, the measurement of dehumidification effciency would be based on a comparison of condensate collected and power consumed in a preliminary ‘non-makeup air’ test (i.e., test without make-up air intake) and a ‘make-up air’ test (i.e., test without make-up air intake). For the ‘non make-up air’ test—the make-up airflow passage would be blocked, and to prevent use of the condensate for condenser cooling, the condensate will need to be drained before it reaches a level high enough for the slinger to spray it onto the condenser coil. Since this will affect performance by preventing the enhancement of condenser cooling, this test will be done at reduced outdoor air temperature conditions to compensate for the slinger de-activation. This would require measuring the average coil temperature during the Afull cooling test, using the temperature measuring setup in Figure III–2 of this document. For the PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 Maximum observed range of readings (test operating tolerance) 0.3 0.5 1.2 1.5 3 3 5 5 0.3 0.3 1 .............................. 1.5 1.0 .............................. 5 ‘non-make up air’ test, the outdoor room dry bulb temperature will be reduced to a level for which the outdoor coil return bend temperature is within 0.5 °F of the temperature measured during the Afull test. The sensible and latent capacity would be measured as described in ASHRAE 16–2016, with condensate measurements at intervals of 10 minutes. When conditions have stabilized after a duration of 60 minutes, the performance test is conducted for a 60 minute test period. The test is considered valid when the energy balance requirements described in section 7 of ASHRAE 16–2016 have been met and the latent capacity calculated based on the condensate measurement is within 6 percent of the latent capacity measurement based on the psychrometric or calorimetric test method, whichever is used. This test will yield the value of collected condensate, wd,pre.. For the ‘make-up air’ test—the makeup airflow passage would be unblocked and will utilize the same reduced outdoor air temperature conditions, but to ensure a consistent comparison with other make-up systems (make-up air systems with add-on dehumidifiers), the incoming make-up air would need to be re-heated back to 95 °F. Part (or all) of this re-heating may be provided by the heat generated from the push-through code tester fan as depicted in Figure III– 2 of this document. Supplemental reheating may be required to provide the remaining re-heat. Similar to the ‘nonmake-up air test’, a 60 minute stability period will be followed by a test duration of 60 minutes. The test is considered valid when the energy balance requirements are met. This test will yield the value of collected condensate, wd,int. The difference between the collected condensate for both tests: wd,int. and E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 30858 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 wd,pre. and the difference between the power consumed in the two tests, will be evaluated to provide a measure of dehumidification efficiency for make-up air units with an integrated dehumidifier. Issue 17: DOE requests comment on the proposed test conditions for the make-up air dehumidification test; specifically, whether the indoor air entering conditions, outdoor air entering conditions are appropriate. Issue 18: DOE requests comment on its proposed test measurements and instructions for both make-up air system designs. d. Metric DOE is proposing that the dehumidification energy use for both designs of make-up air systems be measured using a separate metric, dehumidification efficiency (DE). DE is measured in liters per kWh, and is evaluated as a ratio of the collected condensate to energy consumed in dehumidification, as measured in section III.H.3.c of this document. DOE is proposing to define dehumidification efficiency of PTACs and PTHPs as follows: Dehumidification Efficiency, or DE, means the quantity of water removed from the air divided by the energy consumed, measured in liters per kilowatt-hour (L/kWh). DOE may as an alternative choose to integrate the dehumidification energy use of a make-up air unit with the cooling performance, by incorporating the liters per Wh into the SCP metric. DOE could implement such an integration by incorporating the capacity and power input impacts measured for the dehumidification test into the SCP. For each bin involved in the SCP calculation for which nationalaverage humidity associated with the bin’s dry bulb temperature represents more moisture than typical indoor humidity conditions, e.g., associated with 75 °F dry-bulb temperature and 50 percent relative humidity conditions, the system would be assumed to be providing dehumidification at the capacity measured in the dehumidification test, with power input also as measured in the test. The additional thermal load associated with the dehumidification system’s power input, less the latent capacity equivalent of the dehumidification, would be added to the cooling load for the bin to determine additional PTAC/HP primary cooling system energy use for the bin. Also, the measured dehumidification system’s power input would be added to the PTAC/HP power input for the bin. The latent capacity associated with the VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 measured dehumidification would also be added to the delivered cooling for the bin. Both delivered cooling and power input of these contributions would multiply by the bin hours, thus providing the integrated cooling and energy for the bin—by summing bin contributions for the cooling season, the calculations would in this way integrate the contributions to cooling and energy of the dehumidification system. Issue 19: DOE requests comment on its proposed metric to evaluate dehumidification energy use. Issue 20: DOE requests feedback on whether a separate metric is appropriate for evaluating dehumidification energy use, or whether dehumidification energy use should be integrated into the cooling metric. If integrated into the cooling metric, DOE requests comment on the approach outlined above to represent the dehumidification energy use. I. Fan-Only Mode The current DOE test procedures for PTACs and PTHPs do not address energy consumption during ‘‘fan-only’’ mode. In the May 2021 TP RFI, DOE described ‘‘fan-only’’ mode as a mode in which the fan is operating and providing ventilation or air circulation without active cooling or heating. 86 FR 28005, 28011. In the May 2021 TP RFI DOE requested data and information related to the power consumption of PTAC and PTHP units during ‘‘fan-only’’ mode, specifically, whether the indoor and outdoor fans are powered by the same motor; whether the default fan control scheme dictates that the indoor fan cycles with the compressor or stays on; and whether the fan operates at a lower power if the fan remains on when the compressor cycles off. Id. DOE also requested data and information on the annual number of hours PTAC and PTHP units operate in ‘‘fan-only’’ mode. Id. AHRI explained that power can be supplied to the indoor and outdoor fans using two different motors and both fans can be variable speed and operate at different set points given mode of operation and model type. (AHRI, No. 14 at p. 11) Alternately, AHRI noted that power can be supplied using a single motor operating both indoor and outdoor fans. Id. AHRI further explained that the indoor ‘‘fan-only’’ mode has two user-selectable speeds: high and low, and that the default settings for the indoor fan are to run continuously for cooling and to cycle for heating. Id. AHRI stated that there is no change in power consumption of the fan itself when running continuously compared PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 to cycling with the compressor and there is no difference in fan speed during cooling, heating or ventilation operations. Id. AHRI did not provide any data regarding ‘‘fan-only’’ mode operating hours, but noted that it would be highly individualized to the individual staying in the hotel room. Id. They stated that the compressor is the dominant energy using component of a PTAC or PTHP and that many PTACs and PTHPs use brushless DC motors, which have comparatively low energy consumption. Id. The Joint Advocates and NEEA encouraged DOE to capture energy use in fan-only mode. (Joint Advocates, No. 16 at p. 2 ; NEEA, No. 17 at p. 3) NEEA stated that product literature indicated that at least some PTACs and PTHPs utilize continuous fan operation in their primary mode i.e., these units operate the fan any time the unit is on, regardless of whether the compressor is running. (NEEA, No. 17 at p. 3) NEEA stated that the number of fan hours spent in this mode have the potential to be significant, and this energy use should be captured by the test procedure. NEEA recommended that DOE conduct further research to determine the number of hours spent in fan-only mode and to include this energy use in the test procedure. Id. To investigate the energy used during ‘fan-only’ mode, DOE reviewed literature for several PTAC/HPs and performed investigative testing on 2 single-speed PTHPs, running full-load and part-load cooling tests to evaluate the differences between running a unit with the indoor fan running continuously (‘‘constant fan’’ test) and running the indoor fan cycling with the compressor (‘‘cycling fan’’ test). The two tests were run at the same conditions and loads to provide a comparison. DOE’s literature review agrees with AHRI’s provided information that most PTAC/HPs have two user-selectable speeds: high and low, and that the default settings for the indoor fan is usually to run continuously for cooling and to cycle for heating. However, while DOE agrees with AHRI that there is no change in power consumption of the fan itself when running continuously compared to cycling with the compressor, DOE’s investigative testing, which incorporated part-load cyclic tests, was able to conclude that the average total power consumed over several cycles was higher for the indoor fan when running in ‘‘constant fan’’ mode, as compared to when it was running on ‘‘cycling fan’’ mode. Consequently, the cooling efficiency (EER) observed for the constant fan tests were lower. E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 These test results suggest that PTAC/ HPs may consume more energy when they are operating with the fan in continuous operation. However, DOE does not have enough information regarding the prevalence of use when only the fan is in operation, i.e., number of annual hours spent in fan-only mode, as this is highly dependent on user preference and other factors. Further, DOE did not receive any comments that provided this information. Therefore, DOE is not proposing to measure energy use during fan-only mode. However, the evaluation of cooling and heating default degradation coefficients in section III.F.3 of this document are evaluated based on the cyclic testing data associated with the constant fan mode, as this presents the worst case for cycling losses. J. Use of Psychrometric Testing The current DOE test procedure for PTAC/HPs allow for cooling mode testing to be performed either in a calorimeter room per ASHRAE 16–1983 or by employing the indoor air enthalpy method per ANSI/ASHRAE 37–2009. The heating mode testing must be performed using ASHRAE 58–1986, which utilizes a psychrometric measurement. In response to the May 2021 RFI, the CA IOUs recommended that DOE require testing in a calorimeter room for both cooling and heating mode. (CA IOUs, No. 15 at p. 3–4) The CA IOUs cited DOE’s conclusion in the RAC rulemaking that testing done using the ANSI/ASHRAE 37 procedure for RACs did not provide repeatable data when compared to the calorimeter method and that, unlike the calorimeter, the airenthalpy method did not accurately account for heat transfer within and through the unit chassis. Id. (See 86 FR 16446, 16461) The CA IOUs recommended that DOE either perform similar testing for PTAC/HPs or use the results from the RAC testing to only allow testing under ANSI/ASHRAE 16. Id. DOE has in the past considered requiring calorimetric testing for all PTAC/HPs. In the test procedure NOPR published on March 13, 2014 (‘‘March 2014 NOPR’’), DOE proposed requiring that tests be conducted using the calorimetric method of ASHRAE 16, based on testing conducted using both methods which showed better performance using ASHRAE 16 than when using ASHRAE 37. 79 FR 14186, 14190–14191. However, DOE did not finalize such a requirement in the June 2015 TP final rule. DOE based this decision on feedback from commenters suggested that there would be additional VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 burden if DOE were to require all testing to be performed calorimetrically, and data received from a commenter based on a more extensive series of tests that showed that the calorimetric and psychrometric test methods were comparable, contrary to DOE’s test results. 80 FR 37136, 37141. Consequently, DOE did not eliminate the optional use of ANSI/ASHRAE 37– 2009 to determine cooling capacity. Id. DOE notes that ASHRAE 16–2016 now allows for both calorimetric and psychrometric testing, indicating consensus of participants in the development of the updated test standard that the calorimeter and the psychrometric chamber provide comparable results. DOE more recently performed testing of a PTHP unit in cooling mode in both a calorimeter using methods in ASHRAE 16–1983, and in a psychrometric chamber using ASHRAE 37–2009, and found the results to be comparable. Regarding DOE’s determination in the RAC rulemaking, it is not clear that the potential test inconsistency in that case would necessarily be an issue for PTAC/ HPs, as it was specific to RACs. DOE notes that there are geometric differences and size differences between RACs and PTACs which can make recirculation of air from air discharge outlets to air inlets more likely for RACs than PTACs. This recirculation can occur on both the room side and the outdoor side. Such recirculation, which generally reduces a unit’s performance, is blocked on the indoor side by use of ASHRAE 37–2009, due to ducting of the discharge air, but not when using the calorimetric method. Thus, DOE provisionally concludes that this issue would have a larger impact in the psychrometric testing of RACs as compared PTAC/HPs. DOE is proposing to incorporate by reference ASHRAE 16–2016, which allows calorimetric and psychrometric testing for both heating and cooling mode tests. However, DOE welcomes additional data regarding the consistency of psychrometric and calorimetric tests for PTAC/HPs. Issue 21: DOE requests data regarding the agreement of test results when testing PTAC/HPs using psychrometric test methods as opposed to calorimetric test methods. K. Test Procedure Costs and Impact In this NOPR, DOE proposes to amend the existing test procedure for PTACs and PTHPs by incorporating seasonal cooling and heating performance and establishing new cooling and heating metrices, SCP and SHP. DOE also proposes to include provisions to PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 30859 measure dehumidification energy use of make-up air PTAC/HPs. DOE has tentatively determined that the proposed amendments in this NOPR would improve the representativeness, accuracy, and reproducibility of the test results and would not be unduly burdensome for manufacturers to conduct. Because the current DOE test procedure for PTAC/HPs would be relocated to appendix H without change, the proposed test procedure in appendix H for measuring EER and COP would result in no change in testing practices and thus result in no new burden or costs. Should DOE adopt standards in a future energy conservation standards rulemaking in terms of the new metrics (SCP and SHP), the proposed test procedure in appendix H1 would be required. DOE has tentatively concluded that the proposed test procedure in appendix H1 for measuring SCP and SHP, would increase third-party lab testing costs per unit relative to the current DOE test procedure. DOE estimates the expected cost increase for physical testing to range from $5,100 to $15,300 per unit for the complete test, depending on the system configuration of the PTAC/HP unit (single-speed, twospeed or variable-speed). In addition to the increased costs due to required testing to determine SCP and SHP, make-up air PTAC/HPs may incur an additional cost of $3,000 if manufacturers chose to make dehumidification representations. However, in accordance with 10 CFR 429.70, PTAC/HP manufacturers may elect to use AEDMs to rate models, which significantly reduces costs to industry. DOE estimates the permanufacturer cost to develop and validate an AEDM for PTAC/HPs to be $25,200. DOE estimates a cost of approximately $50 26 per basic model for determining energy efficiency using the validated AEDM. Both of these estimates reflect the costs for AEDM development based on the proposed appendix H1 procedure. Because DOE is not proposing any changes to appendix H that would affect current testing practices, there are no incremental costs 26 DOE estimated initial costs to validate an AEDM assuming 80 hours of general time to develop an AEDM based on existing simulation tools and 16 hours to validate two basic models within that AEDM at the cost of an engineering technician wage of $50 per hour plus the cost of third-party physical testing of two units per validation class (as required in 10 CFR 429.70(c)(2)(iv)). DOE estimated the additional per basic model cost to determine efficiency using an AEDM, assuming 1 hour per basic model at the cost of an engineering technician wage of $50 per hour. E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 30860 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules expected due to the proposed amendments to appendix H. Issue 22: DOE requests comment on its understanding of the impact of the test procedure proposals in this NOPR, specifically DOE’s estimates of the costs associated with testing using appendix H1 of this document. L. Compliance Date EPCA prescribes that, if DOE amends a test procedure, all representations of energy efficiency and energy use, including those made on marketing materials and product labels, must be made in accordance with that amended test procedure, beginning 360 days after publication of such a test procedure final rule in the Federal Register. (42 U.S.C. 6314(d)(1)) Representations related to energy consumption of PTACs and PTHPs must be made in accordance with the appropriate appendix that applies (i.e., appendix H or appendix H1) when determining compliance with the relevant standard. DOE would not require that PTAC/HPs be tested according to the test procedure in the proposed appendix H1 until the compliance date of any future amended energy conservation standard that relies on the SCP and SHP metrics, should DOE adopt such standards. However, beginning 360 days after publication of a test procedure final rule finalizing appendix H1, any representations of dehumidification capacity and efficiency of make-up air PTAC/HPs must be made using the dehumidification test procedures in appendix H1. IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 14094 Executive Order (‘‘E.O.’’)12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review,’’ as supplemented and reaffirmed by E.O. 13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review,’’ 76 FR 3821 (Jan. 21, 2011) and E.O. 14094, ‘‘Modernizing Regulatory Review,’’ 88 FR 21879 (April 11, 2023), 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 VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 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 proposed 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 proposed regulatory action 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. The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires preparation of an initial regulatory flexibility analysis (‘‘IRFA’’) for any rule that by law must be proposed for public comment, unless the agency certifies that the rule, if promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. As required by Executive Order 13272, ‘‘Proper Consideration of Small Entities in Agency Rulemaking,’’ 67 FR 53461 (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 DOE 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. PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 1. Description of Why Action Is Being Considered DOE is proposing to amend the existing DOE test procedures for PTACs and PTHPs in satisfaction of the 7-year review requirement specified in EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(1)(A)(i)). 2. Objective of, and Legal Basis for, Rule EPCA authorizes DOE to regulate the energy efficiency of a number of consumer products and certain industrial equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6291– 6317) Title III, Part C of EPCA, added by Public Law 95–619, Title IV, § 441(a), established the Energy Conservation Program for Certain Industrial Equipment, which sets forth a variety of provisions designed to improve energy efficiency. (42 U.S.C. 6311–6317) This equipment includes PTACs and PTHPs, the subjects of this document. (42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(J)) Further, if such an industry test procedure is amended, DOE must amend its test procedure to be consistent with the amended industry test procedure, unless DOE determines, by rule published in the Federal Register and supported by clear and convincing evidence, that such amended test procedure would not meet the requirements in 42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2) and (3) related to representative use and test burden. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(4)(B)) EPCA also requires that, at least once every 7 years, DOE evaluate test procedures for each type of covered equipment, including PTACs and PTHPs, to determine whether amended test procedures would more accurately or fully comply with the requirements for the test procedures to not be unduly burdensome to conduct and be reasonably designed to produce test results that reflect energy efficiency, energy use, and estimated operating costs during a representative average use cycle. (42 U.S.C. 6146314(a)(1)(A)) 3. Description and Estimate of Small Entities Regulated For manufacturers of PTACs and PTHPs, the Small Business Administration (‘‘SBA’’) has set a size threshold, which defines those entities classified as ‘‘small businesses’’ for the purposes of the statute. DOE used the SBA’s small business size standards to determine whether any small entities would be subject to the requirements of the rule. See 13 CFR part 121. The equipment covered by this rule are classified under North American Industry Classification System (‘‘NAICS’’) code 333415, ‘‘AirConditioning and Warm Air Heating Equipment and Commercial and E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules Industrial Refrigeration Equipment Manufacturing.’’ In 13 CFR 121.201, the SBA sets a threshold of 1,250 employees or fewer for an entity to be considered as a small business for this category. DOE identified twelve original equipment manufacturers (‘‘OEMs’’) of equipment covered by this rulemaking. DOE screened out companies that do not meet the definition of a ‘‘small business’’ or are foreign-owned and operated. Of the twelve OEMs, DOE identified one small, domestic OEM for consideration. DOE used subscriptionbased business information tools to determine headcount and revenue of the small business. DOE relied on the CCMS Compliance Certification Database 27 to create a list of companies that manufacture equipment covered by this proposal. lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 4. Description and Estimate of Compliance Requirements In the test procedure notice, DOE proposes to relocate the current DOE test procedure for PTACs and PTHPs to appendix H without change. This reorganization to the test procedure for measuring EER and COP would result in no change in testing practices and no cost to manufacturers. Additionally, DOE is proposing to establish a new appendix H1 to subpart F of part 431. Appendix H1 would establish a new seasonal cooling performance metric (SCP) and a new seasonal heating performance metric (SHP) and the test procedure requirements for SCP and SHP. DOE also proposes to include provisions to measure dehumidification energy use of make-up air PTAC and PTHPs. Use of the proposed appendix H1 is not required and would not be required until the compliance date of amended energy conservation standards based on SCP and SHP, should DOE adopt such standards. Should DOE adopt standards in a future energy conservation standards rulemaking in terms of the new metrics (SCP and SHP), the proposed test procedure in appendix H1 would be required. DOE has tentatively concluded that the proposed test procedure in appendix H1 for measuring SCP and SHP, would increase third-party lab testing costs per unit relative to the current DOE test procedure. DOE estimates the expected cost increase for physical testing to range from $5,100 to $15,300, depending on the system configuration of the PTAC/HP unit 27 U.S. Department of Energy Compliance Certification Database, available at: www.regulations.doe.gov/certification-data/ products.html. VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 (single-speed, two-speed or variablespeed). In addition to the increased costs due to required testing to determine SCP and SHP, make-up air PTAC/HPs may incur an additional cost of $3,000 if manufacturers chose to make representations for dehumidification in terms of the DE metric. However, in accordance with 10 CFR 429.70, PTAC/HP manufacturers may elect to use AEDMs to rate models, which significantly reduces costs to industry. DOE estimates the permanufacturer cost to develop and validate an AEDM for PTAC/HPs to be $25,200. DOE estimates a cost of approximately $50 per basic model for determining energy efficiency using the validated AEDM. DOE estimates that developing an AEDM and re-rating all 219 basic models to new metrics would cost the identified small manufacturer approximately $40,000. DOE has tentatively determined that this amount would not constitute a significant economic impact on this small manufacturer. However, because these costs would only be incurred if DOE were to adopt a future energy conservation based on SCP and SHP metrics, the small manufacturer would incur no additional compliance costs as a direct result of this test procedure rulemaking. On this basis, DOE tentatively concludes that the proposed rule would not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. DOE has tentatively determined that the proposed amendments in this NOPR would improve the representativeness, accuracy, and reproducibility of the test results and would not be unduly burdensome for manufacturers to conduct. Issue 23: DOE requests comment on the number of small OEMs identified. DOE also seeks comment the estimated costs the small manufacturer may incur. 5. Duplication Overlap, and Conflict With Other Rules and Regulations DOE is not aware of any rules or regulations that duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the rule being considered today. 6. Significant Alternatives to the Rule DOE proposes to reduce burden on manufacturers, including small businesses, by allowing AEDMs in lieu of physically testing all basic models. The use of an AEDM is less costly than physical testing of PTAC and PTHP models. Without AEDMs, DOE estimates the cost to physically test all PTAC and PTHP basic models for the identified PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 30861 small manufacturer to be approximately $2 million. Additional compliance flexibilities may be available through other means. EPCA provides that a manufacturer whose annual gross revenue from all of its operations does not exceed $8 million may apply for an exemption from all or part of an energy conservation standard for a period not longer than 24 months after the effective date of a final rule establishing the standard. (42 U.S.C. 6295(t)) Additionally, manufacturers subject to DOE’s energy efficiency standards may apply to DOE’s Office of Hearings and Appeals for exception relief under certain circumstances. Manufacturers should refer to 10 CFR part 430, subpart E, and 10 CFR part 1003 for additional details. C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Manufacturers of PTAC/HPs must certify to DOE that their products comply with any applicable energy conservation standards. To certify compliance, manufacturers must first obtain test data for their products according to the DOE test procedures, including any amendments adopted for those test procedures. DOE has established regulations for the certification and recordkeeping requirements for all covered consumer products and commercial equipment, including PTAC/HPs. (See generally 10 CFR part 429.) The collection-ofinformation 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. DOE is not proposing to amend the certification or reporting requirements for PTAC/HPs in this NOPR. Instead, DOE may consider proposals to amend the certification requirements and reporting for PTAC/HPs under a separate rulemaking regarding appliance and equipment certification. DOE will address changes to OMB Control Number 1910–1400 at that time, as necessary. E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 30862 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules 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. lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 In this NOPR, DOE proposes test procedure amendments that it expects will be used to develop and implement future energy conservation standards for PTAC/HPs. DOE has determined that this rule falls into a class of actions that are categorically excluded from review under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and DOE’s implementing regulations at 10 CFR part 1021. Specifically, DOE has determined that adopting test procedures for measuring energy efficiency of consumer products and industrial equipment is consistent with activities identified in 10 CFR part 1021, appendix A to subpart D, A5 and A6. Accordingly, neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required. E. Review Under Executive Order 13132 Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism,’’ 64 FR 43255 (Aug. 4, 1999) imposes certain requirements on agencies formulating and implementing policies or regulations that preempt State law or that have federalism implications. The Executive order requires agencies to examine the constitutional and statutory authority supporting any action that would limit the policymaking discretion of the States and to carefully assess the necessity for such actions. The Executive order also requires agencies to have an accountable process to ensure meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications. On March 14, 2000, DOE published a statement of policy describing the intergovernmental consultation process it will follow in the development of such regulations. 65 FR 13735. DOE has examined this proposed rule and has determined that it would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. EPCA governs and prescribes Federal preemption of State regulations as to energy conservation for the products that are the subject of this proposed rule. States can petition DOE for exemption from such preemption to VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 the extent, and based on criteria, set forth in EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6297(d)) No further action is required by Executive Order 13132. F. Review Under Executive Order 12988 Regarding the review of existing regulations and the promulgation of new regulations, section 3(a) of Executive Order 12988, ‘‘Civil Justice Reform,’’ 61 FR 4729 (Feb. 7, 1996), imposes on Federal agencies the general duty to adhere to the following requirements: (1) eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity, (2) write regulations to minimize litigation, (3) provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct rather than a general standard, and (4) promote simplification and burden reduction. Section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988 specifically requires that Executive agencies make every reasonable effort to ensure that the regulation (1) clearly specifies the preemptive effect, if any, (2) clearly specifies any effect on existing Federal law or regulation, (3) provides a clear legal standard for affected conduct while promoting simplification and burden reduction, (4) specifies the retroactive effect, if any, (5) adequately defines key terms, and (6) addresses other important issues affecting clarity and general draftsmanship under any guidelines issued by the Attorney General. Section 3(c) of Executive Order 12988 requires Executive agencies to review regulations in light of applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b) to determine whether they are met or it is unreasonable to meet one or more of them. DOE has completed the required review and determined that, to the extent permitted by law, the proposed rule meets the relevant standards of Executive Order 12988. 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 proposed regulatory action likely to result in a rule that may cause the expenditure by State, local, and Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100 million or more in any one year (adjusted annually for inflation), section 202 of UMRA requires a Federal agency to publish a written statement that estimates the resulting costs, benefits, and other effects on the national economy. (2 U.S.C. 1532(a), (b)) The UMRA also requires a Federal agency to develop an effective process PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 to permit timely input by elected officers of State, local, and Tribal governments on a proposed ‘‘significant intergovernmental mandate,’’ and requires an agency plan for giving notice and opportunity for timely input to potentially affected small governments before establishing any requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small governments. On March 18, 1997, DOE published a statement of policy on its process for intergovernmental consultation under UMRA. 62 FR 12820; also available at www.energy.gov/gc/office-generalcounsel. DOE examined this proposed rule according to UMRA and its statement of policy and determined that the rule contains neither an intergovernmental mandate, nor a mandate that may result in the expenditure of $100 million or more in any year, so these requirements do not apply. 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 proposed rule would not have any impact on the autonomy or integrity of the family as an institution. Accordingly, DOE has concluded that it is not necessary to prepare a Family Policymaking Assessment. I. Review Under Executive Order 12630 DOE has determined, under Executive Order 12630, ‘‘Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights’’ 53 FR 8859 (March 18, 1988), that this proposed regulation would not result in any takings that might require compensation under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. J. Review Under Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 2001 Section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C. 3516 note) provides for agencies to review most disseminations of information to the public under guidelines established by each agency pursuant to general guidelines issued by OMB. OMB’s guidelines were published at 67 FR 8452 (Feb. 22, 2002), and DOE’s guidelines were published at 67 FR 62446 (Oct. 7, 2002). Pursuant to OMB Memorandum M–19–15, Improving Implementation of the Information Quality Act (April 24, 2019), DOE E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules 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 proposed rule under the OMB and DOE guidelines and has concluded that it is consistent with applicable policies in those guidelines. lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 K. Review Under Executive Order 13211 Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,’’ 66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001), requires Federal agencies to prepare and submit to OMB, a Statement of Energy Effects for any proposed significant energy action. A ‘‘significant energy action’’ is defined as any action by an agency that promulgated or is expected to lead to promulgation of a final rule, and that (1) is a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866, or any successor order; and (2) is likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy; or (3) is designated by the Administrator of OIRA as a significant energy action. For any proposed significant energy action, the agency must give a detailed statement of any adverse effects on energy supply, distribution, or use should the proposal be implemented, and of reasonable alternatives to the action and their expected benefits on energy supply, distribution, and use. The proposed regulatory action to amend the test procedure for measuring the energy efficiency of PTAC/HPs is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. Moreover, it would not have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy, nor has it been designated as a significant energy action by the Administrator of OIRA. Therefore, it is not a significant energy action, and, accordingly, DOE has not prepared a Statement of Energy Effects. L. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974 Under section 301 of the Department of Energy Organization Act (Pub. L. 95– 91; 42 U.S.C. 7101), DOE must comply with section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974, as amended by the Federal Energy Administration Authorization Act of 1977. (15 U.S.C. 788; ‘‘FEAA’’) Section 32 essentially provides in relevant part that, where a proposed rule authorizes or requires use of commercial standards, the notice of proposed rulemaking must inform the public of the use and background of such standards. In addition, section VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 30863 32(c) requires DOE to consult with the Attorney General and the Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission (‘‘FTC’’) concerning the impact of the commercial or industry standards on competition. The proposed modifications to the test procedure for PTAC/HPs would incorporate testing methods contained in certain sections of the following commercial standards: AHRI 310/380– 2017 and ASHRAE 16–2016. DOE has evaluated these standards and is unable to conclude whether they fully comply with the requirements of section 32(b) of the FEAA (i.e., whether it was developed in a manner that fully provides for public participation, comment, and review.) DOE will consult with both the Attorney General and the Chairman of the FTC concerning the impact of these test procedures on competition, prior to prescribing a final rule. equipment. ANSI/ASHRAE 58–1986 (RA 2014) is available on ANSI’s website at webstore.ansi.org/standards/ ashrae/ ansiashraestandard581986r2014. ANSI/ASHRAE 37–2009 is an industry-accepted test procedure that provides methods for determining cooling or heating capacities of several categories of air conditioning and heating equipment. ANSI/ASHRAE 37– 2009 is available on ANSI’s website at webstore.ansi.org/standards/ashrae/ ansiashrae372009r2019. The following standards included in the proposed regulatory text were previously approved for incorporation by reference for the locations in which they appear in this proposed rule: AHRI 210/240–2008, AHRI 340/360–2007, and ISO Standard 13256–1. M. Description of Materials Incorporated by Reference In this NOPR, DOE proposes to incorporate by reference the following test standards: AHRI 310/380–2017 is an industryaccepted test standard for measuring the performance of PTAC/HPs, and is an update of AHRI 310/380–2014. AHRI 310/380–2017 is available from AHRI at www.ahrinet.org/search-standards.aspx. ANSI/ASHRAE 16–2016 is an industry-accepted test procedure that provides a calorimetric method for rating the cooling and heating capacity of room air conditioners and PTAC/HPs, and is an update of ANSI/ASHRAE 16– 1983. ANSI/ASHRAE 16–2016 is available on ANSI’s website at webstore.ansi.org/standards/ashrae/ ansiashraestandard162016. DOE proposes to maintain and update the incorporation by reference previously approved for the following test standards: AHRI 310/380–2014 is an industryaccepted test standard for measuring the performance of PTAC/HPs. AHRI 310/ 380–2014 is available from AHRI at www.ahrinet.org/search-standards.aspx. ANSI/ASHRAE 16–1983 (RA 2014) is an industry-accepted test procedure that provides a calorimetric method for rating the cooling and heating capacity of room air conditioners and PTAC/HPs. ANSI/ASHRAE 16–1983 (RA 2014) is available on ANSI’s website at https:// webstore.ansi.org/standards/ashrae/ ansiashraestandard161983r2014. ANSI/ASHRAE 58–1986 (RA 2014) is an industry-accepted test procedure that provides a psychometric method for rating the cooling and heating capacity of air conditioning and heating The time, date, and location of the public meeting are listed in the DATES and ADDRESSES sections at the beginning of this document. If you plan to attend the public meeting, please notify the Appliance and Equipment Standards staff at (202) 287–1445 or Appliance_ Standards_Public_Meetings@ee.doe.gov. Please note that foreign nationals visiting DOE Headquarters are subject to advance security screening procedures which require advance notice prior to attendance at the public meeting. If a foreign national wishes to participate in the public meeting, please inform DOE of this fact as soon as possible by contacting Ms. Regina Washington at (202) 586–1214 or by email (Regina.Washington@ee.doe.gov) so that the necessary procedures can be completed. DOE requires visitors to have laptops and other devices, such as tablets, checked upon entry into the Forrestal Building. Any person wishing to bring these devices into the building will be required to obtain a property pass. Visitors should avoid bringing these devices, or allow an extra 45 minutes to check in. Please report to the visitor’s desk to have devices checked before proceeding through security. Due to the REAL ID Act implemented by the Department of Homeland Security (‘‘DHS’’), there have been recent changes regarding ID requirements for individuals wishing to enter Federal buildings from specific States and U.S. territories. DHS maintains an updated website identifying the State and territory driver’s licenses that currently are acceptable for entry into DOE facilities at www.dhs.gov/real-id-enforcement- PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 V. Public Participation A. Attendance at the Public Meeting E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 30864 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules brief. A driver’s licenses from a State or territory identified as not compliant by DHS will not be accepted for building entry and one of the alternate forms of ID listed below will be required. Acceptable alternate forms of Photo-ID include U.S. Passport or Passport Card; an Enhanced Driver’s License or Enhanced ID-Card issued by States and territories as identified on the DHS website (Enhanced licenses issued by these States and territories are clearly marked Enhanced or Enhanced Driver’s License); a military ID or other Federal government-issued Photo-ID card. In addition, you can attend the public meeting via webinar. Webinar registration information, participant instructions, and information about the capabilities available to webinar participants will be published on DOE’s website at https://www.energy.gov/eere/ buildings/public-meetings-andcomment-deadlines. Participants are responsible for ensuring their systems are compatible with the webinar software. lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 B. Procedure for Submitting Prepared General Statements for Distribution Any person who has plans to present a prepared general statement may request that copies of his or her statement be made available at the public meeting. Such persons may submit requests, along with an advance electronic copy of their statement in PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file format, to the appropriate address shown in the ADDRESSES section at the beginning of this document. The request and advance copy of statements must be received at least one week before the public meeting and are to be emailed. Please include a telephone number to enable DOE staff to make follow-up contact, if needed. C. Conduct of the Public Meeting DOE will designate a DOE official to preside at the public meeting and may also use a professional facilitator to aid discussion. The meeting will not be a judicial or evidentiary-type public hearing, but DOE will conduct it in accordance with section 336 of EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6306) A court reporter will be present to record the proceedings and prepare a transcript. DOE reserves the right to schedule the order of presentations and to establish the procedures governing the conduct of the public meeting. There shall not be discussion of proprietary information, costs or prices, market share, or other commercial matters regulated by U.S. anti-trust laws. After the public meeting, interested parties may submit further VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 comments on the proceedings, as well as on any aspect of the rulemaking, until the end of the comment period. The public meeting will be conducted in an informal, conference style. DOE will present a general overview of the topics addressed in this rulemaking, allow time for prepared general statements by participants, and encourage all interested parties to share their views on issues affecting this rulemaking. Each participant will be allowed to make a general statement (within time limits determined by DOE), before the discussion of specific topics. DOE will allow, as time permits, other participants to comment briefly on any general statements. At the end of all prepared statements on a topic, DOE will permit participants to clarify their statements briefly. Participants should be prepared to answer questions by DOE and by other participants concerning these issues. DOE representatives may also ask questions of participants concerning other matters relevant to this proposed rulemaking. The official conducting the public meeting will accept additional comments or questions from those attending, as time permits. The presiding official will announce any further procedural rules or modification of the previous procedures that may be needed for the proper conduct of the public meeting. A transcript of the public meeting will be included in the docket, which can be viewed as described in the Docket section at the beginning of this document and will be accessible on the DOE website. In addition, any person may buy a copy of the transcript from the transcribing reporter. D. Submission of Comments DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this proposed rule no later than the date provided in the DATES section at the beginning of this proposed rule.28 Interested parties 28 DOE has historically provided a 75-day comment period for test procedure NOPRs pursuant to the North American Free Trade Agreement, U.S.Canada-Mexico (‘‘NAFTA’’), Dec. 17, 1992, 32 I.L.M. 289 (1993); the North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, Public Law 103– 182, 107 Stat. 2057 (1993) (codified as amended at 10 U.S.C.A. 2576) (1993) (‘‘NAFTA Implementation Act’’); and Executive Order 12889, ‘‘Implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement,’’ 58 FR 69681 (Dec. 30, 1993). However, on July 1, 2020, the Agreement between the United States of America, the United Mexican States, and the United Canadian States (‘‘USMCA’’), Nov. 30, 2018, 134 Stat. 11 (i.e., the successor to NAFTA), went into effect, and Congress’s action in replacing NAFTA through the USMCA Implementation Act, 19 U.S.C. 4501 et seq. (2020), implies the repeal of E.O. 12889 and its 75-day comment period requirement for technical regulations. Thus, the controlling laws are EPCA and the USMCA Implementation Act. PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 may submit comments using any of the methods described in the ADDRESSES section at the beginning of this document. Submitting comments via www.regulations.gov. The www.regulations.gov web page will require you to provide your name and contact information. Your contact information will be viewable to DOE Building Technologies staff only. Your contact information will not be publicly viewable except for your first and last names, organization name (if any), and submitter representative name (if any). If your comment is not processed properly because of technical difficulties, DOE will use this information to contact you. If DOE cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, DOE may not be able to consider your comment. However, your contact information will be publicly viewable if you include it in the comment or in any documents attached to your comment. Any information that you do not want to be publicly viewable should not be included in your comment, nor in any document attached to your comment. Persons viewing comments will see only first and last names, organization names, correspondence containing comments, and any documents submitted with the comments. Do not submit to www.regulations.gov information for which disclosure is restricted by statute, such as trade secrets and commercial or financial information (hereinafter referred to as Confidential Business Information (‘‘CBI’’)). Comments submitted through www.regulations.gov cannot be claimed as CBI. Comments received through the website will waive any CBI claims for the information submitted. For information on submitting CBI, see the Confidential Business Information section. DOE processes submissions made through www.regulations.gov before posting. Normally, comments will be posted within a few days of being submitted. However, if large volumes of comments are being processed simultaneously, your comment may not be viewable for up to several weeks. Please keep the comment tracking number that www.regulations.gov provides after you have successfully uploaded your comment. Submitting comments via email. Comments and documents submitted Consistent with EPCA’s public comment period requirements for consumer products, the USMCA only requires a minimum comment period of 60 days. Consequently, DOE now provides a 60-day public comment period for test procedure NOPRs. E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 via email also will be posted to www.regulations.gov. If you do not want your personal contact information to be publicly viewable, do not include it in your comment or any accompanying documents. Instead, provide your contact information on a cover letter. Include your first and last names, email address, telephone number, and optional mailing address. The cover letter will not be publicly viewable as long as it does not include any comments. Include contact information each time you submit comments, data, documents, and other information to DOE. No faxes will be accepted. Comments, data, and other information submitted to DOE electronically should be provided in PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file format. Provide documents that are not secured, written in English and free of any defects or viruses. Documents should not contain special characters or any form of encryption and, if possible, they should carry the electronic signature of the author. Campaign form letters. Please submit campaign form letters by the originating organization in batches of between 50 to 500 form letters per PDF or as one form letter with a list of supporters’ names compiled into one or more PDFs. This reduces comment processing and posting time. Confidential Business Information. Pursuant to 10 CFR 1004.11, any person submitting information that he or she believes to be confidential and exempt by law from public disclosure should submit via email two well-marked copies: one copy of the document marked confidential including all the information believed to be confidential, and one copy of the document marked non-confidential with the information believed to be confidential deleted. DOE will make its own determination about the confidential status of the information and treat it according to its determination. It is DOE’s policy that all comments may be included in the public docket, without change and as received, including any personal information provided in the comments (except information deemed to be exempt from public disclosure). E. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment Although DOE welcomes comments on any aspect of this proposal, DOE is particularly interested in receiving comments and views of interested parties concerning the following issues: Issue 1: DOE requests comment on its proposed A (95 °F), B (82 °F) and C VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 (75 °F) test conditions to represent reduced cooling conditions experienced by PTACs and PTHPs in the field. Issue 2: DOE requests comment on whether setting the unit thermostat down to 75 °F (i.e., a 5 °F differential to the indoor condition of 80 °F) is sufficient to ensure that the compressor runs at full speed. DOE requests comment on whether manufacturers will be able to provide override instructions to ensure operation at the low and intermediate compressor speeds. Issue 3: DOE requests comment on whether fan speed may vary with staging and whether it may have to be ‘‘fixed’’ at the right speed. Issue 4: DOE requests comment on its proposed cooling tests for single-speed, two-speed and variable-speed compressor systems. Issue 5: DOE requests comment on its proposed value of the cooling and heating degradation coefficients. Issue 6: DOE requests comment on its proposed approach to calculate SCP using a similar binned analysis as that of SEER2. DOE also requests comment on the proposed cooling building load line; specifically, whether an equal weighting of the small hotel and midrise apartment use cases is appropriate. Issue 7: DOE requests comment on its proposed temperature bins and associated fractional bin hours for cooling. Issue 8: DOE requests comment on its proposed H1 (47 °F), H3 (17 °F) or HL and H4 (5 °F) test conditions to represent different heating outdoor conditions experienced by PTACs and PTHPs in the field. Issue 9: DOE requests comment on whether setting the unit thermostat up to 75 °F (i.e., a 5 °F differential to the indoor condition of 70 °F) is sufficient to ensure that the compressor runs at full speed for heating mode. Issue 10: DOE requests comment on its proposed heating tests for singlespeed, two-speed and variable-speed compressor systems. Issue 11: DOE requests comment on its proposed method to evaluate cut-out and cut-in temperatures. Issue 12: DOE requests comment on its proposed defrost adjustment coefficients; specifically, DOE requests feedback on its approach to use appendix M1 to inform the adjustment values for performance at 35 °F. DOE requests data on defrost degradation particular to PTHPs. Issue 13: DOE requests comment on its proposed approach to calculate SHP using a similar binned analysis as that of HSPF2. DOE also requests comment on the proposed heating building load PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 30865 line; specifically, whether an equal weighting of the small hotel and midrise apartment use cases is appropriate. Issue 14: DOE requests comment on its proposed temperature bins and associated fractional bin hours for heating. Issue 15: DOE requests comment on its proposed definitions for make-up air PTAC, make-up air PTHP, add-on dehumidifier and integrated dehumidifier. Issue 16: DOE requests comment on the required make-up airflow rate of 30 CFM and the proposed test setup to ensure this make-up airflow rate. Issue 17: DOE requests comment on the proposed test conditions for the make-up air dehumidification test; specifically, whether the indoor air entering conditions, outdoor air entering conditions are appropriate. Issue 18: DOE requests comment on its proposed test measurements and instructions for both make-up air system designs. Issue 19: DOE requests comment on its proposed metric to evaluate dehumidification energy use. Issue 20: DOE requests feedback on whether a separate metric is appropriate for evaluating dehumidification energy use, or whether dehumidification energy use be integrated into the cooling metric. If integrated into the cooling metric, DOE requests comment on the approach outlined above to represent the dehumidification energy use. Issue 21: DOE requests data addressing potential inconsistency of test results when testing PTAC/HPs using psychrometric test methods as opposed to calorimetric test methods. Issue 22: DOE requests comment on its understanding of the impact of the test procedure proposals in this NOPR, specifically DOE’s estimates of the costs associated with testing using appendix H1 of this document. Issue 23: DOE requests comment on the number of small OEMs identified. DOE also seeks comment on the estimated costs the small manufacturer may incur. VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of this notice of proposed rulemaking and request for comment. List of Subjects 10 CFR Part 429 Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business information, Energy conservation, Household appliances, Imports, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 30866 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules and recordkeeping requirements, Small businesses. 10 CFR Part 431 Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business information, Energy conservation test procedures, Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Signing Authority This document of the Department of Energy was signed on April 21, 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 April 24, 2023. Treena V. Garrett, Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy. For the reasons stated in the preamble, DOE is proposing to amend parts 429 and 431 of Chapter II of Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations as set forth below: PART 429—CERTIFICATION, COMPLIANCE, AND ENFORCEMENT FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT 1. The authority citation for part 429 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6317; 28 U.S.C. 2461 note. 2. Amend § 429.43 by revising paragraph (a)(1)(iii) to read as follows: ■ § 429.43 Commercial heating, ventilating, air conditioning (HVAC) equipment (excluding air-cooled, three-phase, small commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment with a cooling capacity of less than 65,000 British thermal units per hour and air-cooled, three-phase, variable refrigerant flow multi-split air conditioners and heat pumps with less than 65,000 British thermal units per hour cooling capacity). (a) * * * (1) * * * (iii) Packaged terminal air conditioners and packaged terminal heat pumps. (A) The represented value of cooling capacity shall be the average of the capacities measured for the sample selected as described in paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of this section, rounded to the nearest 100 Btu/h. (B) For make-up air PTACs and PTHPs, the represented value of dehumidification capacity will be the average of the capacities measured for the sample selected as described in paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of this section, rounded to the nearest 0.01 liters/hr. (C) For make-up air PTACs and PTHPs, the represented value of dehumidification efficiency (DE) will be the average of the DE values measured for the sample selected as described in paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of this section, rounded to the nearest 0.01 liters/kWh. * * * * * ■ 3. Amend § 429.70 by revising table 2 to paragraph (c)(5)(vi)(B) to read as follows: § 429.70 Alternative methods for determining energy efficiency and energy use. * * * (c) * * * (5) * * * (vi) * * * (B) * * * * * TABLE 2 TO PARAGRAPH (c)(5)(vi)(B) Metric Commercial Packaged Boilers .................................................................. Combustion Efficiency ................................................. Thermal Efficiency ....................................................... Thermal Efficiency ....................................................... Standby Loss ............................................................... R-Value ........................................................................ Energy Efficiency Ratio ............................................... Coefficient of Performance .......................................... Integrated Energy Efficiency Ratio .............................. Energy Efficiency Ratio ............................................... Coefficient of Performance .......................................... Integrated Energy Efficiency Ratio .............................. Energy Efficiency Ratio ............................................... Coefficient of Performance .......................................... Integrated Energy Efficiency Ratio .............................. Energy Efficiency Ratio ............................................... Coefficient of Performance .......................................... Integrated Energy Efficiency Ratio .............................. Energy Efficiency Ratio ............................................... Coefficient of Performance .......................................... Energy Efficiency Ratio ............................................... Coefficient of Performance .......................................... Seasonal Cooling Performance ................................... Seasonal Heating Performance .................................. Dehumidification Efficiency .......................................... Energy Efficiency Ratio ............................................... Coefficient of Performance .......................................... Integrated Energy Efficiency Ratio .............................. Sensible Coefficient of Performance ........................... Integrated Seasonal Coefficient of Performance 2 ..... Integrated Seasonal Moisture Removal Efficiency 2 .. Commercial Water Heaters or Hot Water Supply Boilers ......................... Unfired Storage Tanks .............................................................................. Air-Cooled, Split and Packaged ACs and HPs Greater than or Equal to 65,000 Btu/h Cooling Capacity and Less than 760,000 Btu/h Cooling Capacity. Water-Cooled, Split and Packaged ACs and HPs, All Cooling Capacities. Evaporatively-Cooled, Split and Packaged ACs and HPs, All Capacities Water-Source HPs, All Capacities ............................................................ Single Package Vertical ACs and HPs ..................................................... Packaged Terminal ACs and HPs ............................................................ lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 Applicable tolerance Equipment Variable Refrigerant Flow ACs and HPs (Excluding Air-Cooled, Threephase with Less than 65,000 Btu/h Cooling Capacity). Computer Room Air Conditioners ............................................................. Direct Expansion-Dedicated Outdoor Air Systems ................................... VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 5% (0.05) 5% (0.05) 5% (0.05) 10% (0.1) 10% (0.1) 5% (0.05) 5% (0.05) 10% (0.1) 5% (0.05) 5% (0.05) 10% (0.1) 5% (0.05) 5% (0.05) 10% (0.1) 5% (0.05) 5% (0.05) 10% (0.1) 5% (0.05) 5% (0.05) 5% (0.05) 5% (0.05) 10% (0.1) 10% (0.1) 10% (0.1) 5% (0.05) 5% (0.05) 10% (0.1) 5% (0.05) 10% (0.1) 10% (0.1) 30867 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules TABLE 2 TO PARAGRAPH (c)(5)(vi)(B)—Continued Applicable tolerance Equipment Metric Commercial Warm-Air Furnaces ............................................................... Commercial Refrigeration Equipment ....................................................... Thermal Efficiency ....................................................... Daily Energy Consumption .......................................... * * * * * PART 431—ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAM FOR CERTAIN COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT 4. The authority citation for part 431 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 42 U.S.C 6291–6317; 28 U.S.C 2461 note. 5. Amend § 431.92 by adding, in alphabetical order, definitions for ‘‘Dehumidification efficiency’’, ‘‘Makeup air PTAC’’, ‘‘Make-up air PTHP’’, ‘‘Seasonal cooling performance’’ and ‘‘Seasonal heating performance’’ to read as follows: ■ § 431.92 Definitions concerning commercial air conditioners and heat pumps. * * * * * Dehumidification efficiency, or DE, means the ratio of water removed from the air by the energy consumed, measured in liters per kilowatt-hour (L/ kWh). * * * * * Make-up air PTAC means a PTAC for which a portion of the total airflow is drawn in from the outside of the conditioned space and in which this outside air passes through a dehumidifying or cooling coil, either before or after mixing with the air drawn into the unit from inside the conditioned space, but before being discharged from the unit. Make-up air PTHP means a PTHP for which a portion of the total airflow is drawn in from outside the conditioned space and in which this outside air passes through a dehumidifying or cooling coil, either before or after mixing with the air drawn into the unit from inside the conditioned space, but before being discharged from the unit. * * * * * Seasonal cooling performance or SCP means the total heat removed from the conditioned space during the cooling season, expressed in Btu’s, divided by the total electrical energy consumed by the package terminal air conditioner or heat pump during the same season, expressed in watt-hours. SCP is determined in accordance with appendix H1. * * * * * Seasonal heating performance or SHP means the total heat added to the conditioned space during the heating season, expressed in Btu’s, divided by the total electrical energy consumed by the package terminal air conditioner or heat pump during the same season, expressed in watt-hours. SHP is determined in accordance with appendix H1. * * * * * ■ 6. Amend § 431.95 by: ■ a. Redesignating paragraphs (b)(4) through (9) as paragraphs (b)(5) through (10); ■ b. Adding paragraph (b)(4); ■ c. Revising paragraph (c)(1); ■ d. Redesignating paragraphs (c)(2) through (8) as paragraphs (c)(3) through (9); ■ e. Adding paragraph (c)(2); ■ f. In newly redesignated paragraph (c)(3), removing the words ‘‘and G1’’ and adding in its place, the words ‘‘and G1, H and H1’’; and ■ g. In newly redesignated paragraph (c)(7), removing the text ‘‘§ 431.96’’ and adding in its place, the text ‘‘§ 431.96 and appendix H to this subpart’’. 5% (0.05) 5% (0.05) The additions and revision read as follows: § 431.95 Materials incorporated by reference. * * * * * (b) * * * (4) AHRI Standard 310/380–2017 (‘‘AHRI 310/380–2017’’), ‘‘Packaged Terminal Air-Conditioners and Heat Pumps,’’ July 2017; IBR approved for appendices H and H1 to this subpart. * * * * * (c) * * * (1) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–1983 (RA 2014), (‘‘ANSI/ASHRAE 16–1983’’), ‘‘Method of Testing for Rating Room Air Conditioners and Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners,’’ ASHRAE reaffirmed July 3, 2014, IBR approved for appendix H to this subpart. (2) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–2016, (‘‘ANSI/ASHRAE 16–2016’’), ‘‘Method of Testing for Rating Room Air Conditioners, Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners, and Packaged Terminal Heat Pumps for Cooling and Heating Capacity,’’ November 2016, IBR approved for appendix H1 to this subpart. * * * * * ■ 7. Amend § 431.96 by: ■ a. Removing paragraph (b)(2); ■ b. Revising table 1 to paragraph (b); and ■ c. Removing paragraph (g). The revisions read as follows: § 431.96 Uniform test method for the measurement of energy efficiency of commercial air conditioners and heat pumps. * * * (b) * * * * * lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (b)—TEST PROCEDURES FOR COMMERCIAL AIR CONDITIONERS AND HEAT PUMPS Equipment type Category Small Commercial Package Air-Conditioning and Heating Equipment. Air-Cooled, 3-Phase, AC and HP. Energy efficiency descriptor Use tests, conditions, and procedures 1 in <65,000 Btu/h ................. SEER and HSPF ............ Appendix F to this subpart 3. Appendix F1 to this subpart 3. Appendix A of this subpart. AHRI 210/240–2008 (omit section 6.5). AHRI 340/360–2007 (omit section 6.3). ISO Standard 13256–1 .. SEER2 and HSPF2. Air-Cooled AC and HP ... Water-Cooled and Evaporatively-Cooled AC. Water-Source HP ........... VerDate Sep<11>2014 Cooling capacity or moisture removal capacity 2 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 ≥65,000 Btu/h and <135,000 Btu/h. <65,000 Btu/h ................. ≥65,000 Btu/h and <135,000 Btu/h. <135,000 Btu/h ............... PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 EER, IEER, and COP .... EER ................................ EER ................................ EER and COP ................ Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 Additional test procedure provisions as indicated in the listed paragraphs of this section None. None. None. Paragraphs (c) and (e). Paragraphs (c) and (e). Paragraph (e). 30868 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (b)—TEST PROCEDURES FOR COMMERCIAL AIR CONDITIONERS AND HEAT PUMPS—Continued Cooling capacity or moisture removal capacity 2 Energy efficiency descriptor Use tests, conditions, and procedures 1 in EER, IEER and COP ..... Water-Cooled and Evaporatively-Cooled AC. AC and HP ..................... ≥135,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h. ≥135,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h. ≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h. ≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h. <760,000 Btu/h ............... AC and HP. <760,000 Btu/h. SCP and SHP. AC ................................... <760,000 Btu/h ............... SCOP ............................. <760,000 Btu/h ............... NSenCOP ....................... <65,000 Btu/h (3-phase) SEER .............................. Appendix A to this subpart. AHRI 340/360–2007 (omit section 6.3). Appendix A to this subpart. AHRI 340/360–2007 (omit section 6.3). Appendix H to this subpart 3. Appendix H1 to this subpart 3. Appendix E to this subpart 3. Appendix E1 to this subpart 3. Appendix F to this subpart 3. Appendix F1 to this subpart 3. Appendix F to this subpart 3. Appendix F1 to this subpart 3. Appendix D of this subpart 3. Appendix D1 of this subpart 3. Appendix D of this subpart 3. Appendix D1 of this subpart 3. Appendix G to this subpart 3. Appendix G1 to this subpart 3. Appendix B of this subpart. Equipment type Category Large Commercial Package Air-Conditioning and Heating Equipment. Air-Cooled AC and HP ... Very Large Commercial Package Air-Conditioning and Heating Equipment. Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps. Computer Room Air Conditioners. Variable Refrigerant Flow Multi-split Systems. Water-Cooled and Evaporatively-Cooled AC. Air-Cooled AC and HP ... AC ................................... EER. EER, IEER and COP ..... EER. EER and COP ................ SEER2 ............................ Variable Refrigerant Flow Multi-split Systems, Aircooled. HP ................................... Variable Refrigerant Flow Multi-split Systems, Aircooled. AC and HP ..................... Variable Refrigerant Flow Multi-split Systems, Water-source. HP ................................... Single Package Vertical Air Conditioners and Single Package Vertical Heat Pumps. Direct Expansion-Dedicated Outdoor Air Systems. AC and HP ..................... <65,000 Btu/h (3-phase) SEER and HSPF ............ SEER2 and HSPF2. ≥65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h. ≥65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h. <760,000 Btu/h ............... EER and COP ................ <760,000 Btu/h. IEER and COP. <760,000 Btu/h ............... EER and COP ................ IEER and COP. EER and COP ................ EER, IEER, and COP. All .................................... <324 lbs. of moisture removal/hr. ISMRE2 and ISCOP2 ..... Additional test procedure provisions as indicated in the listed paragraphs of this section None. Paragraphs (c) and (e). None. Paragraphs (c) and (e). None. None. None. None. None. None. None. None. None. None. None. None. None. None. None. 1 Incorporated by reference; see § 431.95. removal capacity applies only to direct expansion-dedicated outdoor air systems. equipment with multiple appendices listed in table 1, consult the notes at the beginning of those appendices to determine the applicable appendix to use for 2 Moisture 3 For testing. * * * * * 8. Add appendix H to subpart F of part 431 to read as follows: ■ lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 Appendix H to Subpart F of Part 431— Uniform Test Method for Measuring the Energy Consumption of Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners and Packaged Terminal Heat Pumps Note: Manufacturers must use the results of testing under this appendix to determine compliance with the relevant standard from § 431.97 as that standard appeared in the January 1, 2022 edition of 10 CFR parts 200– 499. Specifically, representations must be based upon results generated either under this appendix H or under 10 CFR 431.96 as it appeared in the 10 CFR parts 200–499 edition revised as of January 1, 2022. For any amended standards for packaged terminal air conditioners and packaged terminal heat pumps that rely on seasonal cooling performance (SCP) and seasonal heating performance (SHP) published after January 1, 2022, manufacturers must use the results of testing under appendix H1 of this subpart to determine compliance. Representations related to energy VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 consumption must be made in accordance with the appropriate appendix that applies (i.e., appendix H or appendix H1) when determining compliance with the relevant standard. 1. Incorporation by Reference DOE incorporated by reference in § 431.95, the entire standard for AHRI 310/380–2017, ANSI/ASHRAE 16–1983, ANSI/ASHRAE 37– 2009, and ANSI/ASHRAE 58–1986. However, only enumerated provisions of AHRI 310/ 380–2017, ANSI/ASHRAE 16–1983, ANSI/ ASHRAE 37–2009, and ANSI/ASHRAE 58– 1986, as listed in this section 1.1 are required. To the extent there is a conflict between the terms or provisions of a referenced industry standard and the CFR, the CFR provisions control. 1.1 AHRI 310/380–2017 (a) Section 3—Definitions and Table 1— Operating Conditions for Standard Rating and Performance Tests, as referenced in sections 2.1 and 2.2 of this appendix; (b) Section 4—Test Requirements, as referenced in sections 2.1, 2.1.2 and 2.2 of this appendix; (c) Section 5—Rating Requirements, as referenced in section 2.2 of this appendix. PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 1.2 ANSI/ASHRAE 16–1983 (a) Section 2—Definitions, as referenced in section 2.1.1 of this appendix; (b) Section 4—Calorimeters, as referenced in section 2.1.1 of this appendix; (c) Section 5—Instruments, as referenced in section 2.1.1 of this appendix; (d) Section 6—Cooling Capacity Test, as referenced in section 2.1.1 of this appendix; (e) Section 7.2—Nozzles, as referenced in section 2.1.1 of this appendix; (f) Section 7.3—Apparatus, as referenced in section 2.1.1 of this appendix; (g) Section 7.5—Ventilation, Exhaust, and Leakage Airflow Measurement, as referenced in section 2.1.1 of this appendix; 1.3 ANSI/ASHRAE 58–1986 (a) Section 3—Definitions, as referenced in section 2.2 of this appendix; (b) Section 5—Instruments, as referenced in section 2.2 of this appendix; (c) Section 6—Apparatus, as referenced in section 2.2 of this appendix; (d) Section 7—Test Procedures, as referenced in section 2.2 of this appendix; (e) Section 8—Data to be Recorded, as referenced in section 2.2 of this appendix; E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules (f) Section 9—Calculation of Test Results, as referenced in section 2.2 of this appendix; 1.4 ANSI/ASHRAE 37–2009 (a) Section 3—Definitions, as referenced in section 2.1.2 of this appendix; (b) Section 5—Instruments, as referenced in section 2.1.2 of this appendix; (c) Section 6—Airflow and Air Differential Pressure Measurement Apparatus, as referenced in section 2.1.2 of this appendix; (d) Section 7—Methods of Testing and Calculation, as referenced in section 2.1.2 of this appendix; (e) Section 8—Test Procedures, as referenced in section 2.1.2 of this appendix; (f) Section 9—Data to be Recorded, as referenced in section 2.1.2 of this appendix; and (g) Section 11—Symbols Used in Equations, as referenced in section 2.1.2 of this appendix. 2. Test Method 2.1 Cooling Mode Testing The test method for testing packaged terminal air conditioners and packaged terminal heat pumps in cooling mode shall consist of application of the methods and conditions in AHRI 310/380–2017 sections 3, 4, and, and in the enumerated sections of the following test standards, depending on the cooling mode test standard utilized. 2.1.1 Calorimetric Test Method The calorimetric test method shall consist of application of the methods and conditions in ANSI/ASHRAE 16–1983, sections 2, 4, 5, 6, 7.2, 7.3, and 7.5. 2.1.2 Psychrometric Test Method The psychrometric test method shall consist of application of the methods and conditions in ANSI/ASHRAE 37–2009, sections 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 11, subject to the requirement of AHRI 310/380–2017, section 4.2.1.1(b) indicating that no secondary capacity check is required and no ductwork shall be attached to the condenser. 2.2 Heating Mode Testing The test method for testing packaged terminal heat pumps in heating mode shall consist of application of the methods and conditions in AHRI 310/380–2017 sections 3, 4, and 5, and in ANSI/ASHRAE 58–1986, sections 3, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9. 2.3 Precedence Where definitions provided in AHRI 310/ 380–2017, ANSI/ASHRAE 16–1983, ANSI/ ASHRAE 37–2009 and/or ANSI/ASHRAE 58–1986 conflict with the definitions provided in 10 CFR 431.92, the 10 CFR 431.92 definitions shall be used. 9. Add appendix H1 to subpart F of part 431 to read as follows: lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 ■ Appendix H1 to Subpart F of Part 431— Uniform Test Method for Measuring the Energy Consumption of Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners and Packaged Terminal Heat Pumps Note: Manufacturers must use the results of testing under this appendix to determine compliance with any amended standards for VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 packaged terminal air conditioners and packaged terminal heat pumps provided in § 431.97 that are published after January 1, 2022, and that rely on seasonal cooling performance (SCP) and seasonal heating performance (SHP). Representations related to energy consumption, must be made in accordance with the appropriate appendix that applies (i.e., appendix H or appendix H1) when determining compliance with the relevant standard. Manufacturers may make representations of dehumidification capacity and efficiency only if measured in accordance with this appendix. 1. Incorporation by Reference DOE incorporated by reference in § 431.95, the entire standard for AHRI 310/380–2017, ANSI/ASHRAE 16–2016, and ANSI/ASHRAE 37–2009. However, enumerated provisions of AHRI 310/380–2017 and ANSI/ASHRAE 16– 2016, as listed in this section 1 are required. To the extent there is a conflict between the terms or provisions of a referenced industry standard and the CFR, the CFR provisions control. 1.1 AHRI 310/380–2017 (a) Section 3—Definitions, as referenced in section 2 of this appendix; (b) Section 4—Test Requirements, as referenced in section 3.1 of this appendix; (c) Section 5—Rating Requirements, as referenced in section 3.1 of this appendix. 1.2 ASHRAE 16–2016 (a) Section 3—Definitions, as referenced in section 2 of this appendix, (b) Section 5—Instruments, as referenced in section 3.1 of this appendix, (c) Section 6—Apparatus, as referenced in section 4.1 of this appendix, (d) Section 7—Methods of Testing, as referenced in sections 4.4.2.1.2 and 4.4.2.2.2 of this appendix, (e) Section 8—Test Procedures, as referenced in sections 3.1, 4.4.2.1.2, and 4.4.2.2.2 of this appendix; (e) Section 9—Data to be recorded, as referenced in section 3.1 of this appendix, (f) Section 10—Measurement Uncertainty and Table 5—Uncertainties of Measurement for the Indicated Values, as referenced in section 3.1 of this appendix, (g) Section 11—Test Results, as referenced in section 3.1 of this appendix, (h) Normative Appendix A—Cooling Capacity Calculations—Calorimeter Test Indoor and Calorimeter Test Outdoor, as referenced in section 3.1 of this appendix, (i) Normative Appendix B—Cooling Capacity Calculations—Calorimeter Test Indoor and Psychrometric Test Indoor, as referenced in section 3.1 of this appendix, (j) Normative Appendix C—Cooling Capacity Calculations—Psychrometric Test Indoor and Calorimeter Test Outdoor, as referenced in section 3.1 of this appendix, (k) Normative Appendix E—Heating Capacity Calculations—Calorimeter Test Indoor and Calorimeter Test Outdoor, as referenced in section 3.1 of this appendix, (l) Normative Appendix F—Heating Capacity Calculations—Calorimeter Test Indoor and Psychrometric Test Indoor, as referenced in section 3.1 of this appendix, PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 30869 (m) Normative Appendix G—Heating Capacity Calculations—Psychrometric Test Indoor and Calorimeter Test Outdoor, as referenced in section 3.1 of this appendix, 1.2 ASHRAE 37–2009 (a) Section 6.2—Nozzle Airflow Measuring Apparatus, as referenced in section 4.1.1 of this appendix; (b) Section 6.5—Recommended Practices for Static Pressure Measurements, as referenced in section 4.2.1 of this appendix; (c) Section 7.3.3—Cooling Calculations, as referenced in section 3.1 of this appendix; (d) Section 7.3.4—Heating Calculations When Using the ‘‘S’’ Test Method of section 8.8.2, as referenced in section 3.1 of this appendix; (e) Section 7.8.2.1—Latent Cooling Capacity Calculation, as referenced in section 4.4.2.1.2 of this appendix. 2. Definitions. In addition to the definitions in section 3 of AHRI 310/380–2017 and section 3 of ANSI/ASHRAE 16–2016, the following definitions apply. Add-on dehumidifier means a dehumidification system of a make-up air PTAC or PTHP that has its own complete dehumidification system and does not use the main PTAC/HP system indoor coil for any portion of the outdoor air dehumidification. Degradation coefficient (CD) means a parameter used in calculating the part load factor. The degradation coefficient for cooling is denoted by CDc. The degradation coefficient for heating is denoted by CDh. Dehumidification efficiency, or DE, means the quantity of water removed from the air divided by the energy consumed, measured in liters per kilowatt-hour (L/kWh). Integrated dehumidifier means a dehumidification system of a make-up air PTAC or PTHP for which some of the dehumidification of the outdoor air is provided by the main PTAC/HP system indoor coil. Part-load factor (PLF) means the ratio of the cyclic EER (or COP for heating) to the steady-state EER (or COP), where both EERs (or COPs) are determined based on operation at the same ambient conditions. Make-up air PTAC means a PTAC for which a portion of the total airflow is drawn in from outside the conditioned space and in which this outside air passes through a dehumidifying or cooling coil, either before or after mixing with the air drawn into the unit from the conditioned space, but before being discharged from the unit. Make-up air PTHP means a PTHP for which a portion of the total airflow is drawn in from outside the conditioned space and in which this outside air passes through a dehumidifying or cooling coil, either before or after mixing with the air drawn into the unit from inside the conditioned space, but before being discharged from the unit. Seasonal cooling performance or SCP means the total heat removed from the conditioned space during the cooling season, expressed in Btu’s, divided by the total electrical energy consumed by the package terminal air conditioner or heat pump during the same season, expressed in watt-hours. SCP is determined in accordance with appendix H1. E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 30870 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules Seasonal heating performance or SHP means the total heat added to the conditioned space during the heating season, expressed in Btu’s, divided by the total electrical energy consumed by the package terminal heat pump during the same season, expressed in watt-hours. SHP is determined in accordance with appendix H1. Variable speed PTAC/HP means a packaged terminal air-conditioner or heat pump with a compressor that uses a variablespeed drive to vary the compressor speed to achieve variable capacities or three or more capacities for any operating condition for which the compressor would be running. 3. Heating and Cooling Test Procedures 3.1 General. Evaluate SCP and SHP using instructions in sections 3.1 to 3.8 to this appendix. For the cooling tests required to evaluate SCP, use the cooling test conditions in section 3.5 of this appendix. For the heating tests required to evaluate SHP, use the heating test conditions in section 3.7 of this appendix. The capacity and power input measurements for the cooling tests shall be determined using section 4 and section 5 of AHRI 310/380–2017; section 8, section 11, appendix A, appendix B and appendix C of ANSI/ASHRAE 16–2016 and section 7 of ANSI/ASHRAE 37–2009. The capacity and power input measurements for the heating tests shall be determined using section 4 and section 5 of AHRI 310/380–2017; section 8, section 11, appendix E, appendix F and appendix G of ANSI/ASHRAE 16–2016 and section 7 of ANSI/ASHRAE 37–2009. Test measurements shall be made in accordance with section 5, section 9 and section 10 of ANSI/ASHRAE 16–2016. 3.2 Additional setup instructions. If applicable, unit dehumidification mode will be turned off. Any controls setting for dehumidification (e.g., for lower fan speed) shall not to be activated. Any make-up air opening or opening in the unit bulkhead shall be sealed shut for the cooling and heating tests. 3.3 Compressor speeds. Use compressor speeds as required by the cooling and heating tests in section 3.5 and 3.7 respectively, of this appendix. To operate the unit at full compressor speed, set the room thermostat at 75 °F for both heating and cooling tests, representing a 5 °F differential above the heating test condition and 5 °F below the cooling test condition. Use the certified values for the low and intermediate compressor speeds. 3.4 Indoor Fan Settings. Conduct all tests with the fan control selections that set the fan speed to high and the indoor fan to cycle with the compressor. If the fan control selections do not allow for indoor fan to cycle with the compressor, use the alternate selection that runs the fan continuously. If needed, the manufacturer supplemental test instructions must provide a means for overriding the controls to achieve this high airflow. 3.5 Cooling Mode Tests 3.5.1 Tests for a System with a SingleSpeed Compressor. Conduct two steady-state full-load tests, at the A and C conditions. Table 1 specifies test conditions for the two tests. TABLE 1—COOLING MODE TEST CONDITIONS FOR UNITS HAVING A SINGLE-SPEED COMPRESSOR Air entering indoor unit temperature (°F) Test description Dry bulb Afull Test—required ............................................... Cfull Test—required ............................................... 3.5.2 Tests for a System with a TwoSpeed Compressor. Conduct two full-load Air entering outdoor unit temperature (°F) Wet bulb 80 80 Dry bulb 67 67 95 75 tests, at the A and B conditions. Conduct two low-load tests, at the B and C conditions. Compressor speed Wet bulb 75 60 Full. Full. Table 2 specifies test conditions for the four tests. TABLE 2—COOLING MODE TEST CONDITIONS FOR UNITS HAVING A TWO-CAPACITY COMPRESSOR1 Air entering indoor unit temperature (°F) Test description Dry bulb Afull Test—required ............................................... Bfull Test—required ............................................... Blow Test—required .............................................. Clow Test—required .............................................. Air entering outdoor unit temperature (°F) Wet bulb 80 80 80 80 Dry bulb 67 67 67 67 Compressor speed Wet bulb 95 82 82 75 75 65 65 60 Full. Full. Low. Low. 1 This includes units with compressors that achieve no more than two capacity levels using variable speed technology for any one of the test conditions used for the tests. 3.5.3 Tests for a System with a VariableSpeed Compressor. Conduct two full-load tests, at the A and B conditions. Conduct two low-load tests, at the B and C conditions. Conduct an optional intermediate test at the B condition. Table 3 specifies test conditions for the four tests. TABLE 3—COOLING MODE TEST CONDITIONS FOR VARIABLE-SPEED PTAC/HPS Air entering indoor unit temperature (°F) Test description lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 Dry bulb Afull Test—required ............................................................... Bfull Test—required ............................................................... Blow Test—required .............................................................. Bint Test—optional ................................................................ Clow Test—required .............................................................. VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Wet bulb 80 80 80 80 80 Fmt 4701 Air entering outdoor unit temperature (°F) Sfmt 4702 Dry bulb 67 67 67 67 67 E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM Compressor speed Wet bulb 95 82 82 82 75 12MYP2 75 65 65 65 60 Full. Full. Low. Intermediate. Low. 30871 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules 3.6 Evaluation of Cut-out and Cut-in Temperatures in Heating Mode 3.6.1 Setup. Set the unit to operate in heating mode with the thermostat set at 75 °F and the conditioned space at a lower temperature of 70 °F. 3.6.2 Cut-out Temperature. Reduce outdoor chamber temperature in steps or continuously at an average rate of 1 °F every 5 minutes. The average outdoor coil air inlet temperature when the PTHP operation stops is noted as the cut-out temperature. 3.6.3 Cut-in Temperature. Hold outdoor temperature constant for 5 minutes where the cut-out occurred—then increase outdoor chamber temperature by 1 °F every 5 minutes. Continue temperature ramp until 5 minutes after the HP operation restarts. The average outdoor coil air inlet temperature when the HP operation restarts is noted as the cut-in temperature. 3.7 Heating Mode Tests 3.7.1 Tests for a System with a SingleSpeed Compressor. Conduct two steady-state full-load tests, at the H1 and H3 (or HL) conditions. Table 4 specifies test conditions for the two tests. TABLE 4—HEATING MODE TEST CONDITIONS FOR UNITS HAVING A SINGLE-SPEED COMPRESSOR Air entering indoor unit temperature (°F) Test description Dry bulb H1,full Test—required .............................................................................. H3,full Test—required .............................................................................. HL,full Test 1 ............................................................................................ 1 To 70 70 70 Air entering outdoor unit temperature (°F) Compressor speed Wet bulb Dry bulb Wet bulb 60 max .............. 60 max .............. 60 max .............. 47 ...................... 17 ...................... See note 2 ......... 43 ...................... 15 ...................... See note 3 ......... Full. Full. Full. be conducted only if the unit is unable to test at H3 conditions. the average of the cut-in and cut-out temperatures. a wet-bulb temperature corresponding to a maximum 60% RH level. 2 Use 3 Use 3.7.2 Tests for a System with a TwoSpeed Compressor. Conduct two full-load tests, at the H1 and H3 (or HL) conditions. Conduct two low-load tests, at the H1 and H3 (or HL). Conduct an optional full-load test at the H4 condition. Table 5 specifies test conditions for the four tests. TABLE 5—HEATING MODE TEST CONDITIONS FOR UNITS HAVING A TWO-CAPACITY COMPRESSOR * Air entering indoor unit temperature (°F) Test description Dry bulb H1,full Test—required .......................................... H3,full Test—required .......................................... HL,full Test 1 ........................................................ H4,full Test—optional .......................................... H1,low Test—required ......................................... H3,low Test—required ......................................... HL,low Test 1 ........................................................ Air entering outdoor unit temperature (°F) Wet bulb 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 max max max max max max max ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ Dry bulb Wet bulb 47 ................................ 17 ................................ See note 2 ................... 5 .................................. 47 ................................ 17 ................................ See note 2 ................... 43 ................................ 15 ................................ See note 3 ................... 4 .................................. 43 ................................ 15 ................................ See note 3 ................... Compressor speed Full. Full. Full. Full. Low. Low. Low. * This includes units with compressors that achieve no more than two capacity levels using variable speed technology for any one of the test conditions used for the tests. 1 To be conducted only if the unit is unable to test at H conditions. 3 2 Use the average of the cut-in and cut-out temperatures. 3 Use a wet-bulb temperature corresponding to a maximum 60% RH level. 3.7.3 Tests for a System with a VariableSpeed Compressor. Conduct tests as indicated in section 3.7.2 of this appendix. Conduct an additional optional intermediate low load test at the H3 (or HL) condition. TABLE 6—HEATING MODE TEST CONDITIONS FOR UNITS HAVING A VARIABLE-SPEED COMPRESSOR WITH THREE OR MORE SPEED LEVELS AT ANY GIVEN OUTDOOR TEMPERATURE Air entering indoor unit temperature (°F) Test description Dry bulb H1,full Test—required .......................................... H3,full Test—required .......................................... HL,full Test 1 ........................................................ H4,full Test—optional .......................................... H1,low Test—required ......................................... H3,low Test—required ......................................... HL,low Test 1 ........................................................ H3,int Test—optional ........................................... HL,int Test—optional 1 ......................................... lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 1 To Air entering outdoor unit temperature (°F) Wet bulb 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 max max max max max max max max max ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ Dry bulb Wet bulb 47 ................................ 17 ................................ See note 2 ................... 5 .................................. 47 ................................ 17 ................................ See note 2 ................... 17 ................................ See note 2 ................... 43 ................................ 15 ................................ See note 3 ................... 4 .................................. 43 ................................ 15 ................................ See note 3 ................... 15 ................................ See note 3 ................... be conducted only if the unit is unable to test at H3 conditions. the average of the cut-in and cut-out temperatures. a wet-bulb temperature corresponding to a maximum 60% RH level. 2 Use 3 Use VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 Compressor speed Full. Full. Full. Full. Low. Low. Low. Intermediate. Intermediate. 30872 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules 3.8 Calculation of seasonal performance descriptors 3.8.1 SCP Calculation The SCP is calculated per equation 3.8.1– 1: Equation 3.8.1–1: Where: Tj = the outdoor bin temperature, °F, which are binned in bins of 5°F with the 8 cooling season bin temperatures being 67,72,77,82,87,92,97 and 102°F. j = the bin number, For cooling season calculations, j ranges from 1 to 8. Evaluate the building cooling load, BL(Tj) using equation 3.8.1–2: Equation 3.8.1–2: Where: QA,fullis the space cooling capacity measured in the Afull test Use the fractional cooling hours for each temperature bin, j as defined in Table 7 65–69 70–74 75–79 80–84 85–89 90–94 95–99 100–104 67 72 77 82 87 92 97 102 3.8.1.1 Single-speed system Equation 3.8.1.1–1: VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 0.229 0.238 0.220 0.150 0.094 0.047 0.014 0.007 EP12MY23.101</GPH> ................................................................................................................................. ................................................................................................................................. ................................................................................................................................. ................................................................................................................................. ................................................................................................................................. ................................................................................................................................. ................................................................................................................................. ................................................................................................................................. Fraction of total temperature bin hours, nj/N Jkt 259001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 EP12MY23.002</GPH> EP12MY23.003</GPH> lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Representative temperature for bin °F EP12MY23.004</GPH> Bin temperature range °F Bin number, j EP12MY23.005</GPH> TABLE 7—DISTRIBUTION OF FRACTIONAL HOURS WITHIN COOLING SEASON TEMPERATURE BINS Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules 30873 Equation 3.8.1.1–2: Where: ˙ c(Tj) = the space cooling capacity of the unit Q when operating at outdoor temperature, Tj, Btu/h; PLF = 1¥CDC · [1 – X (Tj)], the part load factor, dimensionless; CDC = 0.3, the cooling degradation coefficient, dimensionless; and Equation 3.8.1.1–3: compressor capacity and outdoor temperature Tj using: Equation 3.8.1.2–1: EP12MY23.008</GPH> 3.8.1.2 Two-speed systems Calculate SCP using Equation 3.8.1–1. ˙ c,low Evaluate the space cooling capacity Q (Tj), and electrical power consumption, E˙c,low (Tj), of the test unit when operating at low Equation 3.8.1.2–2: VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 EP12MY23.006</GPH> EP12MY23.007</GPH> lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 ˙ C,full and E˙C,full are determined Where Q ˙ A,full and E˙A,full are from the Cfull test, Q determined from the Afull test, and all four quantities are measured as specified in section 3.5.1 of this appendix. EP12MY23.009</GPH> Equation 3.8.1.1–4: EP12MY23.010</GPH> EP12MY23.011</GPH> EP12MY23.012</GPH> ˙ c(Tj) and E˙c(Tj) using Evaluate the terms Q equations 3.8.1.1–3 and 3.8.1.1–4: E˙c(Tj) = the electrical power consumption of the test unit when operating at outdoor temperature Tj, W; 30874 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules ˙ C,low and E˙C,low are determined Where Q ˙ B,low and E˙B,low are from the Clow test, Q determined from the Blow test, and all four quantities are measured as specified in section 3.5.2 of this appendix. ˙ c,full Evaluate the space cooling capacity Q (Tj), and electrical power consumption, E˙c,full (Tj), of the test unit when operating at full compressor capacity and outdoor temperature Tj using: Equation 3.8.1.2–3: The calculation of equation 3.8.1–1 quantities differs depending on whether the test unit would operate at low capacity (section 3.8.1.2.1 of this appendix), cycle between low and high capacity (section 3.8.1.2.2 of this appendix), or operate at high capacity (section 3.8.1.2.3) in responding to the building load. Use Equation 3.8.1–2 to calculate the building load, BL(Tj), for each temperature bin. 3.8.1.2.1 Building load is less than low˙ c,low) stage cooling capacity (BL(Tj) < Q Equation 3.8.1.2–4: ˙ B,full and E˙B,full are determined from Where Q ˙ A,full and E˙A,full are the Bfull test, and Q determined from the Afull test, and all four quantities are measured as specified in section 3.5.2 of this appendix. EP12MY23.019</GPH> EP12MY23.020</GPH> Equation 3.8.1.2.1–1: EP12MY23.017</GPH> EP12MY23.018</GPH> Equation 3.8.1.2.1–2: VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 EP12MY23.015</GPH> PLF = 1¥CDC. [1¥Xlow (Tj)], the part load factor, dimensionless; CDC = 0.3, the cooling degradation coefficient, dimensionless; and PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 EP12MY23.013</GPH> EP12MY23.014</GPH> lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP12MY23.016</GPH> Where: Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules 30875 3.8.1.2.2 Building load is higher than the low-stage capacity and less than the full˙ c,low < BL(Tj) < Q ˙ c,full) stage capacity (Q Equation 3.8.1.2.2–1: Equation 3.8.1.2.2–2: Where: EP12MY23.026</GPH> 3.8.1.2.3 Building load is higher than the ˙ c,full) full-stage capacity (BL(Tj) > Q EP12MY23.023</GPH> VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 EP12MY23.021</GPH> EP12MY23.022</GPH> lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP12MY23.024</GPH> EP12MY23.025</GPH> Xfull (Tj) = 1¥Xlow (Tj) is the cooling mode, full capacity load factor for temperature bin j, dimensionless. 30876 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules ˙ c,full (Tj) and E˙c,full (Tj) using Evaluate Q equations 3.8.1.2–3 and 3.8.1.2–4. 3.8.1.3 Variable-speed system Calculate SCP using Equation 3.8.1–1. ˙ c,low Evaluate the space cooling capacity Q (Tj), and electrical power consumption, E˙c,low (Tj), of the test unit when operating at low compressor capacity and outdoor temperature Tj using equations 3.8.1.2–1 and 3.8.1.2–2. ˙ c,int Calculate the space cooling capacity, Q (Tj), and electrical power consumption, E˙c,int (Tj), of the test unit when operating at outdoor temperature Tj and the intermediate compressor speed used during using the following: Equation 3.8.1.3–1: ˙ c,int (Tj) = Q ˙ B,int + MQ * (Tj¥82) Q Equation 3.8.1.3–2: E˙c,int (Tj) = E˙B,int + ME * (Tj¥82) ˙ B,int and E˙B,int are determined from Where Q the optional Bint test or interpolated from the Blow and Bfull tests. Approximate the slopes of the intermediate speed cooling capacity and electrical power input curves, MQ and ME, as follows: Where: Use Equations 3.8.1.2–1, 3.8.1.2–2, 3.8.1.2– 3 and 3.8.1.2–4, respectively, to calculate ˙ c,low(87), E˙c,low(87), Q ˙ c,full(87) and E˙c,full(87). Q 3.8.1.3.1 Building load is less than low˙ c,low) stage capacity (BL(Tj) < Q VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM EP12MY23.029</GPH> CDC = Cooling degradation coefficient, 0.3 12MYP2 EP12MY23.027</GPH> EP12MY23.028</GPH> lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 PLF = 1¥CDC. [1¥Xlow (Tj)], the part load factor, dimensionless. EP12MY23.030</GPH> EP12MY23.031</GPH> Where: Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules 30877 Obtain the fractional bin hours for the cooling season, from Table 7. Use Equations 3.8.1.2–1 and ˙ c,low (Tj) 3.8.1.2–2, respectively, to evaluate Q and E˙c,low (Tj). 3.8.1.3.2 Building load is higher than the low-stage capacity and lesser than the full- stage capacity and the unit operates at an intermediate speed to match capacity to load ˙ c,full) ˙ c,low < BL(Tj) < Q (Q Where: ˙ c,int¥bin(Tj) = BL(Tj), the space cooling Q capacity delivered by the unit in EERint¥bin(Tj) = the steady-state energy efficiency ratio of the test unit when operating at an intermediate compressor speed and temperature Tj, Btu/h per W. Obtain the fractional bin hours for the cooling season, from Table 7 of this appendix. For each temperature bin where the unit operates at an intermediate compressor speed, determine the energy efficiency ratio EERint¥bin(Tj) using the following equations: Where: EERlow(Tj) is the steady-state energy efficiency ratio of the test unit when operating at minimum compressor speed and temperature Tj, Btu/h per W, calculated using ˙ c,low(Tj) calculated using Equation capacity Q 3.8.1.2–1 and electrical power consumption E˙c,low(Tj) calculated using Equation 3.8.1.2–2; EERint(Tj) is the steady-state energy efficiency ratio of the test unit when operating at intermediate compressor speed and temperature Tj, Btu/h per W, calculated ˙ c,int(Tj) calculated using using capacity Q Equation 3.8.1.3–1 and electrical power consumption E˙c,int(Tj) calculated using Equation 3.8.1.3–2; EERfull(Tj) is the steady-state energy efficiency ratio of the test unit when operating at full compressor speed and temperature Tj, Btu/h per W, calculated using ˙ c,full(Tj) calculated Equation capacity Q 3.8.1.2–3 and electrical power consumption E˙c,full(Tj), calculated using Equation 3.8.1.2–4. BL(Tj) is the building cooling load at temperature Tj, Btu/h. 3.8.1.3.3 Building load is higher than the ˙ c,full(Tj)) full-stage capacity a (BL(Tj) > Q VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 EP12MY23.035</GPH> EP12MY23.034</GPH> EP12MY23.032</GPH> EP12MY23.033</GPH> lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP12MY23.036</GPH> EP12MY23.037</GPH> matching the building load at temperature Tj, Btu/h. 30878 3.8.2 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules SHP Calculation The SHP is calculated using equation 3.8.2–1: BL(Tj) = the value of the heating building load evaluated at the outdoor bin temperature, btu/hr. Tj = the outdoor bin temperature, °F, which are binned in bins of 5°F with the 7 heating season bin temperatures being 7, 12, 17, 22, 27, 32, 37. j = the bin number, For heating season calculations, j ranges from 1 to 7. VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 EP12MY23.040</GPH> Evaluate the building heating load, BL(Tj) using equation 3.8.2–2: Equation 3.8.2–2: EP12MY23.038</GPH> EP12MY23.039</GPH> lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP12MY23.041</GPH> EP12MY23.042</GPH> EP12MY23.043</GPH> Where: Equation 3.8.2–1 30879 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules Where: QA,full = is the space cooling capacity from the Afull test Tzl the zero-load temperature, °F, is equal to 40 °F Tj the outdoor bin temperature, °F Use the fractional heating hours for each temperature bin, j as defined in table 8. TABLE 8—DISTRIBUTION OF FRACTIONAL HOURS WITHIN HEATING SEASON TEMPERATURE BINS Bin temperature range °F Bin number, j 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ................................................................................................................................. ................................................................................................................................. ................................................................................................................................. ................................................................................................................................. ................................................................................................................................. ................................................................................................................................. ................................................................................................................................. 3.8.2.1 Representative temperature for bin °F 39–35 34–30 29–25 24–20 19–15 14–10 9–5 37 32 27 22 17 12 7 Fraction of total temperature bin hours, nj/N 0.337 0.298 0.192 0.108 0.051 0.008 0.006 Single-speed system Equation 3.8.2.1–1: Equation 3.8.2.1–2: EP12MY23.047</GPH> from Table 8. Determine the low temperature cut-out factor, d(Tj), using the equation below: Equation 3.8.2.1–3: EP12MY23.046</GPH> PLFj = C˙Dh * [1 ¥ XTj] (the part load factor, dimensionless. C˙Dh = Heating degradation coefficient = 0.3 Use Equation 3.8.2–2 to determine BL(Tj). Obtain fractional bin hours for the heating season, VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 EP12MY23.044</GPH> EP12MY23.045</GPH> lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 ˙ h(Tj) = the space heating capacity of the Q heat pump when operating at outdoor temperature Tj, Btu/h. E˙h(Tj) = the electrical power consumption of the heat pump when operating at outdoor temperature Tj, W. d(Tj) = the heat pump low temperature cutout factor, dimensionless. EP12MY23.048</GPH> Where: 30880 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules Ton = the outdoor temperature when the compressor is automatically turned back on, if applicable, following an automatic shut-off, °F. If the H4 test is not conducted, calculate ˙ h(Tj) and E˙h(Tj) using Equations 3.8.2.1–4 Q and 3.8.2.1–5 if the H3 is conducted, or equations 3.8.2.1–6 and 3.8.2.1–7 if the HL test is conducted. Equation 3.8.2.1–4: Where: ˙ h,full(35) = 0.9 * {Q ˙ H3,full + 0.6 * [Q ˙ H1,full ¥ Q ˙ H3,full]} Q Equation 3.8.2.1–5: Where: E˙h,full(35) = 0.985 * {E˙H3,full + 0.6 * [E˙H1,full ¥ E˙H3,full]} Equation 3.8.2.1–6: EP12MY23.053</GPH> EP12MY23.054</GPH> Where: Toff = the outdoor temperature when the compressor is automatically shut off, °F. (If no such temperature exists, Tj is always greater than Toff and Ton). EP12MY23.052</GPH> Where: EP12MY23.051</GPH> Where: VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 EP12MY23.049</GPH> EP12MY23.050</GPH> lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 Equation 3.8.2.1–7: Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules Equation 3.8.2.1–8: Where: ˙ h,full(35) = 0.9 * {Q ˙ H3,full + 0.6 * [Q ˙ H1,full ¥ Q ˙ H3,full]} Q Where: E˙h,full(35) = 0.985 * {E˙H3,full + 0.6 * [E˙H1,full ¥ E˙H3,full} 3.8.2.2 Two-speed system The calculation of Equation 3.8.2–1 quantities differs depending upon whether the heat pump would operate at low capacity (section 3.8.2.2.1 of this appendix), cycle between low and high capacity (section 3.8.2.2.2 of this appendix), or operate at high capacity (section 3.8.2.2.3 of this appendix) in responding to the building load. Evaluate the space heating capacity and electrical power consumption of the heat Where: ˙ h,low(35) = 0.9 * {Q ˙ H3,low + 0.6 * [Q ˙ H1,low ¥ Q ˙ H3,low]} Q Equation 3.8.2.2–2: Where: E˙h,low(35) = 0.985 * {E˙H3,low + 0.6 * [E˙H1,low ¥ ˙ H3,low]} H Equation 3.8.2.2–3: Equation 3.8.2.1–9: pump when operating at low compressor capacity and outdoor temperature Tj using equations 3.8.2.2–1 and 3.8.2.2–2 if the H3 is conducted, or equations 3.8.2.2–3 and 3.8.2.2–4 if the HL is conducted: Equation 3.8.2.2–1: EP12MY23.058</GPH> EP12MY23.057</GPH> Where: VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 EP12MY23.055</GPH> EP12MY23.056</GPH> lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP12MY23.059</GPH> EP12MY23.060</GPH> ˙ h(Tj) If the H4 test is conducted, calculate Q and E˙h(Tj) using equations 3.8.2.1–8 and 3.8.2.1–9: 30881 30882 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules Equation 3.8.2.2–4: Where: If the H4 test is not conducted, evaluate the space heating capacity and electrical power ˙ h,full(Tj) and E˙h,full(Tj) of the consumption (Q heat pump when operating at high compressor capacity and outdoor temperature Tj by solving Equations 3.8.2.1– 4 and 3.8.2.1–5, or Equations 3.8.2.1–6 and 3.8.2.1–7 as appropriate . If the H4 test is conducted, evaluate the space heating capacity and electrical power consumption ˙ h,full(Tj) and E˙h,full(Tj) of the heat pump (Q when operating at high compressor capacity and outdoor temperature Tj using Equations 3.8.2.1–8 and 3.8.2.1–9, respectively. 3.8.2.2.1 Building load is less than low˙ h,low) stage capacity (BL(Tj) < Q d(Tj) the low temperature cutoff factor, dimensionless. C˙Dh = Heating degradation coefficient = 0.3 Determine the low temperature cut-out factor using Equation 3.8.2.2.1–3: Equation 3.8.2.2.1–3: EP12MY23.067</GPH> EP12MY23.068</GPH> Equation 3.8.2.2.1–1: EP12MY23.066</GPH> Equation 3.8.2.2.1–2: VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 EP12MY23.063</GPH> EP12MY23.061</GPH> EP12MY23.062</GPH> lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 PLFj = 1¥C˙Dh * [1¥Xlow≤(Tj)], the part load factor, dimensionless. EP12MY23.064</GPH> EP12MY23.065</GPH> Where: Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules Where: Toff = the outdoor temperature when the compressor is automatically shut off, °F. (If no such temperature exists, Tj is always greater than Toff and Ton). 30883 Ton = the outdoor temperature when the compressor is automatically turned back on, if applicable, following an automatic shut-off, °F. 3.8.2.2.2 Building load is higher than the low-stage capacity and lesser than the full˙ h,low < BL(Tj) < Q ˙ h,full) stage capacity (Q Determine the low temperature cut-out factor, d (Tj), using equation 3.8.2.2.1–3. 3.8.2.2.3 Building load is higher than the ˙ h,full) full-stage capacity a (BL(Tj) > Q Equation 3.8.2.2.2–1: Equation 3.8.2.2.2–2: Equation 3.8.2.2.3–2: EP12MY23.072</GPH> EP12MY23.073</GPH> Equation 3.8.2.2.3–1: EP12MY23.074</GPH> EP12MY23.075</GPH> Xfull(Tj) = 1 ¥ Xlow (Tj) the heating mode, high capacity load factor for temperature bin j, dimensionless. EP12MY23.076</GPH> Where: EP12MY23.071</GPH> VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 EP12MY23.069</GPH> EP12MY23.070</GPH> lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 Where: 30884 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules 3.8.2.3 Variable-speed system The calculation of the Equation 3.8.2–1 quantities differs depending upon whether the heat pump would operate at low capacity (section 3.8.2.3.1 of this appendix), cycle between low and high capacity (section 3.8.2.3.2 of this appendix), or operate at high capacity (section 3.8.2.3.3 of this appendix) in responding to the building load. Calculate the space heating capacity, ˙ h,int(Tj), and electrical power consumption, Q E˙h,int(Tj), of the test unit when operating at outdoor temperature Tj and the intermediate compressor speed used during using the following equations: Equation 3.8.2.3–1: ˙ h,int(35) + MQ * (Tj ¥ 35) ˙ h,int(Tj) = Q Q Equation 3.8.2.3–2: E˙h,int(Tj) = E˙h,int(35) + ME * (Tj ¥ 35) Where: Where: ˙ h,int(35) = 0.9 * {Q ˙ H3,int + 0.6 * [Q ˙ H1,full ¥ Q ˙ H3,int] Q E˙h,int(35) = 0.985 * {E˙H3,int + 0.6 * [E˙H1,full ¥ E˙H3,int] ˙ H3,int and E˙H3,int are determined Where Q from the optional H3,int test or interpolated from the H3,low and H3,full tests. Approximate the slopes of the intermediate speed heating capacity and electrical power input curves, MQ and ME, as follows: 3.8.2.3.1 Building load is less than low˙ h,low) stage capacity (BL(Tj) < Q ˙ h,low < BL(Tj) < Q ˙ h,full) and stage capacity (Q the compressor operates at an intermediate speed) in order to match the building heating load at a temperature Tj heat pump operating at an intermediate compressor speed. COPint¥bin(Tj) = the steady-state coefficient of performance of the heat pump when operating at an intermediate compressor speed and temperature (Tj), dimensionless. For each temperature bin where the heat pump operates at an intermediate compressor speed, determine COPint¥bin(Tj) using the following equations, ˙ h,low(Tj) For each temperature bin where Q ˙ h,int(Tj)¥ < BL(Tj) < Q EP12MY23.081</GPH> EP12MY23.082</GPH> 3.8.2.3.2 Building load is higher than the low-stage capacity and lesser than the full- VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 EP12MY23.079</GPH> and d(Tj) is evaluated using Equation ˙ h,int¥bin(Tj) = (BL(Tj), the 3.8.2.2.1–3 while, Q space heating capacity delivered by the unit in matching the building load at temperature (Tj), Btu/h. The matching occurs with the EP12MY23.077</GPH> EP12MY23.078</GPH> lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP12MY23.080</GPH> Where: Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules 30885 COPint(Tj) is the steady-state coefficient of performance of the heat pump when operating at intermediate compressor speed and temperature Tj, dimensionless, ˙ h,int(Tj) calculated calculated using capacity Q using Equation 3.8.2.3–1 and electrical power consumption E˙h,int(Tj) calculated using Equation 3.8.2.3–2; COPfull(Tj) is the steady-state coefficient of performance of the heat pump when operating at full compressor speed and temperature Tj, dimensionless, calculated ˙ h,full(Tj) and electrical power using capacity Q consumption E˙h,full(Tj), both calculated as described in section 3.8.2.1; and BL(Tj) is the building heating load at temperature Tj, Btu/h. 3.8.2.3.3 Building load is higher than the ˙ h,full) full-stage capacity a (BL(Tj) > Q 4. Dehumidification Test Procedures 4.1 Test Setup for Dehumidification Tests. Install the unit according to section 6 of ANSI/ASHRAE 16–2016, subject to the following additional requirements: 4.1.1 Makeup Air Inlet Duct Assembly. (1) Connect a makeup air inlet duct assembly as shown in Figure 1. The inlet duct assembly will include a nozzle airflow measuring apparatus and an inlet plenum, with interconnecting duct sections. The inlet plenum shall be insulated to a level of R–19. The interconnecting duct between the inlet plenum and the unit’s makeup air inlet shall be insulated to a level or R–19 up to the inlet grill. (2) The connecting duct between the code tester and the inlet plenum shall have crosssectional dimensions such that the air velocity within it is no more than 200 fpm. (3) The connecting duct between the inlet plenum and the makeup air inlet of the unit under test shall have dimensions equal to those of the dehumidification air inlet. If this is not possible due to interference of components within the unit under test, the dimensions of the duct may be different, but the cross-sectional area of the connecting duct shall be equal to that of the inlet. A hole shall be cut in the air inlet grill to make room for the duct. External to the inlet grill, the duct shall have an area-reducing section with reducing angle no greater than 45 degrees. At the connection to the inlet plenum, the connecting duct cross section shall be at least twice the cross section of the connection to the dehumidification air inlet. The duct shall extend beyond the grill such that the inlet plenum wall insulation is at least 3 inches distant from the grill. (4) When testing a PTAC/HP with an integrated dehumidification system, the inlet plenum shall be located offset to the side, away from the center of the unit under test to impose minimal air flow restriction on outdoor coil air inlet and discharge. (5) The inlet plenum shall have interior dimensions of at least 12 inches high and at least 12 inches wide in the plane perpendicular to air flow, and an interior dimension of at least 24 inches between the edges of the inlet and outlet ducts that are closest to each other. (6) Install a thermocouple grid consisting of nine thermocouples in a three-by-three arrangement in the inlet air plenum upstream of the plane of the pressure taps (7) Seal all duct connections between the code tester inlet and the connection to the unit’s dehumidification air inlet. (8) Use a nozzle airflow measuring apparatus as described in section 6.2 of ASHRAE 37–2009 with an adjustable fan to allow adjustment of the inlet plenum pressure. Set up the nozzle airflow measuring apparatus to take in outdoor room air and move it into the unit under test in a blowthrough arrangement. (9) If testing a makeup air PTAC/HP with an integrated dehumidification system, provide means to heat or cool the inlet air as needed to achieve the target makeup air dry bulb temperature at a location between the measurement of conditions at the nozzle airflow measuring apparatus inlet and the apparatus fan. The applied heating or cooling shall not affect the makeup air dew point temperature. 4.1.2 Indoor air duct connection. When testing a makeup air PTAC/HP with an addon dehumidification system, test the system without connection of an indoor air duct. When testing a makeup air PTAC/HP with an integrated dehumidification system, if the cooling performance of the unit was tested using the psychrometric method, keep the indoor air duct assembly connected. 4.1.3 Transfer Fan. Install an adjustable transfer fan to transfer makeup air from the indoor room back to the outdoor room. The fan shall be adjustable to allow setting of the needed pressure differential when the target makeup air is passing through the test unit. 4.1.4 Thermostatic plug. Remove the thermostatic plug that prevents condensate drainage from the unit in cooling mode. Attach an adapter if needed, and a tube to transfer collected condensate to a measurement location in the outdoor room. Collect condensate in a bucket placed on a scale with mass measurement resolution of 1 gram. Provide a cover for the bucket to limit re-evaporation. 4.2 Measurements 4.2.1 Pressure Measurement. Consistent with section 6.5 of ASHRAE 37–2009, static pressure taps shall be placed at four locations around the inlet air plenum as shown in Figure 1, halfway between the nearest edges of the connecting ducts to the nozzle airflow measuring apparatus and the PTAC/HP makeup air inlet. The pressure taps shall be manifolded together as indicated section 6.5.3 of ASHRAE 37–2009. Measure pressure differential between the outdoor room and the inlet air plenum. 4.2.2 Temperature Measurements. Outdoor inlet dry bulb and wet bulb temperature shall be measured at the inlet of the nozzle airflow measurement apparatus, as described in ASHRAE 16–2016. 4.2.3 Outdoor Coil Temperature Measurement for PTAC/HPs with Integrated Dehumidification Systems. For PTAC/HPs with integrated dehumidification systems, measure outdoor coil temperature using provisions as described in this section, for both the cooling Afull test and all of the dehumidification tests. Attach a thermocouple with +/¥ 0.5 0F measurement accuracy to a return bend at approximately the midpoint of the outdoor coil circuit. VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 EP12MY23.085</GPH> Where: COPlow(Tj) is the steady-state coefficient of performance of the heat pump when operating at minimum compressor speed and temperature Tj, dimensionless, calculated ˙ h,low(Tj) calculated using using capacity Q Equation 3.8.2.2.1 and electrical power consumption E˙h,low(Tj) calculated using Equation 3.8.2.2.2; EP12MY23.083</GPH> EP12MY23.084</GPH> lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 ˙ h,int(Tj ≤ For each temperature bin where Q ˙ h,full(Tj)¥ BL(Tj) < Q Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules Figure 1—Makeup Air Inlet Duct Assembly 4.4 Tests to be Conducted 4.4.1 Units with Add-on dehumidification system 4.4.1.1 Preliminary Power Measurement. Operate the PTAC/HP in fan-only mode or with the thermostat and fan controls set such that the indoor fan is energized, but the compressor and outdoor fan are not. Establish operating conditions as specified in Table 10, keeping indoor air dry bulb and wet bulb within 3 °F of specified values, and preliminarily setting dry bulb and dew point of air at the nozzle airflow measuring apparatus inlet within 3 °F of specified values. Make a preliminary measurement of PTAC/HP power input for a duration of 5 minutes when operating in this mode without the dehumidification system activated. 4.4.1.2 Establishing Test Conditions. Set up the makeup air flow by starting operation of the transfer fan and the nozzle airflow measuring apparatus fan. Activate the dehumidification system. Adjust the transfer fan and the nozzle airflow measuring apparatus fan so that the pressure differential from the inlet plenum to outdoor room is 0 +/¥0.005 inches of W.C. and the certified airflow is flowing as measured by the nozzle airflow measuring apparatus. Adjust outdoor room conditions such that the dew point of air entering the nozzle airflow measuring apparatus matches the specified outdoor air dew point and the dry bulb temperature measured by the thermocouple grid in the inlet plenum matches the specified outdoor air dry bulb temperature, both within required tolerances as specified in Table 10 of this appendix. VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 4.4.1.3 Equilibrium and Test Periods. Equilibrium test conditions shall be maintained within tolerances shown in Table 10 for not less than one hour before recording data for the capacity test. The dehumidification test shall then be conducted over a 1-hour period, confirming that at no time any measured parameter exceeds the allowable tolerances specified in Table 10. Measurements of test conditions, input power and energy, and airflow shall be taken at least every 60 seconds and logged. Measurements of condensate mass shall be made every 10 minutes. 4.4.2 Units with Integrated dehumidification 4.4.2.1 Preliminary Test 4.4.2.1.1 Calculate the average coil temperature measured during the Afull cooling test using the temperature measurement described in section 4.2.3 of this section. 4.4.2.1.2 With the make-up airflow passage blocked as for the Afull test, but with the makeup air inlet duct assembly installed as described in section 4.1.1 of this appendix and with the condensate plug removed to allow collection of condensate as described in section 4.1.4 of this appendix, conduct a repeat of the Afull test. For this preliminary test, reduce outdoor room dry bulb temperature to a level for which the outdoor coil return bend temperature is within 0.5 0F of the temperature measured during the official Afull test. Measure capacity and latent capacity as described in ASHRAE 16–2016. Measure condensate every 10 minutes. Calculate latent capacity based on the condensate measurement as described in section 7.8.2.1 of ASHRAE 37–2009. When PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 conditions have been stable for 60 minutes, as described in section 8.5.3 of ASHRAE 16– 2016, measure performance for a 60 minute test period. The test is valid when energy balance requirements described in section 7 of ASHRAE 16–2016 have been met and the latent capacity calculated based on the condensate measurement is within 6 percent of the latent capacity measurement based on the psychrometric or calorimetric test method, whichever is used. 4.4.2.2 Makeup air test 4.4.2.2.1 Remove the blockage of the makeup air passage. Restart cooling operation as conducted for the preliminary test and set up the makeup air flow and conditions as described in section 4.4.1.2 of this appendix. However, maintain outdoor room dry bulb temperature within 0.3 0F of the average measured during the preliminary test, and set dry bulb temperature of the makeup air by adjusting the heating or cooling thereof using provisions set up in the nozzle airflow measuring apparatus as described in section 4.1.1(9) of this appendix. 4.4.2.2.2 When conditions have been stable for 60 minutes, as described in section 8.5.3 of ASHRAE 16–2016, measure performance for a 60 minute test period. The test is valid when energy balance requirements described in section 7 of ASHRAE 16–2016 have been met and the latent capacity calculated based on the condensate measurement is within 6 percent of the latent capacity measurement based on the psychrometric or calorimetric test method, whichever is used. E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 EP12my23.086</GPH> lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 30886 30887 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules TABLE 9—DEHUMIDIFICATION TEST CONDITIONS Air entering makeup air inlet temperatures (°F) Air entering indoor side of unit temperature (°F) Dry bulb Dew point Dry bulb Wet bulb Make-up air flow (scfm) 95 67 80 67 30 TABLE 10—DEHUMIDIFICATION TEST TOLERANCES Variation of arithmetic average from specified conditions (test condition tolerance) Reading Air entering makeup air inlet dry bulb (°F) .................................................................................................. Dew point (°F) .............................................................................................................................................. Add-on dehumidification system test: Air entering indoor side dry bulb (°F) ................................................................................................... Wet bulb (°F) ........................................................................................................................................ Integrated dehumidification system test: Air entering indoor side dry bulb (°F) ................................................................................................... Wet bulb (°F) ........................................................................................................................................ Makeup airflow (scfm) ................................................................................................................................. Makeup airflow Nozzle pressure drop (%) .................................................................................................. 4.3 Calculations 4.3.1 Dehumidifier capacity for PTAC/HP with add-on dehumidification system. Calculate the capacity of an add-on dehumidification system using the data obtained and the formula: Where: wd,add is the mass of collected condensate during the test period in pounds; t is the test period duration in hours; and 24 is a conversion from hours to 24-hour period. 4.3.2 Dehumidifier capacity for PTAC/HP with integrated dehumidification system. Calculate the capacity of an integrated dehumidification system using the data obtained and the formula: wd,int and wd,pre are the masses of collected condensate during the tests with the dehumidification system operative and non-operative, respectively, in pounds; ttest and tpre are the test period durations in hours for the test with the dehumidification system operative and the preliminary test with the system nonoperative, respectively; and 24 is a conversion from hours to 24-hour period. 4.3.3 Dehumidifier Capacity in Pints per 24 hours. Calculate capacity in pints per 24 hours by dividing the capacity in pounds per 24 hours by 1.04. 4.3.4 Dehumidification Energy Use. Calculate the 24-hour energy use associated with system dehumidification as follows. Where: Etest and Epre are the energy use measured during the dehumidification test and the 0.3 0.5 1.2 1.5 3 3 5 5 0.3 0.3 1 .............................. 1.5 1.0 .............................. 5 preliminary test, respectively, both in watt-hours (kWh); ttest and tpre are the durations of the dehumidification test and the preliminary test, respectively, both in hours; and 24 is a conversion from hours to 24-hour period. 4.3.5 Dehumidification Efficiency. Calculate the dehumidification efficiency DE as follows: Where: Cd is dehumidification capacity in pounds per 24 hour period; Ed is the energy use in kWh per 24 hour period; and 0.454 is a conversion factor from pounds to liters of water. Values of DE shall be rounded to the nearest 0.01 L/kWh. [FR Doc. 2023–08897 Filed 5–11–23; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450–01–P EP12MY23.089</GPH> VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:34 May 11, 2023 Jkt 259001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\12MYP2.SGM 12MYP2 EP12MY23.087</GPH> EP12MY23.088</GPH> lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP12MY23.090</GPH> Where: Maximum observed range of readings (test operating tolerance)

Agencies

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 92 (Friday, May 12, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30836-30887]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-08897]



[[Page 30835]]

Vol. 88

Friday,

No. 92

May 12, 2023

Part II





Department of Energy





-----------------------------------------------------------------------





10 CFR Parts 429 and 431





Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Packaged Terminal Air 
Conditioners and Packaged Terminal Heat Pumps; Proposed Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 2023 / Proposed 
Rules

[[Page 30836]]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

10 CFR Parts 429 and 431

[EERE-2019-BT-TP-0027]
RIN 1904-AE65


Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Packaged Terminal 
Air Conditioners and Packaged Terminal Heat Pumps

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of 
Energy.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking and request for comment.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (``DOE'') proposes to amend the 
test procedures for Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners (``PTACs'') and 
Packaged Terminal Heat Pumps (``PTHPs'') to establish seasonal energy 
efficiency metrics for heating and cooling. DOE also proposes to revise 
the current test procedure to measure dehumidification energy use of 
make-up air PTACs and PTHPs. DOE is seeking comment from interested 
parties on the proposal.

DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this 
proposal no later than July 11, 2023. See section V, ``Public 
Participation,'' for details. DOE will hold a webinar on Tuesday, June 
6, 2023, from 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. See section V, ``Public 
Participation,'' for webinar registration information, participant 
instructions, and information about the capabilities available to 
webinar participants.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are encouraged to submit comments using 
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov under docket 
number EERE-2019-BT-TP-0027. Follow the instructions for submitting 
comments. Alternatively, interested persons may submit comments, 
identified by docket number EERE-2019-BT-TP-0027, by any of the 
following methods:
    Email: [email protected]. Include the docket number EERE-
2019-BT-TP-0027 in the subject line of the message.
    Postal Mail: Appliance and Equipment Standards Program, U.S. 
Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, Mailstop EE-5B, 
1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC, 20585-0121. Telephone: 
(202) 287-1445. If possible, please submit all items on a compact disc 
(``CD''), in which case it is not necessary to include printed copies.
    Hand Delivery/Courier: Appliance and Equipment Standards Program, 
U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, 1000 
Independence Ave SW, Washington, DC 20585. Telephone: (202) 287-1445. 
If possible, please submit all items on a CD, in which case it is not 
necessary to include printed copies.
    No telefacsimiles (``faxes'') will be accepted. For detailed 
instructions on submitting comments and additional information on this 
process, see section V of this document.
    Docket: The docket for this activity, which includes Federal 
Register notices, public meeting attendee lists and transcripts (if a 
public meeting is held), comments, and other supporting documents/
materials, is available for review at 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-2019-BT-TP-0027. The docket web page contains instructions on how 
to access all documents, including public comments, in the docket. See 
section V for information on how to submit comments through 
www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 
    Mr. Lucas Adin, 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) 287-5904. Email: [email protected]
    Ms. Amelia Whiting, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the 
General Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 
20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-2588. Email: 
[email protected].
    For further information on how to submit a comment, review other 
public comments and the docket, or participate in a public meeting (if 
one is held), contact the Appliance and Equipment Standards Program 
staff at (202) 287-1445 or by email: 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    DOE proposes to maintain material previously approved for 
incorporation by reference in part 431: AHRI 310/380-2014, and update 
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-1983 (RA 2014), ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 37-2009 
and ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 58-1986. DOE incorporates by reference the 
following industry standards into 10 CFR part 431:
    AHRI Standard 310/380-2017, ``Standard for Packaged Terminal Air-
Conditioners and Heat Pumps,'' July 2017 (``AHRI 310/380-2017''). ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 16-2016, ``Method of Testing for Rating Room Air 
Conditioners, Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners, and Packaged Terminal 
Heat Pumps for Cooling and Heating Capacity,'' ANSI approved November 
1, 2016 (``ANSI/ASHRAE 16-2016'').
    Copies of AHRI 310/380-2014 and AHRI 310/380-2017 can be obtained 
from the Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute 
(``AHRI''), 2311 Wilson Blvd., Suite 400, Arlington, VA 22201 (703) 
524-8800, or online at: www.ahrinet.org/standards.
    See section IV.M of this document for a further discussion of these 
standards.

Table of Contents

I. Authority and Background
    A. Authority
    B. Background
II. Synopsis of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
III. Discussion
    A. Scope of Applicability
    B. Proposed Organization of the PTAC/HP Test Procedure
    C. Updates to Industry Standards
    1. AHRI 310/380-2017
    2. ANSI/ASHRAE 16-2016
    D. Definitions
    E. Operation at Part Load Conditions and Integrated Metrics
    1. Market Size of PTACs and PTHPs With Part-Load Operation 
Capability
    2. Potential Part-Load Efficiency Metrics
    3. Low-Ambient Heating
    F. Proposed Cooling Metric and Test Procedure
    1. Test Conditions
    2. Cooling Tests
    3. Cyclic Losses
    4. SCP Calculation
    5. Cooling Temperature Bins and Weights
    G. Proposed Heating Metric and Test Procedure
    1. Test Conditions
    2. Heating Tests
    3. Evaluating Cut-In and Cut-Out Temperatures
    4. Defrost Degradation
    5. SHP Calculation
    6. Heating Temperature Bins and Weights
    H. Dehumidification of Fresh Air
    1. Market Size of Make-Up Air PTACs and PTHPs
    2. Dehumidification Energy Use
    3. Proposed Test Procedure
    I. Fan-Only Mode
    J. Use of Psychrometric Testing
    K. Test Procedure Costs and Impact
    L. Compliance Date
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
    A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 14094
    B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act

[[Page 30837]]

    1. Description of Why Action Is Being Considered
    2. Objective of, and Legal Basis for, Rule
    3. Description and Estimate of Small Entities Regulated
    4. Description and Estimate of Compliance Requirements
    5. Duplication Overlap, and Conflict With Other Rules and 
Regulations
    6. Significant Alternatives to the Rule
    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 Treasury and General Government Appropriations 
Act, 2001
    K. Review Under Executive Order 13211
    L. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration 
Act of 1974
    M. Description of Materials Incorporated by Reference
V. Public Participation
    A. Attendance at the Public Meeting
    B. Procedure for Submitting Prepared General Statements for 
Distribution
    C. Conduct of the Public Meeting
    D. Submission of Comments
    E. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment
VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

I. Authority and Background

    Package terminal air conditioners (``PTACs'') and package terminal 
heat pumps (``PTHPs'') (collectively ``PTAC/HPs'') are included in the 
list of ``covered equipment'' for which DOE is authorized to establish 
and amend energy conservation standards and test procedures. (42 U.S.C. 
6311(1)(I)) DOE's current test procedures for PTACs and PTHPs are 
currently prescribed at title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 
(``CFR''), part 431, section 96(g) ``Test Procedures for Packaged 
Terminal Air Conditioners and Packaged Terminal Heat Pumps,'' with 
additional provisions provided in section 96 paragraphs (c) and (e). 
The following sections discuss DOE's authority to establish test 
procedures for PTACs and PTHPs and relevant background information 
regarding DOE's consideration of test procedures for this equipment.

A. Authority

    The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended (``EPCA''),\1\ 
authorizes DOE to regulate the energy efficiency of a number of 
consumer products and certain industrial equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6291-
6317) Title III, Part C \2\ of EPCA, added by Public Law 95-619, Title 
IV, Sec.  441(a), established the Energy Conservation Program for 
Certain Industrial Equipment, which sets forth a variety of provisions 
designed to improve energy efficiency. This equipment includes PTACs 
and PTHPs, the subject of this document. (42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(I))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \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 redesignated Part A-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The energy conservation program under EPCA consists essentially of 
four parts: (1) testing, (2) labeling, (3) Federal energy conservation 
standards, and (4) certification and enforcement procedures. Relevant 
provisions of EPCA include definitions (42 U.S.C. 6311), test 
procedures (42 U.S.C. 6314), labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6315), 
energy conservation standards (42 U.S.C. 6313), and the authority to 
require information and reports from manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6316; 42 
U.S.C. 6296).
    The Federal testing requirements consist of test procedures that 
manufacturers of covered equipment must use 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 other representations about 
the efficiency of that equipment (42 U.S.C. 6314(d)). Similarly, DOE 
uses these test procedures to determine whether the equipment complies 
with relevant standards promulgated under EPCA. 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 
42 U.S.C. 6316(b); 42 U.S.C. 6297). DOE may, however, grant waivers of 
Federal preemption for particular State laws or regulations, in 
accordance with the procedures and other provisions of EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 
6316(b)(2)(D))
    Under 42 U.S.C. 6314, EPCA sets forth the criteria and procedures 
DOE must follow when prescribing or amending test procedures for 
covered equipment. EPCA requires that any test procedures prescribed or 
amended under this section must be reasonably designed to produce test 
results which reflect energy efficiency, energy use, or estimated 
annual operating cost of a given type of covered equipment during a 
representative average use cycle and requires that test procedures not 
be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2)) With respect to 
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 ``ASHRAE equipment''), EPCA requires DOE to use 
industry test procedures developed or recognized by the Air-
Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (``AHRI'') or the 
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning 
Engineers (``ASHRAE''), as referenced in ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1, 
``Energy Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential 
Buildings.'' (``ASHRAE Standard 90.1'') (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(4)(A)) 
Further, if such an industry test procedure is amended, DOE is required 
to amend its test procedure to be consistent with the amended industry 
test procedure, unless it determines, by rule published in the Federal 
Register and supported by clear and convincing evidence, that the 
amended test procedure would be unduly burdensome to conduct or would 
not produce test results that reflect the energy efficiency, energy 
use, and estimated operating costs of that equipment during a 
representative average use cycle. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(4)(B))
    EPCA also requires that, at least once every seven years, DOE 
evaluate test procedures for each type of covered equipment, including 
PTACs and PTHPs, to determine whether amended test procedures would 
more accurately or fully comply with the requirements for the test 
procedures to not be unduly burdensome to conduct and be reasonably 
designed to produce test results that reflect energy efficiency, energy 
use, and estimated operating costs during a representative average use 
cycle. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(1)(A))
    In addition, if the Secretary determines that a test procedure 
amendment is warranted, the Secretary must publish proposed test 
procedures in the Federal Register and afford interested persons an 
opportunity (of not less than 45 days' duration) to present oral and 
written data, views, and arguments on the proposed test procedures. (42 
U.S.C. 6314(b))
    DOE is publishing this notice of proposed rulemaking (``NOPR'') in 
satisfaction of the seven-year review requirement specified in EPCA. 
(42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(1)(A)(ii))

B. Background

    DOE's existing test procedures for PTACs and PTHPs appear at title 
10 of

[[Page 30838]]

the CFR part 431, subpart F, section 96(g).
    For PTACs and PTHPs, DOE currently specifies the energy efficiency 
ratio (``EER'') as the energy efficiency descriptor for cooling 
efficiency. Table 1 to 10 CFR 431.96. EER is the ratio of the produced 
cooling effect of the PTAC or PTHP to its net work input, expressed in 
Btu/watt-hour, and measured at standard rating conditions. 10 CFR 
431.92. For PTHPs, DOE specifies the coefficient of performance 
(``COP'') as the energy efficiency descriptor for heating efficiency. 
Table 1 to 10 CFR 431.96. COP is the ratio of the produced heating 
effect of the PTHP to its net work input, expressed in watts/watts, and 
measured at standard rating conditions. 10 CFR 431.92.
    The test procedures were most recently amended after AHRI published 
AHRI Standard 310/380-2014, ``Standard for Packaged Terminal Air-
Conditioners and Heat Pumps'' (``AHRI 310/380-2014'') in February 2014. 
The 2014 version of the standard updated and superseded AHRI Standard 
310/380-2004. In a final rule published on June 30, 2015 (``June 2015 
TP final rule''), DOE amended the test procedures for PTACs and PTHPs. 
80 FR 37136, 37136-37149. In the June 2015 TP final rule, DOE 
incorporated by reference certain sections of AHRI 310/380-2014. Id. at 
80 FR 37148. DOE also incorporated by reference (1) American National 
Standard Institute (``ANSI'')/ASHRAE Standard 16-1983 (RA 2014), 
``Method of Testing for Rating Room Air Conditioners and Packaged 
Terminal Air Conditioners'' (``ASHRAE 16-1983''); (2) ANSI/ASHRAE 
Standard 58-1986 (RA2014), ``Method of Testing for Rating Room Air 
Conditioner and Packaged Terminal Air Conditioner Heating Capacity'' 
(``ASHRAE 58-1986''); and (3) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 37-2009, ``Methods 
of Testing for Rating Electrically Driven Unitary Air-Conditioning and 
Heat Pump Equipment'' (``ASHRAE 37-2009''). Id. Additionally, DOE 
amended the PTAC and PTHP test procedures to specify an optional break-
in period; explicitly require that wall sleeves be sealed; allow for 
the pre-filling of the condensate drain pan; require that measurements 
of cooling capacity be conducted using electrical instruments accurate 
to  0.5 percent of reading; and require testing with 14-
inch deep wall sleeves and the filter option most representative of a 
typical installation. Id. at 80 FR 37149.
    In July 2017, AHRI published AHRI Standard 310/380-2017, ``Packaged 
Terminal Air-Conditioners and Heat Pumps'' (``AHRI 310/380-2017''). The 
2017 version of the standard updated and superseded AHRI Standard 310/
380-2014. The 2017 version of the standard incorporated DOE's 
additional PTAC and PTHP test procedure specifications listed 
previously. The current DOE test procedures for PTACs and PTHPs are 
therefore consistent with AHRI 310/380-2017.
    EPCA requires DOE to use industry test procedures developed or 
recognized by AHRI or ASHRAE as referenced in ASHRAE Standard 90.1. The 
latest update to ASHRAE Standard 90.1, published on October 24, 2019 
(``ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019'') updated the AHRI Standard 310/380 
reference to the 2017 edition. As discussed, the DOE test procedures 
for PTACs and PTHPs are already consistent with AHRI 310/380-2017. (42 
U.S.C. 6314(a)(4)(A))
    EPCA also requires that, at least once every 7 years, DOE evaluate 
test procedures for each type of covered equipment, including PTACs and 
PTHPs, to determine whether amended test procedures would more 
accurately or fully comply with the requirements for the test 
procedures to not be unduly burdensome to conduct and be reasonably 
designed to produce test results that reflect energy efficiency, energy 
use, and estimated operating costs during a representative average use 
cycle. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(1))
    Under this seven-year lookback provision, DOE initiated a test 
procedure rulemaking for PTACs and PTHPs to collect data and 
information to determine whether there is clear and convincing evidence 
that would justify the adoption of procedures other than those 
referenced in ASHRAE 90.1-2019. On December 8, 2020, DOE published an 
early assessment request for information (``RFI'') in which it sought 
data and information pertinent to whether amended test procedures would 
(1) more accurately or fully comply with the requirement that the test 
procedure produces results that measure energy use during a 
representative average use cycle for the equipment without being unduly 
burdensome to conduct, or (2) reduce testing burden. See 85 FR 78967 
(``December 2020 Early Assessment RFI'').
    Based on the comments received on the December 2020 Early 
Assessment RFI and DOE's review of the test procedures for PTACs and 
PTHPs, DOE determined it appropriate to continue the test procedure 
rulemaking after the early assessment process. On May 25, 2021, DOE 
published in the Federal Register a RFI (``May 2021 RFI'') in which DOE 
requested comments, information, and data about a number of issues, 
including (1) the market size of PTAC and PTHP units that include make-
up air dehumidification, the equipment designs of PTACs and PTHPs that 
provide make-up air dehumidification, and the energy use associated 
with this function of PTACs and PTHPs; (2) the market size of PTAC and 
PTHP units that are capable of part-load operation and the energy use 
associated with part-load operation of PTACs and PTHPs; (3) the power 
use associated with fan-only mode operation of PTACs and PTHPs and 
whether fan-only operation reflects energy use during a representative 
average use cycle; and (4) low-temperature performance for cold climate 
PTHPs and whether and how the test procedure should be updated for such 
equipment. 86 FR 28005.
    DOE received comments in response to the May 2021 RFI from the 
interested parties listed in Table I.1. Discussion of the relevant 
comments, and DOE's responses, are provided in the appropriate sections 
of this document. A parenthetical reference at the end of a comment 
quotation or paraphrase provides the location of the item in the public 
record.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The parenthetical reference provides a reference for 
information located in the docket of DOE's rulemaking to develop 
test procedures for PTACs and PTHPs. (Docket NO. EERE-2019-BT-TP-
0027, which is maintained at www.regulations.gov). The references 
are arranged as follows: (commenter name, comment docket ID number, 
page of that document).

             Table I.1--List of Commenters With Written Submissions in Response to the May 2021 RFI
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Commenter(s)                 Reference in this NOPR                   Commenter type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air-Conditioning, Heating, and          AHRI.....................  Trade Association.
 Refrigeration Institute.
Appliance Standards Awareness Project,  Joint Advocates..........  Efficiency Organizations.
 Natural Resources Defense Council.
California Investor Owned Utilities...  CA IOUs..................  Utility.

[[Page 30839]]

 
Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance..  NEAA.....................  Efficiency Organizations.
LG Electronics USA....................  LG.......................  Manufacturer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Synopsis of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    In this NOPR, DOE is proposing to relocate the existing test 
procedures for PTACs and PTHPs from 10 CFR 431.96(g) to a new appendix 
H to subpart F of part 431, ``Uniform test method for measuring the 
energy consumption of package terminal air conditioners and heat 
pumps,'' (``appendix H'') that would include the relevant test 
procedure requirements for measuring existing efficiency metrics: (1) 
EER for cooling mode and (2) COP for heating mode. DOE is also 
proposing to establish a new appendix H1 to subpart F of part 431, 
``Uniform test method for measuring the energy consumption of package 
terminal air conditioners and heat pumps,'' (``appendix H1'') that 
would include the relevant test procedure requirements for PTACs and 
PTHPs for measuring seasonal cooling and heating efficiency via new 
efficiency metrics: (1) seasonal cooling performance (``SCP'') for 
cooling mode and (2) seasonal heating performance (``SHP'') for heating 
mode and provide test procedure requirements for making representations 
of dehumidification energy use via a new efficiency metric, 
dehumidification efficiency (``DE''). The current DOE test procedures 
for PTACs and PTHPs would be relocated from Sec.  431.96(g) to appendix 
H without change, and the new test procedures would be established at 
appendix H1. Appendix H1 would provide the test procedure for 
representations based on SCP, SHP and DE and would be mandatory at such 
time as compliance is required with amended energy conservation 
standards based on SCP and SHP, should DOE adopt standards using such 
metrics. In conjunction, DOE is proposing to amend Table 1 of 10 CFR 
431.96 to identify the newly added appendices H and H1 as the 
applicable test procedures for PTAC/HPs.
    DOE's proposed actions are summarized in Table II.1 compared to the 
current test procedure as well as the reason for the proposed change.

  Table II.1--Summary of Changes in Proposed Test Procedure Relative to
                         Current Test Procedure
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Proposed test
  Current DOE test procedure           procedure           Attribution
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Located at 10 CFR 431.96(g)...  Current test procedure  Improves
                                 unchanged but           readability.
                                 relocated to appendix
                                 H. The proposed new
                                 test procedure would
                                 be located in
                                 appendix H1.
Incorporates by reference AHRI  Updates incorporation   Updates to the
 310/380-2014, ANSI/ASHRAE 16-   by reference to AHRI    applicable
 1983, ANSI/ASHRAE 58-1986,      310/380-2017 and        industry test
 ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009.            maintains other         procedures.
                                 existing references
                                 in appendix H..
                                In appendix H1
                                 incorporates by
                                 reference AHRI 310/
                                 380-2017, ANSI/ASHRAE
                                 16-2016 and ANSI/
                                 ASHRAE 37-2009.
Includes provisions for         Maintains existing      More
 determining full-load           metrics in appendix     representative
 efficiency metrics, EER and     H. In appendix H1,      test procedure.
 COP.                            includes provisions
                                 for determining
                                 seasonal efficiency
                                 metrics, SCP and SHP.
Does not define make-up PTAC/   Maintains existing      More
 HPs nor includes provisions     approach in appendix    representative
 to measure dehumidification     H. In appendix H1,      test procedure.
 energy use of these units.      defines make-up PTAC/
                                 HPs and includes
                                 provisions to measure
                                 dehumidification
                                 energy use.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE has tentatively determined that the proposed amendments 
described in section III of this NOPR regarding the establishment of 
appendix H would not alter the measured efficiency of PTAC/HPs or 
require retesting solely as a result of DOE's adoption of the proposed 
amendments to the test procedure, if made final. DOE has tentatively 
determined, however, that the proposed test procedure amendments in 
appendix H1 would, if adopted, alter the measured efficiency of PTAC/
HPs. DOE has tentatively determined that these amendments will provide 
efficiency measurements more representative of the energy efficiency of 
PTACs and PTHPs and are not unduly burdensome to conduct. Further, use 
of the proposed appendix H1 would not be required until the compliance 
date of amended standards denominated in terms of SCP and SHP. 
Discussion of DOE's proposed actions are addressed in further detail in 
section III of this NOPR.

III. Discussion

A. Scope of Applicability

    This rulemaking applies to PTACs and PTHPs. DOE defines PTAC as a 
wall sleeve and a separate un-encased combination of heating and 
cooling assemblies intended for mounting through the wall. 10 CFR 
431.92. It includes a prime source of refrigeration, separable outdoor 
louvers, forced ventilation, and heating availability by builder's 
choice of hot water, steam, or electricity. Id. DOE defines PTHP as a 
PTAC that utilizes reverse cycle refrigeration as its prime heat source 
and has a supplemental heat source available, including hot water, 
steam, or electric resistant heat. Id.

B. Proposed Organization of the PTAC/HP Test Procedure

    The current DOE test procedures for PTACs and PTHPs appear at 10 
CFR 431.96(g). The current test procedure for cooling mode incorporates 
by reference AHRI 310/380-2014, with the following sections applicable 
to the DOE test procedure: sections 3, 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, and 4.4; ANSI/
ASHRAE 16-1983 and ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009. 10 CFR 431.96(g)(1). The 
current test procedure for heating mode testing incorporates by 
reference AHRI 310/380-2014, with the following sections applicable to 
the DOE test procedure: sections 3, 4.1, 4.2 (except sections 
4.2.1.2(b)), 4.3, and 4.4; and

[[Page 30840]]

ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 58-1986. 10 CFR 431.96(g)(2).
    The current test procedures also include additional provisions in 
paragraphs (c) and (e) of 10 CFR 431.96. Paragraph (c) of 10 CFR 431.96 
specifies provisions for an optional compressor break-in period, and 
paragraph (e) of 10 CFR 431.96 details what information sources can be 
used for unit set-up and provides specific set-up instructions for 
refrigerant parameters (e.g., superheat) and air flow rate.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The amendatory instructions in the June 2015 TP final rule 
for PTACs and PTHPs includes the reference to AHRI Standard 310/380-
2014 in paragraphs (c) and (e), indicating that the requirements do 
apply to this equipment, even though the current CFR does not 
include this reference. 80 FR 37136, 37149 (June 30, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE is proposing to relocate and centralize the current test 
procedure for PTACs and PTHPs from 10 CFR 431.96(g) to a new appendix 
H. As proposed, appendix H would not amend the current test procedure. 
DOE's current test procedure incorporates by reference AHRI 310/380-
2014, but the most recent version of ASHRAE Standard 90.1, ASHRAE 
Standard 90.1-2019, recognizes AHRI 310/380-2017 as the test procedure 
for PTACs and PTHPs. AHRI 310/380-2017 differs from AHRI 310/380-2014 
only in that it includes the additional test provisions that DOE has 
already prescribed at 10 CFR 431.96(c), (e) and (g). Therefore, the 
current DOE test procedures for PTAC/HPs are already consistent with 
AHRI 310/380-2017. However, to improve readability, DOE is proposing to 
update the incorporate by reference from AHRI 310/380-2014 to AHRI 310/
380-2017 and to remove the redundant test provision references to 10 
CFR 431.96(c), (e) and (g).
    The test procedure as proposed for appendix H would be updated to 
reference AHRI 310/380-2017 and provide instructions for determining 
EER and COP. Consistent with the existing test procedure, DOE is 
proposing to continue to reference ANSI/ASHRAE 16-1983, ANSI/ASHRAE 58-
1986 and ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009 in the proposed appendix H. As proposed, 
DOE would require that PTACs and PTHPs be tested according to appendix 
H until the compliance date of any future amended energy conservation 
standards for PTACs and PTHPs.
    DOE also is proposing in parallel an amended test procedure for 
PTACs and PTHPs in a new appendix H1 to subpart F of 10 CFR part 431. 
Appendix H1 would include test instructions for determining the new 
seasonal cooling and heating metrics, SCP and SHP, respectively, and 
provide test instructions for making representations of 
dehumidification energy use in terms of the dehumidification metric, 
DE. As proposed, DOE would not require that PTACs or PTHPs be tested 
according to the test procedure in proposed appendix H1 until the 
compliance date of any future amended energy conservation standards for 
PTACs and PTHPs.

C. Updates to Industry Standards

1. AHRI 310/380-2017
    As noted previously, DOE's current test procedure for PTACs and 
PTHPs is codified at 10 CFR 431.96 and incorporates by reference AHRI 
310/380-2014, with additional test provisions at 10 CFR 431.96(c), (e) 
and (g). The most recent version of ASHRAE Standard 90.1, ASHRAE 
Standard 90.1-2019, recognizes AHRI 310/380-2017 as the test procedure 
for PTACs and PTHPs.
    In response to the May 2021 RFI, AHRI expressed their view that 
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 and AHRI Standard 310/380-2017 are reasonably 
designed to measure energy use during a representative use cycle and 
that the design of PTACs and PTHPs and their usage patterns have not 
changed significantly since the last DOE rulemaking. (AHRI, No. 14 at 
p. 2) AHRI commented that AHRI 310/380-2017 was incorporated by 
reference into the 2019 edition of ASHRAE 90.1, and that DOE must now 
act to incorporate AHRI Standard 310/380-2017 by reference without any 
modifications. Id. AHRI noted that the Secretary has discretion to 
consider modifications to the test procedure cited in ASHRAE, but 
similar to energy conservation standards, for ``ASHRAE products'' any 
deviation from the industry test procedure must be, ``supported by 
clear and convincing evidence'' that the industry procedure was (a) not 
reasonably designed to produce test results which reflect energy 
efficiency; or (b) unduly burdensome to conduct. Id. AHRI asserted that 
AHRI 310/380-2017 met neither of these criteria since no manufacturer 
has submitted a waiver to DOE for use of a modified version of the 
current test procedure, which indicates that the results of the 
existing test procedure remain representative of actual energy use or 
efficiency; and all products defined as PTACs and PTHPs are able to be 
tested in accordance with AHRI 310/380. Id.
    DOE notes that the only difference between AHRI 310/380-2014 and 
AHRI 310/380-2017 is that AHRI 310/380-2017 includes the same 
additional test provisions that DOE has already prescribed at 10 CFR 
431.96(c), (e) and (g). Therefore, the current DOE test procedure, 
which incorporates by reference AHRI 310/380-2014 and includes these 
additional provisions, is consistent with AHRI 310/380-2017. However, 
as discussed in section III.B of this proposed rule, to improve 
readability, DOE is proposing to update the existing incorporation by 
reference provisions in 10 CFR 431.95 to reference AHRI 310/380-2017 
and to remove the applicability of the redundant test provisions at 10 
CFR 431.96(c), (e) and (g). Appendix H would reference AHRI 310/380-
2017 and provide instructions for determining EER and COP that are 
consistent with the existing DOE test procedure.
    As mentioned previously, DOE is undertaking this rulemaking to 
satisfy the seven-year review requirement for test procedures in 42 
U.S.C. 6314(a)(1)(A). Under this process, if DOE determines that an 
amended test procedure would more fully or accurately comply with the 
requirements in 42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2) and (3), DOE shall prescribe an 
amended test procedure. Further, as PTACs are subject to the provisions 
in EPCA for ASHRAE equipment, DOE's determination must be supported by 
clear and convincing evidence.
    Based on an evaluation of the current test methodology and products 
on the market, DOE has tentatively determined that an amended test 
procedure may produce test results that more fully or accurately 
reflect energy efficiency and energy use of PTAC/HPs during a 
representative average use cycle and would not be unduly burdensome to 
conduct. In particular, DOE notes that AHRI 310/380-2017 does not 
include test provisions to measure the potential benefit of designs 
that can operate at part load (i.e., variable speed products). As 
discussed in more detail in section III.E of this notice, DOE is aware 
of several variable-speed PTAC/HP models on the market that can provide 
efficiency benefits at part-load conditions which are not captured by 
the test conditions in AHRI 310/380-2017. AHRI 310/380-2017 also does 
not provide a measure of seasonal cooling and heating efficiency, but 
instead relies on the single-point ratings of EER and COP--at 95 [deg]F 
outdoor temperature for EER and at 47 [deg]F outdoor temperature for 
COP. As PTACs and PTHPs in the field operate year round in cooling or 
heating mode, seasonal performance, which considers more than one 
outdoor temperature and the potential for part-load operation when the 
building load is low at moderate outdoor temperatures, would be more

[[Page 30841]]

representative of average use as compared to a single-point rating. 
However, AHRI 310/380-2017 does not include test conditions or 
provisions to capture either of these factors, which would affect 
seasonal cooling or heating efficiency. Finally, AHRI 310/380-2017 does 
not address PTAC/HPs that provide ``make-up air,'' i.e., outside air 
brought in to provide ventilation, or provide test instructions to 
determine the dehumidification energy use associated with these units.
    While DOE is proposing to incorporate by reference certain sections 
of AHRI 310/380-2017 into appendix H1 (sections 3, 4 and 5), DOE has 
additionally tentatively determined that there is clear and convincing 
evidence to propose deviations from AHRI 310/380-2017 and to establish 
amended test procedures at appendix H1.
2. ANSI/ASHRAE 16-2016
    As mentioned, the current test procedure for cooling mode 
incorporates by reference ANSI/ASHRAE 16-1983 and the current test 
procedure for heating mode incorporates ANSI/ASHRAE 58-1986. On October 
31, 2016, ASHRAE published ANSI/ASHRAE 16-2016, ``Method of Testing for 
Rating Room Air Conditioners, Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners, and 
Packaged Terminal Heat Pumps for Cooling and Heating Capacity'' (`ANSI/
ASHRAE 16-2016''). ANSI/ASHRAE 16-2016 is substantively the same as 
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-1983 but also incorporates the method of test 
for obtaining heating capacity for rating room air-conditioners and 
PTAC/HP heating capacity as prescribed in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 58-1986.
    For appendix H, DOE is proposing to maintain the reference to ANSI/
ASHRAE 16-1983 and ANSI/ASHRAE 58-1986. For appendix H1, DOE is 
proposing to incorporate by reference the updated ANSI/ASHRAE 16-2016 
for both the cooling and heating test procedures.

D. Definitions

    DOE currently defines PTAC as a wall sleeve and a separate un-
encased combination of heating and cooling assemblies intended for 
mounting through the wall. 10 CFR 431.92. It includes a prime source of 
refrigeration, separable outdoor louvers, forced ventilation, and 
heating availability by builder's choice of hot water, steam, or 
electricity. Id.
    DOE defines PTHP as a PTAC that utilizes reverse cycle 
refrigeration as its prime heat source and has a supplemental heat 
source available, including hot water, steam, or electric resistant 
heat. Id.
    In the May 2021 RFI, DOE requested comment on the definitions of 
PTACs and PTHPs and whether any of the terms should be amended, and if 
so, how. 86 FR 28005, 28007. In particular, DOE requested comment on 
whether the terms are sufficient to identify which equipment is subject 
to the test procedure and whether any test procedure amendments are 
required to ensure that all such equipment can be appropriately tested 
in accordance with the test procedure. Id.
    In response, AHRI stated that they have no recommended changes to 
the definitions of PTACs and PTHPs. (AHRI, No. 14 at p. 4) NEEA 
recommended that DOE amend the definition of PTACs and PTHPs to include 
`dual-ducted' units, which the commenter explained are units that use 
two through-the-wall ducts in place of an outdoor mounted section. NEAA 
further noted that these products are marketed as replacements for 
PTAC/HPs and are similarly permanently installed through-the-wall air 
conditioners or heat pumps. NEEA provided product literature for two 
such units. (NEAA, No. 17 at p. 1-2)
    DOE reviewed the product literature provided by NEEA and 
tentatively concludes that these products do not meet the PTAC and PTHP 
definitions because they do not have a separate un-encased assembly of 
heating/cooling, do not have a wall sleeve and have no separable 
outdoor louvers. See 10 CFR 431.92. While the two unit ducts go 
`through the wall', the unit itself is mounted on the inside of the 
conditioned space. Additionally, DOE considers that broadening the PTAC 
and PTHP definitions to include these products is not appropriate since 
the product literature for these two units indicates that these are 
covered under other air conditioning product categories. Therefore, DOE 
is not proposing to include the units identified by NEEA within the 
definitions of PTAC and PTHP.

E. Operation at Part Load Conditions and Integrated Metrics

    As stated, EPCA requires that the test procedures for PTACs and 
PTHPs be the generally accepted industry testing procedures developed 
or recognized by AHRI or ASHRAE, as referenced in ASHRAE Standard 90.1. 
(42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(4)(A)) EPCA also requires that test procedures 
prescribed by DOE be reasonably designed to produce test results which 
reflect energy efficiency during a representative average use cycle, 
and must not be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2))
    DOE's current test procedures for PTACs and PTHPs do not have 
provisions to measure the potential benefit of designs that can operate 
at part load, nor does the test address unit cooling performance at 
part-load outdoor temperature conditions that represent many of the 
hours of the cooling season. Additionally, the current DOE test 
procedures do not have provisions to measure performance at low-ambient 
outdoor temperature conditions for the heating season. For PTACs and 
PTHPs, ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 specifies minimum efficiency levels 
expressed in terms of the full-load metrics of EER and COP. ``Full-
load'' refers to testing at a single test condition, under which the 
compressor operates continuously at 100 percent of its full capacity. 
Under DOE's current test procedure, full load efficiency is measured at 
the standard rating conditions as prescribed in AHRI 310/380-2014. In 
contrast, for cooling, ``part-load'' refers to testing at a reduced-
temperature test condition in which the cooling load of the space would 
generally be less than the full cooling capacity of the compressor. Any 
temperatures below the standard rating condition could potentially be 
considered part-load cooling conditions. For heating, ``part-load'' 
refers to testing at a temperature test condition in which the heating 
load of the space is less than the full heating capacity of the 
compressor. Any temperatures which do not require the full heating 
capacity could potentially be considered part-load heating conditions.
1. Market Size of PTACs and PTHPs With Part-Load Operation Capability
    DOE is aware of several variable-speed PTAC and PTHP models on the 
market that can provide an efficiency benefit at part-load conditions. 
In the May 2021 RFI, DOE requested information on the market 
availability and market size for PTACs and PTHPs that incorporate two-
stage, multi-stage, or fully variable-speed compressors that enable 
more efficient part-load operation. 86 FR 28005, 28009-28010.
    AHRI commented that it surveyed its members to determine the 
relative market share of PTACs and PTHPs that incorporate two-stage, 
multi-stage, or fully variable-speed compressors and that their data, 
which constituted a representative sample of the PTAC and PTHP market, 
indicated that 0.7 percent of PTAC and PTHP shipments incorporate these 
enhanced compressors. (AHRI, No. 14 at p. 7)

[[Page 30842]]

    The CA IOUs commented there has been an increase in variable-speed 
compressor technology across a whole host of commercial and residential 
air conditioner products and PTACs and PTHPs are no exception to the 
growth of variable-speed compressor technology. (CA IOUs, No. 15 at p. 
2) The CA IOUs noted that at least five manufacturers already sell 
variable speed products, and that number is likely to grow. Id. 
Additionally, they stated that the hotel industry has also published 
articles speaking to the benefits of new PTAC/HPs that incorporate 
variable-speed compressors. Id.
    The Joint Advocates asserted that PTACs and PTHPs are rarely 
required to operate at full load and an amended test procedure that 
captures part-load performance would thus be more representative and 
would also capture the potential efficiency gains associated with 
variable-speed compressors. (Joint Advocates, No. 16 at p. 1) The Joint 
Advocates encouraged DOE to adopt efficiency metrics that reflect 
annual energy consumption including part-load operation. Id.
    DOE notes that while the shipments data provided by AHRI suggests 
that only a small fraction of PTACs and PTHPs incorporate variable 
speed compressor technology currently, DOE's review of its compliance 
certification management system (``CCMS'') \5\ database and current 
product literature indicates that these products are already present in 
the market and may continue to increase in market share. As a result, 
inclusion of part-load performance in the test procedure may provide a 
more representative measure of unit performance over the cooling or 
heating season. The next section discusses potential part-load cooling 
and heating efficiency metrics for PTACs and PTHPs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ DOE's Compliance Certification Management System Database is 
available at www.regulations.doe.gov/ccms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Potential Part-Load Efficiency Metrics
    For measurement of part-load performance for PTACs and PTHPs, the 
proposed DOE test procedure at appendix H1 would require a part-load or 
seasonal efficiency metric. Several categories of air conditioning and 
heating equipment are already rated under DOE test procedures using 
metrics that account for cooling part-load or seasonal performance. For 
example, commercial unitary air conditioners (``CUACs'') are rated 
using the part-load metric integrated energy efficiency ratio 
(``IEER'') (see appendix A to subpart F of 10 CFR part 431); and 
central air conditioners (``CACs'') and heat pumps(``CHPs'') 
(``collectively CAC/HPs'') are rated using the seasonal energy 
efficiency ratio (``SEER2'') (see appendix M1 to subpart B of 10 CFR 
part 430 (``appendix MI'')). Room air conditioners (``RACs'') are rated 
using the combined energy efficiency ratio (``CEER'').\6\ While the 
CEER metric is not a part-load or seasonal metric, amendments to the 
DOE test procedure provide for the application of a performance 
adjustment factor to a variable-speed model's CEER rating (i.e., 
``performance-adjusted CEER'') that reflects seasonal efficiency 
benefits (see appendix F to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430).\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ CEER is an energy efficiency metric for room air 
conditioners that integrates standby/inactive and off mode energy 
use with the active mode energy use. 10 CFR 430.23(f)(3); appendix F 
to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430 sections 2 and 5.2.2.
    \7\ DOE published a final rule on March 29, 2021, amending the 
test procedure for room air conditioners to establish test 
provisions for measuring the energy use of variable-speed units 
during a representative average use cycle. 86 FR 16446.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Similar to the EER cooling metric, the COP heating metric for PTHPs 
measures heating efficiency only at full load operation. For the 
reasons described previously with regard to cooling efficiency, using a 
heating efficiency metric that accounts for only full-load operation 
does not measure the part-load operation in PTHPs that may be enabled 
by the incorporation of two-stage, multi-stage, or variable-speed 
compressors. Heating Season Performance Factor (``HSPF2'') is a metric 
that serves as a counterpart to SEER2 and accounts for seasonal 
performance in the heating season for residential central heat pumps. 
It reflects seasonal performance by averaging test results from 
multiple load points, depending on system configuration (single-speed, 
two-capacity, or variable-speed), with varying outdoor conditions and 
staging levels to represent the product's average efficiency throughout 
the heating season (see appendix M1).
    In the May 2021 TP RFI, DOE requested comment on how to best 
measure part-load cooling performance for PTACs and PTHPs, specifically 
the number of tests that are appropriate to represent the part-load 
capabilities of the unit; the outdoor ambient conditions that best 
represent real world performance; the averaging weights that should be 
applied to each condition; whether a cyclic test component should be 
incorporated and whether an optional test for multi-capacity rating 
should be incorporated. 86 FR 28005, 28010. DOE also requested feedback 
on the appropriateness and potential applicability of the IEER, SEER 
\8\ and performance-adjusted CEER as appropriate metrics for PTACs and 
PTHPs and whether a test procedure for PTACs and PTHPs that uses any of 
these would produce test results that reflect the energy efficiency of 
that equipment during a representative average use cycle. Id. DOE also 
requested information on the costs that would be associated with a test 
procedure that uses any of these metrics. Id. Additionally, DOE 
requested comment on whether any other seasonal efficiency metrics that 
incorporate part-load performance would produce test results that 
reflect the energy efficiency of PTACs and PTHPs during a 
representative average use cycle, and if so, which outdoor temperature 
rating conditions would be appropriate for testing PTACs and PTHPs. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ In the May 2021 RFI, DOE referred to SEER instead of SEER2. 
SEER2 has the same definition as SEER but reflects the amendments 
made to the test procedure in appendix M1, which change the measured 
efficiency values compared to appendix M to subpart B of 10 CFR part 
430.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the heating metric, DOE requested comment on how to best 
measure part-load and seasonal heating performance for PTHPs, 
specifically the number of tests that are appropriate to represent the 
part-load capabilities of the unit; the outdoor ambient conditions that 
best represent real world performance; the averaging weights that 
should be applied to each condition; whether a cyclic test component 
should be incorporated; whether an optional test for multi-capacity 
rating should be incorporated; and whether a test to evaluate the PTHP 
in defrost cycles is required 86 FR 28005, 28011. DOE also requested 
information on whether HSPF \9\ would be an appropriate metric for 
PTHPs, or if any other seasonal heating efficiency metrics that would 
produce test results that reflect the energy efficiency of PTHPs during 
a representative average use cycle would be appropriate, and if so, 
which outdoor temperature rating conditions would be appropriate for 
testing PTHPs. Id. DOE also requested comment on the costs that would 
be associated with the use of any such seasonal heating efficiency 
metric to rate PTHP performance. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ In the May 2021 RFI, DOE referred to HSPF instead of HSPF2. 
HSPF2 has the same definition as HSPF but reflects the amendments 
made to the test procedure in appendix M1, which change the measured 
efficiency values compared to appendix M.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Joint Advocates encouraged DOE to adopt cooling and heating 
efficiency metrics that attempt to reflect the annual energy 
consumption of PTACs

[[Page 30843]]

and PTHPs in typical applications and to adopt an amended test 
procedure that tests all PTACs and PTHPs the same way, regardless of 
whether a unit is single-speed, two-stage, multi-stage or variable 
speed as this will provide comparable efficiency ratings. (Joint 
Advocates, No. 16 at p. 1)
    NEEA suggested that DOE adopt part-load metrics aligned with the 
AHRI Standard 210/240 as referenced in appendix M1. (NEEA, No. 17 at p. 
2) NEAA stated that aligning with appendix M1 is the best course of 
action in the current rulemaking as PTACs and PTHPs are most likely to 
be substitutes for smaller residential products of similar capacities. 
Id. NEEA further stated that multiple manufacturers are already making 
representations of SEER and HSPF for PTAC/HPs, showing the market 
demand for a residential part-load metric. Id. NEEA noted that a part-
load metric would allow for the benefits of inverter driven, variable 
speed PTACs and PTHPs to be more accurately represented and that there 
were several variable speed products on the market from at least six 
manufacturers. (NEEA, No. 17 at p. 3) NEEA asserted that the fact that 
these variable speed products have emerged in the absence of a part-
load test procedure shows strong market demand for these products and 
shifting to a part-load metric would allow for these products to fairly 
compete with single speed products and would likely lead to the 
introduction of more variable speed products. Id.
    The CA IOUs also recommended that DOE utilize appendix M1 to 
measure the cooling and heating efficiencies of PTACs and PTHPs. The CA 
IOUs asserted that consumers often compare PTAC/HPs with CAC/HPs when 
choosing a method to cool or heat and cool a single space such as 
multifamily housing or lodging facilities because there are models with 
similar capacities in both product types and that these products are 
typically selected in the construction design process to provide 
conditioning year-round. (CA IOUs, No. 15 at p. 2) The CA IOUs stated 
that manufacturers recognize the similarity of these products and 
provide ``SEER equivalent'' performance information for their PTAC and 
PTHPs. Id. The CA IOUs highlighted that a survey of more than 160 
buildings in Manhattan found that in new buildings more PTAC and PTHPs 
were installed compared to RACs, and that PTAC and PTHPs were more 
likely to be designed into the building rather than part of a retrofit 
to address a need for cooling--which is similar to the selection and 
installation of CAC/HPs and indicates that PTAC/HPs and RACs are less 
likely to be substituted for each other. Id. The CA IOUs stated that 
they therefore believe it is most important to be able to compare PTAC/
HPs with CAC/HPs. Id. Additionally, the CA IOUs commented that the test 
procedures for CUACs and RACs only measure cooling capacity and 
efficiency, but PTHPs need a test procedure for both cooling and 
heating, noting that appendix M1 provides both the SEER2 metric for 
cooling and HSPF2 for heating, as well as part-load conditions. Id.
    LG also recommended the DOE adopt AHRI Standard 210/240 as 
referenced in appendix M1, but recommended using this test procedure 
only for part-load cooling performance and not for heating performance, 
because PTACs and PTHPs contain electric heat. (LG, No. 18 at p. 1) LG 
stated that while DOE categorized PTACs and PTHPs as commercial 
products, these products are usually installed in hotel rooms and 
people consider the hotel room as a vacation home--therefore their 
usage was close to the residential air conditioner. Id.
    NEAA recommended that DOE adopt a load-based test procedure for all 
heat pumps and air conditioners including PTHPs and PTACs, stating that 
while a part-load test procedure aligned with appendix M1 will be a 
step towards better accounting for the performance of PTHPs and PTACs, 
it will not account for the effectiveness of the unit's controls or 
fully reflect how these units are likely to perform in the real world. 
(NEEA, No.17 at p.4). The Joint Advocates also encouraged DOE to 
investigate a load-based test procedure, which they stated would 
provide a realistic representation of how all units perform in the 
field, including capturing the importance of control strategies. (Joint 
Advocates, No. 16 at p. 2).
    In response to NEEA, the CA IOUs and LG's suggestion regarding the 
use of appendix M1 for PTACs and PTHPs, DOE's notes that there are 
differences between PTAC/HPs and CAC/HPs that suggest that the direct 
use of appendix M1 as the test procedure for PTAC/HPs is inappropriate. 
The primary application for CAC/HPs is residential single-family homes 
which may have multiple zones, whereas the primary application for 
PTAC/HPs is lodging, typically serving single zones (i.e., each 
individual hotel room). This difference in the use cases results in 
substantially different cooling and heating building load lines for 
these two air-conditioning and heating categories. As such, the test 
conditions and weighting factors in appendix M1 are not suitable to 
capture PTAC and PTHP operation. DOE agrees that SEER2 and HSPF2 are 
comprehensive metrics that provide efficiency ratings representative of 
an entire season, and the publication of `SEER-equivalent' and `HSPF-
equivalent' ratings for PTAC/HPs suggest a desire for similar seasonal 
ratings for PTAC/HPs. However, DOE has provisionally determined that 
seasonal cooling and heating metrics for PTACs and PTHPs, even if 
similar to the SEER2 and HSPF2 metrics, respectively, should reflect 
the different average use operation for PTAC/HP applications. This is 
further discussed in sections III.F and III.G of this document.
    In response to NEEA and the Joint Advocates' suggestions that DOE 
investigate a load-based test procedure, DOE notes that it is unaware 
of a comprehensive evaluation of load-based testing of PTACs or similar 
equipment that satisfactorily demonstrates repeatability and 
reproducibility. DOE is aware of ongoing work addressing questions 
about whether the current DOE and industry test procedures for several 
air conditioning and heat pump equipment are fully representative of 
field operation and would be better served by a load-based test 
procedure.\10\ These efforts have been largely focused on residential 
CAC/HPs, where the market presence of variable-speed units has 
considerably more history and greater market share, and therefore a 
load-based test procedure may hold potential value. In comparison, the 
increased test burden resulting from a load-based test procedure would 
not be appropriate for PTAC/HPs, given the modest share of variable-
speed PTAC/HPs in the market. As such, on the basis of insufficient 
test procedure development leading to repeatability and reproducibility 
concerns, and the increased test burden associated with a load-based 
test procedure, DOE has provisionally determined that introducing a 
load-based test procedure for PTAC/HPs would not be appropriate at this 
time. However, DOE will continue to investigate load-based

[[Page 30844]]

testing and monitor future efforts related to this topic.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ A dynamic load-based test method differs from the steady-
state test method currently used in DOE test procedures for air 
conditioning and heat pump equipment. In a steady-state test method, 
the indoor room is maintained at a constant temperature throughout 
the test. In this type of test, any variable-speed or variable-
position components of air conditioners and heat pumps are set in a 
fixed position, which is typically specified by the manufacturer. In 
contrast, a dynamic load-based test has the conditioning load 
applied to the indoor room using a load profile that approximates 
how the load varies for units installed in the field. In this type 
of test, an air conditioning system or heat pump is allowed to 
automatically determine and vary its control settings in response to 
the imposed conditioning loads, rather than relying on manufacturer-
specified settings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    AHRI noted that it was unreasonable for DOE to expect stakeholders 
to develop a procedure in 30 days through a response to the RFI and 
were unable to any provide information on how to measure part-load 
performance of PTACs and PTHPs. (AHRI, No. 14 at p. 7) AHRI urged DOE 
to join the ASHRAE Standard 16 committee and engage in the consensus-
standards development process for the method of test for PTACs and 
PTHPs. Id. AHRI noted that all cooling metrics suggested in the May 
2021 RFI would carry with them a significant increase in the test 
burden when compared to the full load EER metric of AHRI Standard 310/
380. (AHRI, No. 14 at p. 8) AHRI attached a table comparing the 
required tests for each metric. Id. AHRI also stated that the 
residential metrics, SEER for CAC/HPs and performance-adjusted CEER for 
RACs, present the potential to cause confusion if applied to commercial 
products and that perhaps the best option would be to develop an 
entirely new part-load metric suited to PTAC/HPs, through a consensus 
standards process. Id. AHRI agreed that variable speed products may 
benefit from a part load metric, but stated that the additional test 
burden required by a part load metric for single stage products is 
unwarranted. Id. AHRI asserted that the PTAC and PTHP market is 
overwhelmingly single stage, where a full load rating is most 
appropriate. Id. AHRI noted that full load metrics have not been 
eliminated in ASHRAE Standard 90.1 as new part load metrics, such as 
IEER, have been introduced and federally regulated. Instead, through 
building standards, states have regulated both full and part-load 
metrics for a single product for those in which both metrics have been 
published in ASHRAE Standard 90.1. Id. AHRI also stated that a part-
load metric for any piece of equipment should be specific to the unit's 
average use operation for the most common applications and that no 
cooling metric DOE suggested in May 2021 RFI is primarily for use in 
hotels--the application where the majority of PTACs and PTHPs are used. 
AHRI commented that some metrics, including SEER and performance-
adjusted CEER, are for residential applications and that PTACs and 
PTHPs are commercial products and have vastly different operating hours 
and use patterns than residential equipment. (AHRI, No. 14 at p. 9). 
For the heating metric, AHRI did not provide a response on the 
appropriateness of HSPF or any other seasonal metric. (AHRI, No. 14 at 
p. 10) AHRI stated that it was not possible to quantify the cost 
implications for a new test procedure prior to the test procedure being 
developed. Id.
    In response to AHRI's statement that the PTAC and PTHP market is 
overwhelmingly single stage where a full-load rating is most 
appropriate and that the additional test burden required by a part load 
metric for single stage products is unwarranted, DOE notes that EPCA 
requires DOE to amend a test procedure if DOE determines that the 
amended test procedure would more fully or accurately reflect energy 
use during a representative average use cycle and not be unduly 
burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(1)(A)) Comments received on 
the May 2021 RFI suggest that the current full-load cooling and heating 
metrics (EER and COP) may not effectively capture the energy efficiency 
during a representative average use cycle, regardless of whether a 
PTAC/HP is single-stage, multi-stage or variable capacity, because 
PTAC/HPs often operate at part-load and at several different 
temperature conditions during the cooling or heating season. Therefore, 
a full-load standard rating condition may not fully capture the 
performance of a PTAC/HP. However, DOE also recognizes that EPCA 
requires that test procedures must not be unduly burdensome to conduct 
and DOE understands that a new test procedure incorporating multiple 
test conditions will introduce more test burden when compared to the 
full load single condition EER or COP metric of AHRI Standard 310/380. 
As described in section III.K of this NOPR, DOE has tentatively 
determined that the increase in test procedure costs will not be unduly 
burdensome to manufacturers, especially given the flexibility to 
utilize alternate efficiency determination methods (``AEDMs'') to rate 
models. DOE agrees with AHRI that the part-load metric for any piece of 
equipment should be specific to the unit's average use operation for 
the most common applications. Accordingly, DOE initially determines 
that the best option would be to develop an entirely new part-load 
metric for PTACs and PTHPs, which would be specific to the use cases 
for PTAC/HPs and would include consideration of different load levels 
and outdoor temperature conditions.
    In summary, DOE is proposing cooling and heating metrics which 
incorporate part-load seasonal performance and are appropriate based on 
the use case for PTACs and PTHPs. Sections III.F and III.G of this NOPR 
detail DOE's proposed cooling and heating metrics, respectively.
3. Low-Ambient Heating
    Heat pumps generally perform less efficiently at low ambient 
outdoor temperatures than they do at moderate ambient outdoor 
temperatures. DOE is aware of residential CAC/HP models that are 
optimized for operation in cold climates and can operate at 
temperatures as low as -20 degrees Fahrenheit (``[deg]F''). DOE 
understands that there has been interest in cold-climate PTHPs. For 
example, the New York State Clean Heat Program (``NYS Clean Heat'') 
requires a manufacturer-reported COP greater than 1.75 at 5 [deg]F \11\ 
and the Northeast Energy Efficiency Partnership (``NEEP'') recently 
included a PTAC/HP cold climate specification requiring a COP of 1.5 at 
5 [deg]F.\12\ DOE is aware of at least one PTHP model that is optimized 
for cold climates and can operate at temperatures as low as -5 [deg]F.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See: https://ma-eeac.org/wp-content/uploads/NYS-Clean-Heat-Manual-NEGPA.pdf.
    \12\ See: https://neep.org/sites/default/files/media-files/ccpthp_spvhp_specification_v1.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A conventional PTHP model switches its heat source from reverse-
cycle vapor compression heating to electric resistance heating, which 
is less efficient than vapor compression heating, at an outdoor ambient 
temperature of around 32 [deg]F. A PTHP design that is optimized for 
operation in cold climates could provide energy savings compared to 
conventional PTHP models by enabling the use of the more efficient 
vapor compression heating, rather than electric resistance heating, at 
lower ambient temperatures. However, DOE's current COP test metric for 
heating efficiency requires testing only at the standard rating 
condition of 47 [deg]F dry bulb for the outdoor side. Thus, DOE's COP 
metric does not account for the efficiency improvement that could 
result from using reverse-cycle heating at low ambient temperatures.
    In the May 2021 RFI, DOE requested information on several issues 
related to low-ambient heating, specifically information on the 
comparison of the seasonal heating load and seasonal cooling load for a 
typical PTAC/PTHP installation; information on the range of low-
temperature cutout for compressor operation of PTHPs, including the 
percentage of PTHPs that continue to operate the compressor at outdoor 
temperatures below 32 [deg]F, below 20 [deg]F, and below 10 [deg]F; 
information on the design changes necessary for a typical PTHP (that 
has a 32 [deg]F low-temperature cutout) to be converted for 
satisfactory field performance operation at a 17 [deg]F

[[Page 30845]]

outdoor test condition and whether the design optimization of PTHPs for 
cold-climate operation impacts the COP as measured under the DOE test 
procedure; and feedback on any other test methods that would produce 
test results that reflect the energy efficiency of these units during a 
representative average use cycle, as well as information on the test 
burden associated with such test methods. 86 FR 28005, 28011.
    AHRI commented that it is aware of units operating down to 25 
[deg]F, and other manufacturers have published the low-temperature 
cutout for compressor operation of PTHPs at 42 [deg]F, 38 [deg]F, and 
32 [deg]F. (AHRI, No. 14 at p. 11-12) Regarding the design changes 
necessary for a PTHP to be converted to operate at a 17 [deg]F 
condition, AHRI stated that the PTHP standard wall sleeve size limits 
component sizing such as a heat exchanger and fan, but one possibility 
would to be to install variable speed compressors and to further 
optimize by installing electronic expansions valves (``EEV'') in place 
of capillary tubes. (AHRI, No. 14 at p. 12) They stated that additional 
changes would include the addition of an inverter board, enclosure for 
new board, wire harness, software, compressor, and possibly additional 
thermistors. Id. AHRI commented that these design changes have not been 
demonstrated as a valid methodology at this writing to their knowledge. 
Id. AHRI also stated that if the test procedure were to be amended to 
require testing at the 17 [deg]F test condition it would negatively 
impact COP for single speed units as the capillary tubes can only be 
optimized for a single set point--however, variable speed units with 
electronic expansion valves would be able to be optimized for multiple 
outdoor conditions. Id. AHRI stated that heating testing at very low 
temperatures can become quite costly. Based on their analysis conducted 
to review the costs associated with Natural Resources Canada's proposal 
to make the H42 (5 [deg]F heating mode) test in appendix M1 
for residential heat pumps mandatory as part of evaluating HSPF2, AHRI 
found that the cost to upgrade a laboratory to test to the new 
condition will require significant investment and imposes new testing 
costs to manufacturers. (AHRI, No. 14 at p. 12) AHRI stated that 
currently laboratories do not have the capacity to test equipment to 
the proposed test condition of 5 [deg]F and estimated that the cost to 
upgrade one laboratory could reach $75,000 USD and needs to be repeated 
across each laboratory intending on testing to 5 [deg]F heating mode 
test condition. Id. They further noted that the total costs to upgrade 
labs necessary to test equipment to this new condition in a timely 
manner is between $7.5 to $13.1M USD. (AHRI, No. 14 at p. 10-11)
    The CA IOUs, Joint Advocates and NEEA encouraged DOE to capture 
performance at lower ambient temperatures. The CA IOUs noted that 
results from their market research aligned with DOE's assessment that, 
while there are products that operate below freezing, it is a small 
subset of the market. (CA IOUs, No. 15 at p. 3). The CA IOUs 
highlighted three products that operate in vapor compression mode below 
freezing, two of which switch to an electric resistant heater at 25 
[deg]F while the other is able to operate in vapor compression mode 
down to -5 [deg]F. Id. The CA IOUs reiterated their suggestion that 
PTHPs be tested per appendix M1 which requires single-speed and 
variable-speed products to be tested at 47 [deg]F, 35 [deg]F, and 17 
[deg]F to calculate HSPF2. Id. The CA IOUs recommended that units that 
cannot be tested at the lower temperatures use a default COP of 1.0, 
the efficiency of electric resistant heat, for the lower temperatures 
to calculate HSPF2. Id. They stated that requiring testing and 
reporting of performance at these three additional temperatures would 
also allow designers to know the temperature at which the PTHP will 
switch over to electric resistance heat, especially if the PTHP is also 
providing makeup air to the room. Id. NEEA recommended a part-load test 
aligned with appendix M1 at an outdoor test condition of 17 [deg]F. 
(NEEA, No. 17 at p. 3) Additionally, NEEA suggested that DOE account 
for energy used in defrost and energy used in electric resistance boost 
functionality, which the commenter described as a feature which turns 
on the electric resistance at outdoor temperatures where the heat pump 
can provide adequate heating, thus resulting in unnecessary energy use. 
Id. The Joint Advocates also encouraged DOE to capture defrost 
performance, which they said would differentiate the performance of 
different defrost strategies. (Joint Advocates, No. 16 at p. 2).
    In response to AHRI's comment that design changes to operate below 
a 17 [deg]F condition have not been demonstrated as a valid methodology 
for PTHPs, as noted earlier in this section, DOE is aware of at least 
one commercialized PTHP that can operate at temperatures as low as -5 
[deg]F. Additionally, while the required design changes to operate at 
low ambient conditions may not yet be widely present in PTHPs, other 
categories of heat pumps (such as central HPs) have demonstrated that 
these design changes are possible. Regarding AHRI's comment that 
heating testing at very low temperatures can become quite costly and 
that currently laboratories do not have the capacity to test equipment 
to the proposed test condition of 5 [deg]F, DOE notes that several CAC/
HP manufacturers already conduct testing at this temperature for the 
H42 test in appendix M1 and provide ratings in the CCMS. 
Additionally, DOE notes that commercial equipment, which includes PTACs 
and PTHPs, can benefit from AEDMs to rate their equipment and therefore 
do not need to physically test more than 2 units per basic model. 
However, DOE understands the significant increase in burden associated 
with mandating tests at low temperatures.
    Based on the comments received, DOE tentatively concludes that 
while there are PTAC/HPs that can operate below freezing (32 [deg]F), 
they represent only a small subset of the market and most of these cut-
off heat pump operation around 25 [deg]F. If contemporary PTAC/HPs 
would be required to operate at conditions below freezing, for example 
at 17 [deg]F, they would require significant design changes or complete 
re-design. Therefore, testing at low ambient heating conditions may not 
be appropriate as a requirement for all PTHPs. However, DOE also 
understands that for those PTHPs that are designed for cold climate 
operation (as noted, DOE is aware of at least one such PTHP), it may be 
beneficial to provide a means within the test procedure to make 
representations of operational performance at low-ambient conditions, 
similar to the approach currently used for low-temperature operation 
for central heat pumps. Section III.G details DOE's heating test 
procedure incorporating optional low-ambient heating and an adjustment 
to account for defrost performance degradation.

F. Proposed Cooling Metric and Test Procedure

    As noted, several categories of air conditioning and heating 
equipment are already rated under DOE test procedures using metrics 
that account for part-load or seasonal performance. As discussed in 
section III.E.2 of this document, several commenters suggested that DOE 
adopt appendix M1, and subsequently the SEER2 metric for PTAC/HPs. In 
the May 2021 RFI, DOE noted that PTACs and PTHPs may be considered as 
an alternative to CAC/HPs and products and equipment rated with SEER2 
are generally used in residential or small commercial applications, 
often with smaller internal loads that require minimal or no cooling at 
low ambient

[[Page 30846]]

outdoor air temperatures. 86 FR 28005, 28010. SEER2 reflects seasonal 
performance by averaging test results from up to five different load 
points, depending on system configuration (single-speed, two-capacity, 
or variable-speed), with varying outdoor conditions and staging levels 
to represent the product's average efficiency throughout the cooling 
season (see appendix M1). The test procedure also includes optional 
cyclic testing to evaluate cycling losses. Based on comments received 
by stakeholders that manufacturers are interested in making `SEER-
equivalent' representations, DOE has initially determined that a 
cooling metric that incorporates seasonal performance similar to the 
SEER2 metric is appropriate for PTAC/HPs.
    However, DOE considers that the test conditions, cooling building 
load line, hours of cooling, methods of calculations, cycling losses 
and other aspects of the test procedure will differ for PTAC/HPs as 
compared to CAC/HPs and are better informed by use cases specific to 
PTAC/HPs. Additionally, test burden associated with CAC/HP testing per 
appendix M1 may be higher than appropriate for the relatively lower 
national energy use associated with PTAC/HPs as compared to CAC/HPs. 
DOE is therefore proposing to define a new seasonal cooling metric for 
PTAC/HPs, seasonal cooling performance (``SCP''), which presents a 
better match of PTAC/HP performance rather than CAC/HP and reduces test 
burden as compared to CAC/HP testing. The proposed definition of this 
new metric, which would be included in 10 CFR 431.92, reads as follows:
    Seasonal cooling performance (SCP) means the total heat removed 
from the conditioned space during the cooling season, expressed in 
Btu's, divided by the total electrical energy consumed by the package 
terminal air conditioner or heat pump during the same season, expressed 
in watt-hours. SCP is determined in accordance with appendix H1 to this 
subpart.
    The following sections detail the key differences for the SCP 
metric as compared to the SEER2 metric.
1. Test Conditions
    As discussed previously, DOE recognizes that throughout the cooling 
season, PTACs and PTHPs operate under various outdoor temperature 
conditions. DOE also understands that these varying outdoor conditions 
present a range of reduced cooling loads in the conditioned space. To 
effectively capture performance at these varying outdoor conditions and 
associated loads, DOE proposes a test procedure with three test 
conditions at dry-bulb outdoor temperatures of 95 [deg]F, 82 [deg]F and 
75 [deg]F. These are denoted as the ``A'', ``B'' and ``C'' conditions, 
respectively. DOE notes that these additional temperatures were 
informed by weather analysis conducted for 16 cities representing 
ASHRAE climate zones 1 through 7. For each condition, DOE established a 
temperature range and then evaluated a representative temperature 
within that range. This representative temperature was evaluated as a 
weighted average by multiplying the mean temperature in the respective 
temperature range for each city, by the prevalence of the commercial 
buildings energy consumption survey (``CBECS'') small hotel prototype 
in that city, which is the primary application for PTAC/HPs.
    Issue 1: DOE requests comment on its proposed A (95 [deg]F), B (82 
[deg]F) and C (75 [deg]F) test conditions to represent reduced cooling 
conditions experienced by PTACs and PTHPs in the field.
    These conditions are paired with three compressor speeds to denote 
the different cooling capacities at which the unit will run to modulate 
to the required cooling load: full, intermediate, and low. For example, 
a Blow test would mean a test conducted at the ``B' 
condition (82 [deg]F) and set to a low compressor speed.
    For tests run at the full compressor speed, the test will require 
the room thermostat to be set at a lower temperature than the indoor 
condition i.e., 75 [deg]F. DOE understands that for setting the low and 
intermediate compressor speeds, special control override instructions 
will be required from manufacturers. Therefore, because maintaining 
fixed compressor speeds is critical to the repeatability of the PTAC/HP 
cooling test procedure, DOE may, in a separate rulemaking addressing 
certification, require manufacturers to provide in each certification 
report for a two-speed or variable-speed system basic model, all 
necessary instructions to maintain the low and intermediate compressor 
speeds required for each test condition when testing that basic model. 
This approach is similar to the DOE requirements for RACs and CAC/HPs 
when testing with reduced compressor speeds. However, DOE is not 
addressing certification in this rulemaking and may address this issue 
in a separate future rulemaking.
    Issue 2: DOE requests comment on whether setting the unit 
thermostat down to 75 [deg]F (i.e., a 5 [deg]F differential to the 
indoor condition of 80 [deg]F) is sufficient to ensure that the 
compressor runs at full speed. DOE requests comment on whether 
manufacturers will be able to provide override instructions to ensure 
operation at the low and intermediate compressor speeds.
    DOE's review of several PTAC/HP models suggests that PTAC/HPs offer 
at least two user-selectable indoor fan speeds: high and low, and two 
user-selectable modes: cycling (or auto) fan and constant fan modes. In 
the cycling fan mode, the indoor fan cycles with the compressor while 
in the constant fan mode, the indoor fan runs continuously regardless 
of the compressor operation. DOE is proposing to require that all tests 
be done with the fan control selections that set the fan speed to high 
and the indoor fan to cycle with the compressor. However, DOE 
understands that fan staging may also vary based on compressor staging 
for two-stage and variable speed PTAC/HPs, and may need to be fixed.
    Issue 3: DOE requests comment on whether fan speed may vary with 
staging and whether it may have to be ``fixed'' at the right speed.
2. Cooling Tests
    DOE understands that the PTAC/HP market has a mixed presence of 
single-speed, two-speed, or variable-speed systems, with most units 
employing a single-speed compressor. Therefore, DOE is proposing that 
each of these systems be tested with a different subset of conditions 
to effectively measure performance. DOE is using appendix M1 as the 
basis for the required cooling tests for each system type, but with 
necessary modifications to reduce test burden as appropriate. For 
example, as discussed in section III.F.3 of this document, DOE is not 
proposing cyclic tests but instead requiring the use of a default 
degradation coefficient.
    To prevent confusion between two-speed and variable-speed systems, 
DOE is proposing to define variable speed PTAC/HP as follows:
    Variable speed PTAC/HP means a packaged terminal air-conditioner or 
heat pump with a compressor that uses a variable-speed drive to vary 
the compressor speed to achieve variable capacities or three or more 
capacities for any operating condition for which the compressor would 
be running.
    For units having a single-speed compressor, and consequently one 
compressor speed, DOE is proposing to require two full-speed tests 
conducted at the A and C conditions, with the compressor running at its 
nominal, full speed. Table III.1 sets out the test condition for 
systems employing single-speed compressors. DOE considers that the A 
and C conditions would be sufficient to develop a performance curve for 
the purpose of interpolation.

[[Page 30847]]

In order to reduce test burden, DOE is not proposing to require testing 
at the B condition.

                                  Table III.1--Cooling Mode Test Conditions for Units Having a Single-Speed Compressor
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Air entering indoor  unit      Air entering outdoor  unit
                                                      temperature ([deg]F)            temperature ([deg]F)
                Test description                ----------------------------------------------------------------             Compressor speed
                                                    Dry bulb        Wet bulb        Dry bulb        Wet bulb
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afull Test--required...........................              80              67              95              75  Full.
Cfull Test--required...........................              80              67              75              60  Full.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For units having a two-speed compressor or a variable-speed 
compressor that operate at two speed levels at any given outdoor 
temperature, DOE is proposing to require two full-speed tests conducted 
at the A and B conditions, and two low-speed tests conducted at the B 
and C conditions. These pairings of test conditions and speeds are 
intended to be representative of actual field operation. Table III.2 
sets out the test condition for systems employing two-speed compressors 
or a variable-speed compressor that operate at two speed levels at any 
given outdoor temperature.

                                   Table III.2--Cooling Mode Test Conditions for Units Having a Two-Speed Compressor *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Air entering indoor  unit      Air entering outdoor  unit
                                                      temperature ( [deg]F)           temperature ( [deg]F)
                Test description                ----------------------------------------------------------------             Compressor speed
                                                    Dry bulb        Wet bulb        Dry bulb        Wet bulb
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afull Test--required...........................              80              67              95              75  Full.
Bfull Test--required...........................              80              67              82              65  Full.
Blow Test--required............................              80              67              82              65  Low.
Clow Test--required............................              80              67              75              60  Low.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* This includes units with compressors that achieve no more than two capacity levels using variable speed technology for any one of the test conditions
  used for the tests.

    For units having variable-speed compressors with three or more 
speed levels at any given outdoor temperature, the same tests as set 
for the two-speed systems will apply--but with an additional optional 
intermediate speed test at the B condition i.e., the Bint 
test. This optional intermediate test is included to provide an 
opportunity for a variable-speed unit to test improved performance as 
compared to the performance interpolated between the low speed and the 
high speed at the B condition. Table III.3 sets out the test condition 
for systems employing variable-speed compressors with three or more 
speed levels at any given outdoor temperature.

 Table III.3--Cooling Mode Test Conditions for Units Having a Variable-Speed Compressor With Three or More Speed Levels at any given Outdoor Temperature
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Air entering indoor  unit      Air entering outdoor  unit
                                                     temperature  ( [deg]F)          temperature  ( [deg]F)
                Test description                ----------------------------------------------------------------            Compressor  speed
                                                    Dry bulb        Wet bulb        Dry bulb        Wet bulb
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afull Test--required...........................              80              67              95              75  Full.
Bfull Test--required...........................              80              67              82              65  Full.
Blow Test--required............................              80              67              82              65  Low.
Bint Test--optional............................              80              67              82              65  Intermediate.
Clow Test--required............................              80              67              75              60  Low.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Issue 4: DOE requests comment on its proposed cooling tests for 
single-speed, two-speed and variable-speed compressor systems.
3. Cyclic Losses
    Under part-load operation, in which the cooling load of the space 
is less than the full cooling capacity of the compressor and the 
compressor cannot modulate compressor speed to match capacity to the 
required load, the compressor cycles on and off (for single-speed 
systems) or operates between different compressor speeds (for two-stage 
or variable speed systems). This cycling behavior introduces 
inefficiencies, i.e., ``cycling losses.'' In appendix M1 and AHRI 
Standard 210/240-2023, ``Performance Rating of Unitary Air-conditioning 
& Air-source Heat Pump Equipment'' (``AHRI 210/240-2023''), the 
inefficiencies associated with cycling losses in CAC/HPs are 
represented by a degradation coefficient (CD). The cooling 
degradation coefficient is denoted by CD\c\ and heating 
degradation coefficient is denoted as CD\H\. In appendix M1 
and AHRI 210/240-2023, this degradation coefficient can be optionally 
evaluated

[[Page 30848]]

via cyclic testing, or a default degradation coefficient can be 
used.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Previous versions of AHRI Standard 210/240, including the 
version referenced in Appendix M1, AHRI 210/240-2008, also address 
the degradation coefficient in the same manner.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As ASHRAE Standard 16-2016 does not include test provisions to 
conduct cyclic tests, DOE is not proposing to include cyclic tests as 
part of the new test procedure at appendix H1. To represent the cycling 
losses of a PTAC/HP, a degradation coefficient is required. CAC/HP 
systems are differently configured as compared to PTAC/HPs and 
therefore, the use of the default degradation coefficients from 
appendix M1 and AHRI 210/240-2023 may not be appropriate for PTAC/HPs.
    To investigate cycling losses and evaluate a default degradation 
coefficient particular to PTAC/HPs, DOE conducted testing with several 
single-speed PTHPs and one variable-speed PTHP under different cooling 
conditions at reduced loads. DOE installed each PTHP in a calorimetric 
test chamber, set the unit thermostat just below 80 [deg]F, and applied 
a range of fixed cooling loads to the indoor chamber.^{14 15} 
The calorimeter chamber was configured so that the indoor chamber 
temperature could vary but averaged out at the standard indoor 
condition of 80 [deg]F/67 [deg]F (dry-bulb/wet-bulb), thereby allowing 
the test unit to maintain the target indoor chamber temperature by 
adjusting its cooling operation in response to the changing temperature 
of the indoor chamber. Figure III-1 shows the efficiency losses for 
each unit at varying cooling loads at an outdoor condition of 82 
[deg]F/65 [deg]F, relative to the performance of each unit as tested at 
the full-load condition at 82 [deg]F/65 [deg]F.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ A cooling load is ``applied'' by adjusting and fixing the 
rate of heat added to the indoor test chamber to a level at or below 
that of the nominal cooling capacity of the test unit.
    \15\ This approach aims to represent a consumer installation in 
which the amount of heat added to a room may be less than the rated 
cooling capacity of the room AC (e.g., electronics or lighting 
turned off, people or pets leaving the room, and external factors 
such as heat transfer through walls and windows reducing with 
outdoor temperature).
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.000

    In Figure III-1, the distance of each data point from the x-axis 
represents the change in efficiency relative to the full-load 
efficiency for each unit at an outdoor condition of 82 [deg]F/65 
[deg]F. The single-speed PTHP efficiency decreases in correlation with 
a reduction in cooling load, reflecting cycling losses that become 
relatively larger as the cooling load decreases. In contrast, the 
efficiency of the variable-speed PTHP remains steady as the cooling 
load decreases, reflecting the lack of cycling losses associated with 
lower compressor speeds.
    Based on this data, DOE evaluated the cooling degradation 
coefficient for each single-speed PTHP unit as defined in Appendix 
M1,\16\ and then obtained an average, as shown in Table III.4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See section 3.5.3--Cooling-Mode Cyclic-Degradation 
Coefficient Calculation.

Table III.4--Cooling Degradation Coefficients for Different Single-Speed
                                  Units
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Cooling
                                                            degradation
                     Unit identifier                        coefficient
                                                              (CD\C\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PTHP 1..................................................            0.12
PTHP 2..................................................            0.47
PTHP 3..................................................            0.35
PTHP 4..................................................            0.26
Average.................................................            0.30
------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 30849]]

    Based on the observed data, the average value of the cooling 
degradation coefficients is different from the default value (0.2) 
assigned in appendix M1 and AHRI 210/240-2023 for single-speed systems. 
DOE did not conduct similar testing for heating mode, but considers 
that a similar degradation in performance would be observed. Therefore, 
DOE is proposing that the default cooling and heating degradation 
coefficient for the PTAC/HP test procedure be 0.30, as calculated based 
on DOE's testing.
    Issue 5: DOE requests comment on its proposed value of the cooling 
and heating degradation coefficients.
4. SCP Calculation
    As mentioned, DOE's proposed cooling metric, SCP, represents a 
measure of cooling efficiency across the entire season, as opposed to a 
single test condition. The SCP metric involves the evaluation and 
summation of the total cooling provided and the power consumed using a 
binned analysis similar to the one used for the SEER2 metric for CACs. 
These quantities are calculated for each individual temperature bin 
using the appropriate calculation methods depending on the operating 
characteristics of the type of system i.e., single-speed, two-speed or 
variable-speed. Bin temperatures and bin hours are discussed in section 
III.F.5 of this document.
    Similar to appendix M1, DOE is also proposing a relationship to 
represent the cooling building load line for PTAC/HPs, which enables 
the calculation of the quantities mentioned previously. The PTAC/HP 
cooling building load line is specific to the use cases for PTAC/HPs, 
primarily small hotels and midrise apartments, and represents the 
averaged cooling load at different temperatures evaluated as a national 
average. For this analysis, DOE considered an equal weighting of the 
small hotel and the midrise apartment use cases. Similar to the cooling 
building load line in appendix M1, the building load line for PTAC/HPs 
includes a 10 percent assumption for oversizing.
    Issue 6: DOE requests comment on its proposed approach to calculate 
SCP using a similar binned analysis as that of SEER2. DOE also requests 
comment on the proposed cooling building load line; specifically, 
whether an equal weighting of the small hotel and midrise apartment use 
cases is appropriate.
5. Cooling Temperature Bins and Weights
    As mentioned, the values of the total cooling provided and the 
power consumed are evaluated for each individual temperature bin. Table 
III.5 shows DOE's proposed temperature bins and associated weighting 
factors to represent the number of cooling hours per year spent at each 
bin. These temperature bins and fractional hours are based on DOE's 
analysis of building energy use associated with PTAC/HP use cases, 
primarily the small hotel and the midrise apartment prototypes and are 
a national average.

              Table III.5--Distribution of Fractional Hours Within Cooling Season Temperature Bins
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                              Representative   Fraction of total
                     Bin number, j                        Bin temperature    temperature for    temperature bin
                                                            range [deg]F        bin [deg]F        hours, nj/N
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1......................................................              65-69                 67              0.229
2......................................................              70-74                 72              0.238
3......................................................              75-79                 77              0.220
4......................................................              80-84                 82              0.150
5......................................................              85-89                 87              0.094
6......................................................              90-94                 92              0.047
7......................................................              95-99                 97              0.014
8......................................................            100-104                102              0.007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Issue 7: DOE requests comment on its proposed temperature bins and 
associated fractional bin hours for cooling.

G. Proposed Heating Metric and Test Procedure

    Similar to the cooling metric discussed in section III.F, DOE has 
initially determined that a heating metric that incorporates seasonal 
heating performance (similar to the HSPF2 metric) for CAC/HPs is 
appropriate for PTAC/HPs. HSPF2 reflects seasonal performance by 
averaging test results from different load points, depending on system 
configuration (single-speed, two-capacity, or variable-speed), with 
varying outdoor conditions and staging levels to represent the 
product's average efficiency throughout the heating season (see 
appendix M1).
    However as noted earlier, DOE considers that the direct adoption of 
HSPF2 as detailed in appendix M1 is not suitable for PTAC/HPs, as there 
are differences in the use cases for PTAC/HPs and the test burden 
associated with CAC/HP testing per appendix M1 may be much higher than 
appropriate to gauge heating performance of PTAC/HPs. DOE is proposing 
to define a new heating metric for PTAC/HPs called seasonal heating 
performance (SHP) as follows:
    Seasonal Heating Performance (SHP) means the total heat added to 
the conditioned space during the heating season, expressed in Btu's, 
divided by the total electrical energy consumed by the package terminal 
heat pump during the same season, expressed in watt-hours. SHP is 
determined in accordance with appendix H1 to this subpart.
1. Test Conditions
    Similar to the cooling season, PTACs and PTHPs operate under 
various outdoor temperature conditions and load points in the heating 
season. To effectively capture performance at these varying outdoor 
conditions and associated loads, DOE proposes a test procedure with 
three heating test conditions at dry-bulb temperatures of 47 [deg]F, 17 
[deg]F and 5 [deg]F. These are denoted as the ``H1'', 
``H3'' and ``H4'' conditions, respectively. As 
discussed in section III.E.3 of this document, DOE understands that 
very few PTHPs are able to operate in heat pump mode at temperatures 
below freezing, and therefore could not be tested at the 
``H3'' and ``H4'' conditions. Therefore, DOE is 
proposing that (1) tests at the H4 condition be optional and 
(2) for those units that are unable to test at the ``H3'' 
condition, a substitute test, denoted as ``HL'' be utilized. 
The HL test is conducted at a target dry-bulb temperature 
equal to the average of the

[[Page 30850]]

cut-out \17\ and cut-in \18\ temperatures for a particular PTHP unit. 
The corresponding wet-bulb temperature is chosen such that it 
corresponds to a maximum of 60 percent relative humidity (``RH'') 
level. DOE considers that a maximum 60 percent RH level would be low 
enough to prevent significant frost build up, but high enough that it 
would not be unduly burdensome for test labs to achieve. Details on 
evaluating the cut-in and cut-out temperatures is presented in section 
III.G.3 of this document. Tolerances as set in Table 2B of ANSI/ASHRAE 
37-2009 apply to these test conditions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Cut-out temperature refers to the temperature at which the 
unit compressor stops i.e., `cuts out' operation to prevent 
compressor damage.
    \18\ Cut-in temperature refers to the temperature at which the 
unit compressor restarts i.e., `cuts in' operation after it has 
reached a cut-out event.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Depending on compressor capacity control attributes, the three test 
conditions (H1, H3 or HL and 
H4) are paired with up to three compressor speeds to denote 
the different heating capacities that the unit will run at to modulate 
to the required heating load: full, intermediate, and low. For example, 
a H1,low test would denote a test conducted at the 
``H1' condition (47 [deg]F) and set to a low compressor 
speed for variable-speed and two-capacity compressor systems.
    The full compressor speed for the heating mode tests would be 
evaluated by setting the room thermostat at a higher temperature than 
the required indoor condition i.e., at 75 [deg]F. Manufacturers will 
need to provide special control override instructions to set the low 
and intermediate compressor speeds for heating. Similar to the cooling 
tests, DOE is proposing to require that all heating tests be done with 
the fan control selections that set the fan speed to high and the 
indoor fan to cycle with the compressor.
    Issue 8: DOE requests comment on its proposed H1 (47 [deg]F), H3 
(17 [deg]F) or HL and H4 (5 [deg]F) test conditions to represent 
different heating outdoor conditions experienced by PTACs and PTHPs in 
the field.
    Issue 9: DOE requests comment on whether setting the unit 
thermostat up to 75 [deg]F (i.e., a 5 [deg]F differential to the indoor 
condition of 70 [deg]F) is sufficient to ensure that the compressor 
runs at full speed for heating mode.
2. Heating Tests
    Similar to the cooling tests in section III.F.2 of this document, 
DOE is using appendix M1 as the basis for the required heating tests 
for each system type--single-speed, two-speed, variable-speed, but with 
necessary modifications to reduce test burden as appropriate. Firstly, 
as discussed in more detail in section III.G.4 of this document, DOE is 
not including tests in the temperature range which presents a potential 
for heavy frost accumulation--for example, at 35 [deg]F. Additionally, 
while Appendix M1 includes heating tests at lower ambient conditions 
(17 [deg]F and 5 [deg]F), these conditions can either be substituted 
i.e. using the HL test instead of testing at 17 [deg]F, or 
are optional (5 [deg]F).
    For units having a single-speed compressor, and consequently one 
compressor speed, DOE is proposing to require two full-speed tests 
conducted at the H1 and H3 (or HL) 
conditions, with the compressor running at its nominal, full speed. 
Table III.6 sets out the test condition for systems employing single-
speed compressors.

                                  Table III.6--Heating Mode Test Conditions for Units Having a Single-Speed Compressor
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Air entering indoor  unit temperature    Air entering outdoor  unit temperature ([deg]F)
                                                      ([deg]F)                --------------------------------------------------
          Test description           -----------------------------------------                                                       Compressor speed
                                         Dry bulb             Wet bulb                 Dry bulb                 Wet bulb
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H1, full Test--required.............              70  60 max.................  47.....................  43.....................  Full.
H3, full Test--required.............              70  60 max.................  17.....................  15.....................  Full.
HL, full Test \1\...................              70  60 max.................  See note 2.............  See note 3.............  Full.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ To be conducted only if the unit is unable to test at H3 conditions.
\2\ Use the average of the cut-in and cut-out temperatures.
\3\ Use a wet-bulb temperature corresponding to a maximum 60% RH level.

    For units having a two-speed compressor or a variable-speed 
compressor that operate at two speed levels at any given outdoor 
temperature, DOE is proposing three full-speed tests conducted at the 
H1, H3 (or HL) and H3 
conditions, with the H3 condition test optional. DOE is also 
proposing to require two low-speed tests conducted at the H1 
and H3 (or HL) conditions. Table III.7 sets out 
the test condition for systems employing two-speed compressors.

                                 Table III.7--Heating Mode Test Conditions for Units Having a Two-Capacity Compressor *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Air entering indoor  unit temperature    Air entering outdoor  unit temperature ([deg]F)
                                                      ([deg]F)                --------------------------------------------------
          Test description           -----------------------------------------                                                       Compressor speed
                                         Dry bulb             Wet bulb                 Dry bulb                 Wet bulb
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H1,full Test--required..............              70  60 max.................  47.....................  43.....................  Full.
H3, full Test--required.............              70  60 max.................  17.....................  15.....................  Full.
HL, full Test \1\...................              70  60 max.................  See note 2.............  See note 3.............  Full.
H4, full Test--optional.............              70  60 max.................  5......................  4......................  Full.
H1,low Test--required...............              70  60 max.................  47.....................  43.....................  Low.
H3, low Test--required..............              70  60 max.................  17 \1\.................  15 \2\.................  Low.

[[Page 30851]]

 
HL, low Test \1\....................              70  60 max.................  See note 2.............  See note 3.............  Low.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* This includes units with compressors that achieve no more than two capacity levels using variable speed technology for any one of the test conditions
  used for the tests.
\1\ To be conducted only if the unit is unable to test at H3 conditions.
\2\ Use the average of the cut-in and cut-out temperatures.
\3\ Use a wet-bulb that corresponds to a maximum 60% RH level.

    For units having variable-speed compressors with three or more 
speed levels at any given outdoor temperature, the same tests as set 
for the two-speed systems will apply--but with an additional optional 
intermediate speed test at the H3 (or HL) 
condition.

                                 Table III.8--Heating Mode Test Conditions for Units Having a Variable-Speed Compressor
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Air entering indoor  unit temperature       Air entering outdoor  unit temperature
                                                     ([deg]F)                                    ([deg]F)
          Test description          -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------      Compressor speed
                                        Dry bulb             Wet bulb                Dry bulb                Wet bulb
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H1,full Test--required.............              70  60 max.................  47....................  43....................  Full.
H3, full Test--required............              70  60 max.................  17....................  15....................  Full.
HL, full Test \1\..................              70  60 max.................  See note 2............  See note 3............  Full.
H4, full Test--optional............              70  60 max.................  5.....................  4.....................  Full.
H1,low Test--required..............              70  60 max.................  47....................  43....................  Low.
H3, low Test--required.............              70  60 max.................  17....................  15....................  Low.
HL, low Test \1\...................              70  60 max.................  See note 2............  See note 3............  Low.
H3,int Test--optional..............              70  60 max.................  17....................  15....................  Intermediate.
HL, int Test--optional \1\.........              70  60 max.................  See note 2............  See note 3............  Intermediate.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ To be conducted only if the unit is unable to test at H3 conditions.
\2\ IUse the average of the cut-in and cut-out temperatures.
\3\ Use a wet-bulb that corresponds to a maximum 60% RH level.

    Issue 10: DOE requests comment on its proposed heating tests for 
single-speed, two-speed and variable-speed compressor systems.
3. Evaluating Cut-In and Cut-Out Temperatures
    As mentioned in section III.G.2 of this document, for those units 
that are unable to test at the H3 condition, the 
HL test would be required. The HL test is 
conducted at a target dry-bulb temperature equal to the average of the 
cut-in and cut-out temperatures for a particular PTHP unit and the wet-
bulb temperature is chosen such that it corresponds to a maximum 60 
percent RH level.
    To evaluate the cut-out and cut-in temperatures, DOE is proposing 
to utilize the verification test procedure used in the residential 
cold-climate heat pump technology challenge \19\ (``CCHP Challenge''). 
DOE's proposal requires that the unit be set to operate in heating mode 
with the thermostat set at 75 [deg]F and the conditioned space at the 
standard heating-mode test temperature of 70 [deg]F. The outdoor 
chamber temperature is then reduced to a level that is 3 [deg]F warmer 
than the expected cut-out temperature \20\ and paused for 3 minutes to 
allow conditions to stabilize. The outdoor chamber temperature is 
reduced in steps or continuously at an average rate of 1 [deg]F every 5 
minutes. The average outdoor coil air inlet temperature when the HP 
operation stops is noted as the cut-out temperature. The outdoor 
temperature is held constant for 5 minutes where the cut-out occurred 
to allow for any compressor short cycle timer to expire--then the 
outdoor chamber temperature is increased by 1 [deg]F every 5 minutes. 
The temperature ramp is continued until 5 minutes after the HP 
operation restarts. The average outdoor coil air inlet temperature when 
the HP operation restarts is noted as the cut-in temperature.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Available at: www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2021-10/bto-cchp-tech-challenge-spec-102521.pdf.
    \20\ This information is often indicated in the unit 
installation manual or product brochure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For this evaluation of the cut-out and cut-in temperatures, the 
outdoor chamber would need to be sufficiently dried out to prevent 
frost collection. A remotely controlled circulating fan would also be 
required to provide the temperature ramp after the cut-out occurs.
    Issue 11: DOE requests comment on its proposed method to evaluate 
cut-out and cut-in temperatures.
4. Defrost Degradation
    DOE's proposed heating test procedure does not include tests in the 
temperature range which presents a potential for heavy frost 
accumulation i.e., (``frost zone''). Tests in the frost zone need to 
account for performance impact of frost accumulation and address unit 
energy use to operate a defrost cycle. When a PTHP unit operates a 
defrost cycle, it reverses the heating cycle i.e., it operates in 
cooling mode, removing heat from the indoor space to supply to the 
outdoor coils and remove frost. This operation impacts the unit's 
efficiency because the effective heating capacity is reduced.
    When testing CHPs, appendix M1 requires that one test be conducted 
at a frost zone temperature. Specifically, appendix M1 calls for 
testing at an

[[Page 30852]]

outdoor condition of 35 [deg]F DB temperature and 33 [deg]F WB 
temperature. When operating at this condition, the frost accumulation 
is sufficiently rapid that performance can be affected noticeably 
before a full 30-minute test can be completed. In addition, capturing 
the full impact of frost on performance requires conducting a test that 
includes a full cycle of both heating with frost accumulation and 
defrost. As noted, such a test is specified in appendix M1 as the 
``transient'' test, which follows the test method described for the `T' 
test in ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009. DOE understands that there is additional 
test burden associated with running a transient test as compared to a 
steady-state test and this burden may not be appropriate for PTHPs due 
to their relatively lower energy use as compared to CHPs. For these 
reasons, DOE is proposing not to include transient heating tests.
    However, DOE understands that PTHPs in the field do operate in the 
frost zone and consequently, are impacted by frost. To ensure that the 
heating test procedure is reasonably designed to produce test results 
which reflect energy efficiency during a representative average use 
cycle, DOE has provisionally determined that it would be more 
appropriate to apply a representative defrost degradation to the 
seasonal heating efficiency metric than to require testing to determine 
the impact. Specifically, DOE is proposing to adjust the calculated 
capacity and power for the representative temperature bins associated 
with frost accumulation, i.e., 17 [deg]F to 40 [deg]F. This will be 
achieved by applying defrost coefficients to the capacity and power 
obtained from the H1 and H3 (or HL) 
tests.
    DOE does not currently have defrost data for PTHPs. Thus, DOE is 
proposing to use an approach for defrost degradation based on the 
capacity and power adjustments from appendix M1 for CAC/HPs for 
determination of full-capacity performance of variable-speed CHPs in 35 
[deg]F conditions. Specifically, section 3.6.4.c of appendix M1 calls 
for calculation of full-speed performance at 35 [deg]F by calculating 
capacity and power using the interpolation from the 17 [deg]F and 47 
[deg]F tests, and then adjusting the evaluated heating capacity and 
power by 10 percent and 1.5 percent, respectively. Similarly, for 
PTHPs, DOE is proposing that the heating capacity and power at 35 
[deg]F be evaluated from the interpolation of H1 (47 [deg]F) 
and H3 (17 [deg]F), or HL tests, with the same 
adjustments applied to capacity (10%) and power (1.5%). The evaluation 
of heating capacity and power at temperature bins associated with frost 
accumulation i.e., 17 [deg]F to 40 [deg]F, would then be interpolated 
using the performance at 35 [deg]F.
    Issue 12: DOE requests comment on its proposed defrost adjustment 
coefficients; specifically, DOE requests feedback on its approach to 
use appendix M1 to inform the adjustment values for performance at 35 
[deg]F. DOE requests data on defrost degradation particular to PTHPs.
5. SHP Calculation
    DOE's proposed heating metric, SHP, represents a measure of heating 
efficiency across the entire season, as opposed to a single test 
condition. The SHP metric involves the evaluation and summation of the 
total heating provided and the power consumed using a binned analysis 
similar to the one used for the HSPF2 metric. Similar to HSPF2, the SHP 
calculation determines energy use for each bin based on the heating 
load for the bin, whether the PTHP would be operating in heat pump 
mode, using electric resistance heat, or both--and the heat pump 
capacity, power input, and degradation (if applicable). These 
quantities are calculated for each individual temperature bin using the 
appropriate formula for each bin depending on the operating 
characteristics of the type of system i.e., single-speed, two-speed or 
variable-speed. For each bin, it is assumed that the total heating 
provided would exactly match the building load. Bin temperatures and 
bin hours are discussed in section III.G.6 of this document.
    DOE understands that some units would use the HL test 
instead of testing at the H3 condition (17 [deg]F). 
Additionally, different units would undergo the HL test at 
different temperatures, depending on their respective cut-in and cut-
out temperatures. This may appear to present a concern of a non-
standardized test condition impacting the SHP calculation. However, DOE 
notes that since the H3 or HL tests would be used 
in addition to the other test conditions to interpolate performance in 
the various bins, and electric heat would supplement unit capacity to 
ensure total heating matches the building load in all bins, the 
evaluated SHP values would still allow for a meaningful comparison 
between units. Specifically, for a unit that tests using the 
HL test, heat pump performance would be determined down to 
the cutoff temperature using the performance at the ``L'' temperature, 
and all heating below the cut-out temperature would be calculated based 
on its being provided by electric resistance heating. This results in 
consistent comparison of PTHPs using the HL test and other 
PTHPs using the H3 test, because for all calculations the 
total delivered heating would match the building load, and energy input 
for bins below the cut-out temperature would be calculated assuming 
provision using electric resistance heat.
    DOE is also proposing a relationship to represent the heating 
building load line for PTAC/HPs. Similar to the cooling building load 
line, the PTAC/HP heating building load line represents the averaged 
heating load at different temperatures evaluated as a national average 
and utilizes an equal weighting of the small hotel and the midrise 
apartment prototypes.
    Issue 13: DOE requests comment on its proposed approach to 
calculate SHP using a similar binned analysis as that of HSPF2. DOE 
also requests comment on the proposed heating building load line; 
specifically, whether an equal weighting of the small hotel and midrise 
apartment use cases is appropriate.
6. Heating Temperature Bins and Weights
    The values of the total heating provided and the power consumed are 
evaluated for each individual temperature bin. Table III.9 shows DOE's 
proposed temperature bins and associated weighting factors to represent 
the number of hours per year spent at each bin for heating. These 
temperature bins and fractional hours are based on DOE's analysis of 
building energy use associated with PTAC/HP use cases, primarily the 
small hotel and midrise apartment prototypes, and are a national 
average.

[[Page 30853]]



              Table III.9--Distribution of Fractional Hours Within Heating Season Temperature Bins
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                              Representative   Fraction of total
                     Bin number, j                        Bin temperature    temperature for    temperature bin
                                                            range [deg]F        bin [deg]F        hours, nj/N
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1......................................................              39-35                 37              0.337
2......................................................              34-30                 32              0.298
3......................................................              29-25                 27              0.192
4......................................................              24-20                 22              0.108
5......................................................              19-15                 17              0.051
6......................................................              14-10                 12              0.008
7......................................................                9-5                  7              0.006
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Issue 14: DOE requests comment on its proposed temperature bins and 
associated fractional bin hours for heating.

H. Dehumidification of Fresh Air

    In typical hotel installations, the PTAC or PTHP unit provides 
cooling and heating to individual rooms or suites within the hotel and 
the hotel hallways and common areas are usually serviced by a separate 
air conditioning system. In older building designs, fresh air 
ventilation is supplied to hotel rooms via the corridors to which the 
rooms are connected. In these designs, air is exhausted from each hotel 
room by a bathroom exhaust fan and is replaced by ``make-up'' air 
supplied via the corridor and conditioned by the heating, ventilation, 
and air conditioning (``HVAC'') system that serves the corridor. Make-
up air from the corridor enters the hotel rooms by passing through an 
undercut or grill in the hotel room door.
    Building designs that supply make-up air via corridors generally 
are no longer permissible under the building codes adopted in most U.S. 
states. Chapter 10, Section 1018.5 of the 2009 International Building 
Code (``IBC'') states that, with some exceptions, ``corridors shall not 
serve as supply, return, exhaust, relief or ventilation air ducts.'' 
\21\ The International Code Council (``ICC'') tracks the adoption of 
the IBC by state. The ICC reports that, as of July 2022, only seven 
states had not fully adopted the 2009 version or a more recent version 
of the IBC.\22\ These IBC code requirements have precipitated the 
introduction of PTAC and PTHP models that are designed to draw outdoor 
air into the unit, dehumidify the outdoor air, and introduce the 
dehumidified air into the conditioned space. These models are commonly 
referred to as ``make-up air PTACs'' or ``make-up air PTHPs.'' The 
following paragraphs discuss issues regarding the market size and 
energy consumption of make-up air PTACs and PTHPs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ International Code Council. 2009 International Building 
Code. Available at: https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/chapter/4641/.
    \22\ International Code Council (2022). ``International Codes--
Adoption by State.'' Available at: www.mitek-us.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Master-I-Code-Adoption-Chart.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Market Size of Make-Up Air PTACs and PTHPs
    DOE has identified two different designs of make-up air PTAC and 
PTHP units on the market. In the first design, the PTAC or PTHP 
includes a dehumidifier module situated in the outdoor portion of the 
unit between the unit's outdoor heat exchanger and the panel that 
divides the indoor and outdoor portions of the unit. The dehumidifier 
module contains a compressor and refrigerant loop that are separate 
from the main refrigerant loop that the PTAC or PTHP uses to provide 
cooling to the conditioned space. In this design, outdoor air flows 
through the dehumidifier module, which removes moisture from the air, 
and into the conditioned space.
    In the second identified design, the make-up air PTAC or PTHP does 
not include a dehumidifier module. Instead, the unit incorporates a 
variable-speed compressor that can operate at speeds less than full 
speed. In this design, outdoor air is drawn through the unit and across 
the unit's primary evaporator coil; dehumidification is provided by the 
unit's main refrigerant loop, and the unit's variable-speed compressor 
adjusts its capacity to provide humidity control by matching compressor 
operation to the required load of sensible \23\ or latent \24\ cooling, 
such that the unit removes moisture from the air without cooling the 
air to a temperature well below the setpoint.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ ``Sensible cooling'' refers to cooling that reduces air 
temperature without removing moisture from the air.
    \24\ ``Latent cooling'' refers to cooling that only removes 
moisture from the air.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the May 2021 TP RFI, DOE requested comment on how ``make-up air 
PTAC'' and a ``make-up air PTHP'' could be defined, and what 
characteristics could be used to distinguish make-up air PTACs and 
PTHPs from other PTACs and PTHPs. 86 FR 28005, 28008. DOE also 
requested comment on the market size each of the PTAC and PTHP design 
options it has identified that provide dehumidification of fresh air 
and whether there were any other design pathways by which a PTAC or 
PTHP can provide dehumidification of outdoor air and, if alternative 
designs exist, the market size of these alternative designs. Id. DOE 
also requested data on the relative market share of make-up air PTACs/
PTHPs within the three PTAC and PTHP capacity ranges: <7,000 Btu/h; 
>=7,000 Btu/h and <=15,000 Btu/h; and >15,000 Btu/h. 86 FR 28005, 
28009.
    AHRI stated that the market for PTACs and PTHPs introducing 
conditioned outside air is very small. (AHRI, No. 14 at p. 4) AHRI 
commented that based on the survey they conducted to determine the 
market size for units providing dehumidification of outdoor air, AHRI 
estimates between 2.9 and 8.6 percent of PTAC/HPs sold include 
conditioned outdoor air capabilities across the PTAC and PTHP entire 
market, irrespective of equipment capacity and of these, an even 
smaller percentage include dehumidification capabilities. Id. AHRI 
stated that their survey did not have enough data to aggregate the 
proportion among the capacity bins, but it constituted a representative 
sample of the PTAC and PTHP market and indicated 3.8 percent of PTAC 
and PTHP shipments include make-up air for all equipment capacities. 
(AHRI, No. 14 at p. 7) They stated that this small market share is not 
expected to increase significantly, and it was their belief that DOE's 
analysis of this issue relying solely on building codes fails to 
appropriately account for alternate methods of providing makeup air 
based on the shipment numbers that are likely dominant in the market. 
Id.

[[Page 30854]]

Regarding definitions for make-up air PTACs and PTHPs, AHRI commented 
that they disagree that revisions are necessary, but offered 
information regarding different technologies that introduce makeup air 
through a PTAC or PTHP. (AHRI, No. 14 at p. 4-5) AHRI noted that the 
primary technologies for introducing outside air through a PTAC or PTHP 
are based on a separate module that includes a dehumidification coil--
with air either being forced into the room or a vent damper introducing 
ventilation air into the unit through induction (i.e., standard PTAC 
with open damper). Id. AHRI further noted that forced air introduction 
and induced air via a vent damper may or may not condition the outside 
air and may have a simple vent opening in its bulkhead which allows 
outside air to be drawn in by the negative pressure of the room caused 
by running the bathroom's exhaust fan. Id. AHRI commented that in the 
case of a dehumidification module, outdoor air is introduced through a 
module with its own compressor, fan, and dehumidification coils, with 
air being pushed through a module with a small fan(s) and an automated 
damper door will open and close to prevent draft while not in use. Id. 
AHRI further commented that most PTACs and their internal make-up air 
modules are equipped to accept signals from an occupancy detection 
system and that units with dehumidification modules are sometimes also 
referred to as ``two-stage systems.'' Id.
    NEAA commented that PTAC/HPs with make-up air capabilities are 
already available from at least four manufacturers and are likely to 
become more prevalent as the new construction and retrofit markets 
shift to meet this code requirement. (NEAA, No. 17 at p. 2) NEEA stated 
that there are also products on the market that are not specifically 
marketed for their ventilation capabilities, but which do allow for the 
introduction of outside air when the unit is operating. Id. NEAA noted 
that the distinguishing characteristic of these products is the 
introduction and conditioning of outside air. Id.
    In response to AHRI, DOE notes that while the market for make-up 
air PTACs and PTHPs may be small currently, new IBC code requirements 
and increased focus on ventilation, may lead to increased demand for 
these units. While there are other alternate methods of providing make 
up air, such as through a dedicated outdoor air system, DOE understands 
that implementing these alternate methods may require significant 
changes to existing buildings. As such, using make up air PTAC/HPs may 
be the preferred option to comply with new building codes. Therefore, 
DOE has initially determined that a test procedure to account for the 
dehumidification function of this equipment is appropriate.
2. Dehumidification Energy Use
    As previously mentioned, neither the current DOE test procedure nor 
the industry test procedures, AHRI Standard 310/380-2014 or AHRI 
Standard 310/380-2017, account for any additional energy associated 
with the dehumidification of make-up air traversing the unit. When a 
unit is operating in cooling mode, the dehumidification function may 
add heat to the room, thus increasing the cooling load on the unit. In 
addition, introducing make-up air to the room while the unit is 
operating in heating mode could increase a unit's energy consumption if 
the unit uses electric resistance heating to heat the make-up air. The 
amount of energy consumed by a dehumidification function depends on a 
variety of factors, including the airflow rate, the amount of time the 
dehumidification function is engaged, how the dehumidification function 
is controlled, and the ambient air temperature, among others.
    In the May 2021 TP RFI, DOE sought comment on the impacts on the 
energy consumption of PTACs and PTHPs that dehumidify incoming outdoor 
air for units that include a dehumidification module, a variable-speed 
compressor, or any other design that dehumidifies outdoor air and 
introduces it to the conditioned space, in both cooling and heating 
mode. 86 FR 28005, 28009. DOE also requested comment on how to quantify 
the energy consumption associated with the dehumidification function of 
make-up air PTACs/PTHPs for an average use cycle and what indoor and 
outdoor temperature and humidity conditions might be appropriate for 
this characterization. Id.
    NEAA commented that the introduction of outside air will generally 
increase energy use and the conditioning of this air should be captured 
by the test procedure. (NEAA, No. 17 at p. 2) NEEA stated that it is 
important to include this energy use because designers may be comparing 
makeup air PTACs with other ventilation options and that if this energy 
use is not captured by the test procedure, it would lead to an unfair 
comparison between PTAC or PTHPs and other ventilation options by not 
fully reflecting the energy used by these units. Id. The Joint 
Advocates also encouraged DOE to incorporate the additional energy use 
associated with make-up air PTACs and PTHPs so that the test procedure 
is representative for these units (Joint Advocates, No. 16 at p. 1)
    AHRI stated that there is no standard test procedure for measuring 
the energy component of a PTAC associated with the introduction and 
dehumidification of outdoor air. (AHRI, No. 14 at p. 5) They identified 
many factors to consider including, ambient environmental conditions, 
the quantity and the relative humidity of the outdoor air being 
supplied to the room, and the set of conditions that must be satisfied 
first before a dehumidification process is initiated. Id. AHRI stated 
that it was unreasonable to request stakeholders to essentially develop 
a test procedure through the notice and comment process for any 
product, much less an ``ASHRAE product'', and that these test 
procedures should be developed by a technical committee through 
consensus-process with relevant experts, including manufacturers, 
testing laboratory staff, and other experts present to discuss issues. 
Id.
    DOE agrees with NEAA and Joint Advocates that the introduction of 
outside air will generally increase energy use and the conditioning of 
this air should be considered as part of the test procedure. However, 
DOE also recognizes the challenges identified by AHRI regarding the 
evaluation of the make-up air operation via a test procedure. DOE notes 
that it participates in the AHRI Standard 310/380 committee and has 
worked with stakeholders to develop industry test procedures for PTAC/
HPs in the past and is willing to do so in the future, including for 
operation in dehumidification mode.
    The next section presents DOE's proposed test procedure for 
measuring the dehumidification energy use of make-up air PTAC/HPs.
3. Proposed Test Procedure
    To ensure that the test procedures prescribed by DOE are reasonably 
designed to produce test results which reflect energy efficiency during 
a representative average use cycle for PTAC or PTHP employing the make-
up air function, DOE is proposing a test procedure for manufacturers to 
make representations of dehumidification energy use for make-up PTACs 
and PTHPs.
a. Definitions
    Comments received in response to the May 2021 RFI suggest that the 
key feature of a make-up air PTAC or PTHP is the ability to introduce 
and condition outside air. While PTACs and PTHPs

[[Page 30855]]

which do not have dehumidification capabilities also have provisions to 
bring in outside air through the unit bulkhead,\25\ they do not 
condition the outdoor air before the outdoor air enters the conditioned 
space. Therefore, DOE considers that the conditioning of outside air is 
the defining aspect to distinguish make-up air PTAC/HPs from non make-
up air PTAC/HPs. DOE is proposing to define make-up air PTACs and make-
up PTHPs as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ DOE's research indicates that this bulkhead opening is 
often sealed during installation to prevent moisture ingress.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Make-up Air PTAC means a PTAC for which a portion of the total 
airflow is drawn in from outside the conditioned space and in which 
this outside air passes through a dehumidifying or cooling coil, either 
before or after mixing with the air drawn into the unit from the 
conditioned space, but before being discharged from the unit.
    Make-up Air PTHP means a PTHP for which a portion of the total 
airflow is drawn in from outside the conditioned space and in which 
this outside air passes through a dehumidifying or cooling coil, either 
before or after mixing with the air drawn into the unit from inside the 
conditioned space, but before being discharged from the unit.
    As discussed in section III.H.1 of this document, DOE has 
identified two designs of make-up air units--the first design employs a 
separate dehumidifier module, i.e., an ``add-on dehumidifier'' to 
provide dehumidification, while the second design relies on the main 
refrigeration circuit to provide dehumidification, i.e., it utilizes an 
``integrated dehumidifier''. DOE is proposing to define and include 
these terms in appendix H1 as follows:
    Add-on Dehumidifier means a dehumidification system of a make-up 
air PTAC or PTHP that has its own complete dehumidification system and 
does not use the main PTAC/HP system indoor coil for any portion of the 
outdoor air dehumidification.
    Integrated Dehumidifier means a dehumidification system of a make-
up air PTAC or PTHP for which some of the dehumidification of the 
outdoor air is provided by the main PTAC/HP system indoor coil.
    Issue 15: DOE requests comment on its proposed definitions for 
make-up air PTAC, make-up air PTHP, add-on dehumidifier and integrated 
dehumidifier.
b. Make-Up Air Setup
    To help DOE evaluate a test procedure for make-up air operation, 
DOE requested information and data in the May 2021 TP RFI regarding 
various aspects of the make-up air function, including: the typical 
range of make-up air volume flowing through a make-up air PTAC/PTHP and 
whether this airflow varies while the dehumidification function is 
engaged; how make-up air flowing through the unit is heated while the 
unit is operating in heating mode; how make-up air dehumidification is 
controlled for units with a dehumidifier module and units without a 
dehumidifier module, specifically, what conditions trigger the unit to 
engage make-up air dehumidification and how do make-up air PTACs/PTHPs 
interact with variables like occupancy or exhaust fan controls; the 
typical amount of time that make-up air PTAC/HPs engage the 
dehumidification function; how the cooling and dehumidification modes 
are coordinated for make-up air PTACs/PTHPs, whether dehumidification 
and cooling are typically performed simultaneously or separately, and 
the impact that any such coordination has on energy consumption; and 
the range of dehumidification capacities (in pints of water/day) for 
make-up air PTACs/PTHPs in the market and the test conditions used to 
rate dehumidification capacity. 85 FR 28005, 28009. DOE also requested 
comment on what instructions the test procedures should provide 
regarding how to prepare and setup a PTAC or PTHP makeup air unit for 
testing under the current DOE test procedure, which does not test the 
makeup air function of the unit. Id.
    AHRI stated that dehumidification modules typically introduce 25 to 
50 cubic feet per min (``CFM'') of outdoor air, but airflow rates may 
vary depending on the design of the make-up air feature. (AHRI, No. 14 
at p. 6) Regarding the time that the dehumidification mode is engaged, 
ARHI commented that there are different control strategies to control 
make-up air introduction and could be based on outdoor air conditions, 
room occupation, or other means and without some level of research, it 
is not possible to empirically determine what is ``typical''. Id. AHRI 
stated that they were unable to comment on dehumidification capacities 
(in pints of water/day) as there is currently no consensus method to 
measure dehumidification capacities for make-up air PTACs/PTHPs in the 
market. Id. DOE did not receive any further comments on other aspects 
of the make-up air function.
    DOE's review of product literature suggests typical publicized 
dehumidification rates of 4-5 pints per day, although as AHRI noted 
there is currently no consensus method to measure dehumidification 
capacities for make-up air PTACs/PTHPs in the market. DOE also found 
that some make-up air PTACs or PTHPs use control schemes based on 
outdoor air temperature and relative humidity to decide when to engage 
the dehumidification function.
    DOE notes that the 2022 edition of the ASHRAE ventilation standard, 
ASHRAE 62.1, ``Ventilation and Acceptable Indoor Quality'' (``ASHRAE 
62.1-2022'') prescribes minimum ventilation rates in Table 6-1 of the 
standard. The minimum ventilation rates include an occupancy-based 
outdoor air rate based on expected number of people in the space and/or 
an outdoor air rate based on floor area. For hotels, the occupancy-
based outdoor air rate is 5 CFM per person and the floorspace based 
outdoor air rate is 0.06 CFM per square foot. Based on a typical hotel 
room occupancy of 2 persons and a floor area of 300 square feet, the 
total required ventilation airflow would amount to 28 CFM. DOE 
conducted a review of product literature marketing PTACs and PTHPs with 
make-up air capabilities and concluded that all such units are capable 
of introducing at least 30 CFM of air, with airflow ranges from 30 to 
75 CFM. Therefore, DOE has tentatively concluded that 30 CFM is the 
appropriate representative airflow to use in the development of the 
test procedure.
    DOE understands that a key challenge associated with the testing of 
make-up air PTAC/HPs is the introduction and measurement of the make-up 
air. Some make-up PTAC/HPs have fans to provide the make-up air, while 
others rely on a negative pressure differential within the room. To 
standardize the rate and means of make-up air intake, DOE's proposed 
test procedure requires the use of a makeup air inlet duct assembly to 
draw air into the make-up air intake for the PTAC/HP unit. The inlet 
duct assembly would include a nozzle airflow measuring apparatus and an 
inlet plenum, with interconnecting duct sections. The air flow 
measuring apparatus would be used to measure and feed air into the 
plenum. Figure III-2 details the setup of the inlet duct

[[Page 30856]]

assembly and the nozzle airflow measuring apparatus.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.001

    DOE's proposal requires that the inlet plenum have interior 
dimensions of at least 12 inches high and at least 12 inches wide in 
the plane perpendicular to the air flow, and an interior dimension of 
at least 24 inches between the edges of the inlet and outlet ducts that 
are closest to each other. The inlet plenum would be insulated to 
prevent variance in the air temperature in the plenum as compared to 
the make-up air inlet. Nozzle airflow measuring apparatus as described 
in section 6.2 of ASHRAE 37-2009 in addition to an adjustable fan, 
would be used to adjust the inlet plenum pressure. The nozzle airflow 
measuring apparatus would take in outdoor room air and move it into the 
unit under test in a blow-through arrangement. Additionally, a transfer 
fan would transfer makeup air from the indoor room back to the outdoor 
room. The transfer fan would be adjustable to allow setting of the 
needed pressure differential when the target makeup air is passing 
through the test unit. Setting up of the 30 CFM make-up air flow rate 
would require adjustments of both the inlet plenum pressure and the 
transfer fan.
    To measure the pressure differential between the outdoor room and 
the inlet air plenum, static pressure taps shall be placed at four 
locations around the inlet air plenum as shown in Figure III-2, and 
consistent with section 6.5 of ASHRAE 37-2009. The pressure taps would 
be manifolded together as indicated in section 6.5.3 of ASHRAE 37-2009. 
Temperature measurements of the outdoor inlet dry bulb and wet bulb 
temperatures would be made at the inlet of the nozzle airflow 
measurement apparatus, consistent with ASHRAE 16-2016.
    Issue 16: DOE requests comment on the required make-up airflow rate 
of 30 CFM and the proposed test setup for the make-up inlet assembly.
c. Test Conditions and Measurements
    DOE did not receive any comments regarding the test conditions for 
a dehumidification test. In the absence of any information, DOE 
considers that the standard test conditions used for DOE's current test 
procedure--80 [deg]F/67 [deg]F (dry-bulb/wet-bulb) in the conditioned 
space and 95 [deg]F/6 [deg]F (dry-bulb/dew point) for the outdoor 
entering air, are appropriate. These conditions ensure that the outdoor 
air would have a higher humidity ratio than the indoor air and would 
present the need for dehumidification. Table III.10 and Table III.11 
set out the test conditions and tolerances.

                                 Table III.10--Dehumidification Test Conditions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Air entering makeup air inlet temperatures   Air entering indoor side of unit temperature
                  ([deg]F)                                       ([deg]F)                     Make-up air flow
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------        (scfm)
       Dry bulb              Dew Point               Dry bulb               Wet bulb
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               95                     67                     80                     67                     30
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 30857]]


              TableIII.11--Dehumidification Test Tolerances
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Variation of
                                        arithmetic     Maximum  observed
                                      average  from        range  of
              Reading                   specified        readings (test
                                     conditions (test      operating
                                        condition          tolerance)
                                        tolerance)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air entering makeup air inlet dry                 0.3                1.2
 bulb ([deg]F)....................
Dew point ([deg]).................                0.5                1.5
Add-on dehumidification system
 test:
    Air entering indoor side dry                    3                  5
     bulb ([deg]).................
    Wet bulb ([deg])..............                  3                  5
Integrated dehumidification system
 test:
    Air entering indoor side dry                  0.3                1.5
     bulb ([deg]).................
    Wet bulb ([deg])..............                0.3                1.0
Makeup airflow (scfm).............                  1  .................
Makeup airflow Nozzle pressure      .................                  5
 drop (%).........................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The evaluation of dehumidification energy use requires the 
measurement of condensate removed by the make-up air unit and the power 
consumed during the operation i.e., the liters of water removed per 
watt-hours (``Wh''). Moisture removal is part of the associated latent 
capacity of a PTAC/HP unit, and units which do not have make-up air 
capabilities also collect condensate. For most PTAC/HPs, the collected 
condensate is `slung' back onto the condenser coils to provide an 
evaporative benefit and improve efficiency. Therefore, to collect and 
measure condensate that is strictly associated with the 
dehumidification portion of the make-up air unit, this slinging 
operation needs to be either bypassed or taken into account.
    The two separate designs of make-up air PTAC/HPs discussed in 
section III.H.1 of this document necessitate different methodologies to 
measure dehumidification energy use. For systems that use an add-on 
dehumidifier, DOE's proposed test procedure requires isolating the add-
on dehumidifier of the unit under test from the main refrigeration 
circuit, thereby also avoiding the slinging operation. This can be 
achieved by setting the unit thermostat to a high temperature setting, 
and if necessary, moving the sensor such that it is in sufficiently 
cool air to prevent main system start. A preliminary power measurement 
would be made with the PTAC/HP in fan-only mode or with the thermostat 
and fan controls set such that the indoor fan is energized, but the 
compressor and outdoor fan are not--this measurement would establish 
the background power to be subtracted from the test measurement 
including the dehumidifier operating. The unit is then operated at the 
test conditions mentioned previously and the thermostatic drain plug is 
removed to allow the collection and measurement of condensate--with 
measurements at intervals of no more than 10 minutes. Equilibrium test 
conditions would be maintained within tolerances shown in Table III.11 
for not less than one hour before recording data for the test. The 
dehumidification test would then be conducted over a 1-hour period, 
with no parameter exceeding the allowable tolerances specified in Table 
III.11 of this document. Measurements of test conditions, input power 
and energy, and airflow are taken at least every 60 seconds and logged. 
The condensate is collected in a bucket placed on a scale with a mass 
measurement resolution of 1 gram. The collection bucket is covered to 
limit re-evaporation. This test will yield the value of collected 
condensate, wd,add.
    For systems that use an integrated dehumidifier, the measurement of 
dehumidification effciency would be based on a comparison of condensate 
collected and power consumed in a preliminary `non-makeup air' test 
(i.e., test without make-up air intake) and a `make-up air' test (i.e., 
test without make-up air intake).
    For the `non make-up air' test--the make-up airflow passage would 
be blocked, and to prevent use of the condensate for condenser cooling, 
the condensate will need to be drained before it reaches a level high 
enough for the slinger to spray it onto the condenser coil. Since this 
will affect performance by preventing the enhancement of condenser 
cooling, this test will be done at reduced outdoor air temperature 
conditions to compensate for the slinger de-activation. This would 
require measuring the average coil temperature during the 
Afull cooling test, using the temperature measuring setup in 
Figure III-2 of this document. For the `non-make up air' test, the 
outdoor room dry bulb temperature will be reduced to a level for which 
the outdoor coil return bend temperature is within 0.5 [deg]F of the 
temperature measured during the Afull test. The sensible and 
latent capacity would be measured as described in ASHRAE 16-2016, with 
condensate measurements at intervals of 10 minutes. When conditions 
have stabilized after a duration of 60 minutes, the performance test is 
conducted for a 60 minute test period. The test is considered valid 
when the energy balance requirements described in section 7 of ASHRAE 
16-2016 have been met and the latent capacity calculated based on the 
condensate measurement is within 6 percent of the latent capacity 
measurement based on the psychrometric or calorimetric test method, 
whichever is used. This test will yield the value of collected 
condensate, wd,pre..
    For the `make-up air' test--the make-up airflow passage would be 
unblocked and will utilize the same reduced outdoor air temperature 
conditions, but to ensure a consistent comparison with other make-up 
systems (make-up air systems with add-on dehumidifiers), the incoming 
make-up air would need to be re-heated back to 95 [deg]F. Part (or all) 
of this re-heating may be provided by the heat generated from the push-
through code tester fan as depicted in Figure III-2 of this document. 
Supplemental re-heating may be required to provide the remaining re-
heat. Similar to the `non-make-up air test', a 60 minute stability 
period will be followed by a test duration of 60 minutes. The test is 
considered valid when the energy balance requirements are met. This 
test will yield the value of collected condensate, wd,int.
    The difference between the collected condensate for both tests: 
wd,int. and

[[Page 30858]]

wd,pre. and the difference between the power consumed in the 
two tests, will be evaluated to provide a measure of dehumidification 
efficiency for make-up air units with an integrated dehumidifier.
    Issue 17: DOE requests comment on the proposed test conditions for 
the make-up air dehumidification test; specifically, whether the indoor 
air entering conditions, outdoor air entering conditions are 
appropriate.
    Issue 18: DOE requests comment on its proposed test measurements 
and instructions for both make-up air system designs.
d. Metric
    DOE is proposing that the dehumidification energy use for both 
designs of make-up air systems be measured using a separate metric, 
dehumidification efficiency (DE). DE is measured in liters per kWh, and 
is evaluated as a ratio of the collected condensate to energy consumed 
in dehumidification, as measured in section III.H.3.c of this document. 
DOE is proposing to define dehumidification efficiency of PTACs and 
PTHPs as follows:
    Dehumidification Efficiency, or DE, means the quantity of water 
removed from the air divided by the energy consumed, measured in liters 
per kilowatt-hour (L/kWh).
    DOE may as an alternative choose to integrate the dehumidification 
energy use of a make-up air unit with the cooling performance, by 
incorporating the liters per Wh into the SCP metric. DOE could 
implement such an integration by incorporating the capacity and power 
input impacts measured for the dehumidification test into the SCP. For 
each bin involved in the SCP calculation for which national-average 
humidity associated with the bin's dry bulb temperature represents more 
moisture than typical indoor humidity conditions, e.g., associated with 
75 [deg]F dry-bulb temperature and 50 percent relative humidity 
conditions, the system would be assumed to be providing 
dehumidification at the capacity measured in the dehumidification test, 
with power input also as measured in the test. The additional thermal 
load associated with the dehumidification system's power input, less 
the latent capacity equivalent of the dehumidification, would be added 
to the cooling load for the bin to determine additional PTAC/HP primary 
cooling system energy use for the bin. Also, the measured 
dehumidification system's power input would be added to the PTAC/HP 
power input for the bin. The latent capacity associated with the 
measured dehumidification would also be added to the delivered cooling 
for the bin. Both delivered cooling and power input of these 
contributions would multiply by the bin hours, thus providing the 
integrated cooling and energy for the bin--by summing bin contributions 
for the cooling season, the calculations would in this way integrate 
the contributions to cooling and energy of the dehumidification system.
    Issue 19: DOE requests comment on its proposed metric to evaluate 
dehumidification energy use.
    Issue 20: DOE requests feedback on whether a separate metric is 
appropriate for evaluating dehumidification energy use, or whether 
dehumidification energy use should be integrated into the cooling 
metric. If integrated into the cooling metric, DOE requests comment on 
the approach outlined above to represent the dehumidification energy 
use.

I. Fan-Only Mode

    The current DOE test procedures for PTACs and PTHPs do not address 
energy consumption during ``fan-only'' mode. In the May 2021 TP RFI, 
DOE described ``fan-only'' mode as a mode in which the fan is operating 
and providing ventilation or air circulation without active cooling or 
heating. 86 FR 28005, 28011.
    In the May 2021 TP RFI DOE requested data and information related 
to the power consumption of PTAC and PTHP units during ``fan-only'' 
mode, specifically, whether the indoor and outdoor fans are powered by 
the same motor; whether the default fan control scheme dictates that 
the indoor fan cycles with the compressor or stays on; and whether the 
fan operates at a lower power if the fan remains on when the compressor 
cycles off. Id. DOE also requested data and information on the annual 
number of hours PTAC and PTHP units operate in ``fan-only'' mode. Id.
    AHRI explained that power can be supplied to the indoor and outdoor 
fans using two different motors and both fans can be variable speed and 
operate at different set points given mode of operation and model type. 
(AHRI, No. 14 at p. 11) Alternately, AHRI noted that power can be 
supplied using a single motor operating both indoor and outdoor fans. 
Id. AHRI further explained that the indoor ``fan-only'' mode has two 
user-selectable speeds: high and low, and that the default settings for 
the indoor fan are to run continuously for cooling and to cycle for 
heating. Id. AHRI stated that there is no change in power consumption 
of the fan itself when running continuously compared to cycling with 
the compressor and there is no difference in fan speed during cooling, 
heating or ventilation operations. Id. AHRI did not provide any data 
regarding ``fan-only'' mode operating hours, but noted that it would be 
highly individualized to the individual staying in the hotel room. Id. 
They stated that the compressor is the dominant energy using component 
of a PTAC or PTHP and that many PTACs and PTHPs use brushless DC 
motors, which have comparatively low energy consumption. Id.
    The Joint Advocates and NEEA encouraged DOE to capture energy use 
in fan-only mode. (Joint Advocates, No. 16 at p. 2 ; NEEA, No. 17 at p. 
3) NEEA stated that product literature indicated that at least some 
PTACs and PTHPs utilize continuous fan operation in their primary mode 
i.e., these units operate the fan any time the unit is on, regardless 
of whether the compressor is running. (NEEA, No. 17 at p. 3) NEEA 
stated that the number of fan hours spent in this mode have the 
potential to be significant, and this energy use should be captured by 
the test procedure. NEEA recommended that DOE conduct further research 
to determine the number of hours spent in fan-only mode and to include 
this energy use in the test procedure. Id.
    To investigate the energy used during `fan-only' mode, DOE reviewed 
literature for several PTAC/HPs and performed investigative testing on 
2 single-speed PTHPs, running full-load and part-load cooling tests to 
evaluate the differences between running a unit with the indoor fan 
running continuously (``constant fan'' test) and running the indoor fan 
cycling with the compressor (``cycling fan'' test). The two tests were 
run at the same conditions and loads to provide a comparison. DOE's 
literature review agrees with AHRI's provided information that most 
PTAC/HPs have two user-selectable speeds: high and low, and that the 
default settings for the indoor fan is usually to run continuously for 
cooling and to cycle for heating. However, while DOE agrees with AHRI 
that there is no change in power consumption of the fan itself when 
running continuously compared to cycling with the compressor, DOE's 
investigative testing, which incorporated part-load cyclic tests, was 
able to conclude that the average total power consumed over several 
cycles was higher for the indoor fan when running in ``constant fan'' 
mode, as compared to when it was running on ``cycling fan'' mode. 
Consequently, the cooling efficiency (EER) observed for the constant 
fan tests were lower.

[[Page 30859]]

    These test results suggest that PTAC/HPs may consume more energy 
when they are operating with the fan in continuous operation. However, 
DOE does not have enough information regarding the prevalence of use 
when only the fan is in operation, i.e., number of annual hours spent 
in fan-only mode, as this is highly dependent on user preference and 
other factors. Further, DOE did not receive any comments that provided 
this information. Therefore, DOE is not proposing to measure energy use 
during fan-only mode. However, the evaluation of cooling and heating 
default degradation coefficients in section III.F.3 of this document 
are evaluated based on the cyclic testing data associated with the 
constant fan mode, as this presents the worst case for cycling losses.

J. Use of Psychrometric Testing

    The current DOE test procedure for PTAC/HPs allow for cooling mode 
testing to be performed either in a calorimeter room per ASHRAE 16-1983 
or by employing the indoor air enthalpy method per ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009. 
The heating mode testing must be performed using ASHRAE 58-1986, which 
utilizes a psychrometric measurement.
    In response to the May 2021 RFI, the CA IOUs recommended that DOE 
require testing in a calorimeter room for both cooling and heating 
mode. (CA IOUs, No. 15 at p. 3-4) The CA IOUs cited DOE's conclusion in 
the RAC rulemaking that testing done using the ANSI/ASHRAE 37 procedure 
for RACs did not provide repeatable data when compared to the 
calorimeter method and that, unlike the calorimeter, the air-enthalpy 
method did not accurately account for heat transfer within and through 
the unit chassis. Id. (See 86 FR 16446, 16461) The CA IOUs recommended 
that DOE either perform similar testing for PTAC/HPs or use the results 
from the RAC testing to only allow testing under ANSI/ASHRAE 16. Id.
    DOE has in the past considered requiring calorimetric testing for 
all PTAC/HPs. In the test procedure NOPR published on March 13, 2014 
(``March 2014 NOPR''), DOE proposed requiring that tests be conducted 
using the calorimetric method of ASHRAE 16, based on testing conducted 
using both methods which showed better performance using ASHRAE 16 than 
when using ASHRAE 37. 79 FR 14186, 14190-14191. However, DOE did not 
finalize such a requirement in the June 2015 TP final rule. DOE based 
this decision on feedback from commenters suggested that there would be 
additional burden if DOE were to require all testing to be performed 
calorimetrically, and data received from a commenter based on a more 
extensive series of tests that showed that the calorimetric and 
psychrometric test methods were comparable, contrary to DOE's test 
results. 80 FR 37136, 37141. Consequently, DOE did not eliminate the 
optional use of ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009 to determine cooling capacity. Id. 
DOE notes that ASHRAE 16-2016 now allows for both calorimetric and 
psychrometric testing, indicating consensus of participants in the 
development of the updated test standard that the calorimeter and the 
psychrometric chamber provide comparable results. DOE more recently 
performed testing of a PTHP unit in cooling mode in both a calorimeter 
using methods in ASHRAE 16-1983, and in a psychrometric chamber using 
ASHRAE 37-2009, and found the results to be comparable. Regarding DOE's 
determination in the RAC rulemaking, it is not clear that the potential 
test inconsistency in that case would necessarily be an issue for PTAC/
HPs, as it was specific to RACs. DOE notes that there are geometric 
differences and size differences between RACs and PTACs which can make 
recirculation of air from air discharge outlets to air inlets more 
likely for RACs than PTACs. This recirculation can occur on both the 
room side and the outdoor side. Such recirculation, which generally 
reduces a unit's performance, is blocked on the indoor side by use of 
ASHRAE 37-2009, due to ducting of the discharge air, but not when using 
the calorimetric method. Thus, DOE provisionally concludes that this 
issue would have a larger impact in the psychrometric testing of RACs 
as compared PTAC/HPs.
    DOE is proposing to incorporate by reference ASHRAE 16-2016, which 
allows calorimetric and psychrometric testing for both heating and 
cooling mode tests. However, DOE welcomes additional data regarding the 
consistency of psychrometric and calorimetric tests for PTAC/HPs.
    Issue 21: DOE requests data regarding the agreement of test results 
when testing PTAC/HPs using psychrometric test methods as opposed to 
calorimetric test methods.

K. Test Procedure Costs and Impact

    In this NOPR, DOE proposes to amend the existing test procedure for 
PTACs and PTHPs by incorporating seasonal cooling and heating 
performance and establishing new cooling and heating metrices, SCP and 
SHP. DOE also proposes to include provisions to measure 
dehumidification energy use of make-up air PTAC/HPs.
    DOE has tentatively determined that the proposed amendments in this 
NOPR would improve the representativeness, accuracy, and 
reproducibility of the test results and would not be unduly burdensome 
for manufacturers to conduct. Because the current DOE test procedure 
for PTAC/HPs would be relocated to appendix H without change, the 
proposed test procedure in appendix H for measuring EER and COP would 
result in no change in testing practices and thus result in no new 
burden or costs.
    Should DOE adopt standards in a future energy conservation 
standards rulemaking in terms of the new metrics (SCP and SHP), the 
proposed test procedure in appendix H1 would be required. DOE has 
tentatively concluded that the proposed test procedure in appendix H1 
for measuring SCP and SHP, would increase third-party lab testing costs 
per unit relative to the current DOE test procedure. DOE estimates the 
expected cost increase for physical testing to range from $5,100 to 
$15,300 per unit for the complete test, depending on the system 
configuration of the PTAC/HP unit (single-speed, two-speed or variable-
speed). In addition to the increased costs due to required testing to 
determine SCP and SHP, make-up air PTAC/HPs may incur an additional 
cost of $3,000 if manufacturers chose to make dehumidification 
representations.
    However, in accordance with 10 CFR 429.70, PTAC/HP manufacturers 
may elect to use AEDMs to rate models, which significantly reduces 
costs to industry. DOE estimates the per-manufacturer cost to develop 
and validate an AEDM for PTAC/HPs to be $25,200. DOE estimates a cost 
of approximately $50 \26\ per basic model for determining energy 
efficiency using the validated AEDM. Both of these estimates reflect 
the costs for AEDM development based on the proposed appendix H1 
procedure. Because DOE is not proposing any changes to appendix H that 
would affect current testing practices, there are no incremental costs

[[Page 30860]]

expected due to the proposed amendments to appendix H.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ DOE estimated initial costs to validate an AEDM assuming 80 
hours of general time to develop an AEDM based on existing 
simulation tools and 16 hours to validate two basic models within 
that AEDM at the cost of an engineering technician wage of $50 per 
hour plus the cost of third-party physical testing of two units per 
validation class (as required in 10 CFR 429.70(c)(2)(iv)). DOE 
estimated the additional per basic model cost to determine 
efficiency using an AEDM, assuming 1 hour per basic model at the 
cost of an engineering technician wage of $50 per hour.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Issue 22: DOE requests comment on its understanding of the impact 
of the test procedure proposals in this NOPR, specifically DOE's 
estimates of the costs associated with testing using appendix H1 of 
this document.

L. Compliance Date

    EPCA prescribes that, if DOE amends a test procedure, all 
representations of energy efficiency and energy use, including those 
made on marketing materials and product labels, must be made in 
accordance with that amended test procedure, beginning 360 days after 
publication of such a test procedure final rule in the Federal 
Register. (42 U.S.C. 6314(d)(1)) Representations related to energy 
consumption of PTACs and PTHPs must be made in accordance with the 
appropriate appendix that applies (i.e., appendix H or appendix H1) 
when determining compliance with the relevant standard. DOE would not 
require that PTAC/HPs be tested according to the test procedure in the 
proposed appendix H1 until the compliance date of any future amended 
energy conservation standard that relies on the SCP and SHP metrics, 
should DOE adopt such standards. However, beginning 360 days after 
publication of a test procedure final rule finalizing appendix H1, any 
representations of dehumidification capacity and efficiency of make-up 
air PTAC/HPs must be made using the dehumidification test procedures in 
appendix H1.

IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review

A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 14094

    Executive Order (``E.O.'')12866, ``Regulatory Planning and 
Review,'' as supplemented and reaffirmed by E.O. 13563, ``Improving 
Regulation and Regulatory Review,'' 76 FR 3821 (Jan. 21, 2011) and E.O. 
14094, ``Modernizing Regulatory Review,'' 88 FR 21879 (April 11, 2023), 
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 proposed 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 proposed regulatory action 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'') 
for any rule that by law must be proposed for public comment, unless 
the agency certifies that the rule, if promulgated, will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
As required by Executive Order 13272, ``Proper Consideration of Small 
Entities in Agency Rulemaking,'' 67 FR 53461 (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 DOE 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.
1. Description of Why Action Is Being Considered
    DOE is proposing to amend the existing DOE test procedures for 
PTACs and PTHPs in satisfaction of the 7-year review requirement 
specified in EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(1)(A)(i)).
2. Objective of, and Legal Basis for, Rule
    EPCA authorizes DOE to regulate the energy efficiency of a number 
of consumer products and certain industrial equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6291-
6317) Title III, Part C of EPCA, added by Public Law 95-619, Title IV, 
Sec.  441(a), established the Energy Conservation Program for Certain 
Industrial Equipment, which sets forth a variety of provisions designed 
to improve energy efficiency. (42 U.S.C. 6311-6317) This equipment 
includes PTACs and PTHPs, the subjects of this document. (42 U.S.C. 
6311(1)(J))
    Further, if such an industry test procedure is amended, DOE must 
amend its test procedure to be consistent with the amended industry 
test procedure, unless DOE determines, by rule published in the Federal 
Register and supported by clear and convincing evidence, that such 
amended test procedure would not meet the requirements in 42 U.S.C. 
6314(a)(2) and (3) related to representative use and test burden. (42 
U.S.C. 6314(a)(4)(B))
    EPCA also requires that, at least once every 7 years, DOE evaluate 
test procedures for each type of covered equipment, including PTACs and 
PTHPs, to determine whether amended test procedures would more 
accurately or fully comply with the requirements for the test 
procedures to not be unduly burdensome to conduct and be reasonably 
designed to produce test results that reflect energy efficiency, energy 
use, and estimated operating costs during a representative average use 
cycle. (42 U.S.C. 6146314(a)(1)(A))
3. Description and Estimate of Small Entities Regulated
    For manufacturers of PTACs and PTHPs, the Small Business 
Administration (``SBA'') has set a size threshold, which defines those 
entities classified as ``small businesses'' for the purposes of the 
statute. DOE used the SBA's small business size standards to determine 
whether any small entities would be subject to the requirements of the 
rule. See 13 CFR part 121. The equipment covered by this rule are 
classified under North American Industry Classification System 
(``NAICS'') code 333415, ``Air-Conditioning and Warm Air Heating 
Equipment and Commercial and

[[Page 30861]]

Industrial Refrigeration Equipment Manufacturing.'' In 13 CFR 121.201, 
the SBA sets a threshold of 1,250 employees or fewer for an entity to 
be considered as a small business for this category. DOE identified 
twelve original equipment manufacturers (``OEMs'') of equipment covered 
by this rulemaking. DOE screened out companies that do not meet the 
definition of a ``small business'' or are foreign-owned and operated. 
Of the twelve OEMs, DOE identified one small, domestic OEM for 
consideration. DOE used subscription-based business information tools 
to determine headcount and revenue of the small business.
    DOE relied on the CCMS Compliance Certification Database \27\ to 
create a list of companies that manufacture equipment covered by this 
proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ U.S. Department of Energy Compliance Certification 
Database, available at: www.regulations.doe.gov/certification-data/products.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. Description and Estimate of Compliance Requirements
    In the test procedure notice, DOE proposes to relocate the current 
DOE test procedure for PTACs and PTHPs to appendix H without change. 
This reorganization to the test procedure for measuring EER and COP 
would result in no change in testing practices and no cost to 
manufacturers.
    Additionally, DOE is proposing to establish a new appendix H1 to 
subpart F of part 431. Appendix H1 would establish a new seasonal 
cooling performance metric (SCP) and a new seasonal heating performance 
metric (SHP) and the test procedure requirements for SCP and SHP. DOE 
also proposes to include provisions to measure dehumidification energy 
use of make-up air PTAC and PTHPs. Use of the proposed appendix H1 is 
not required and would not be required until the compliance date of 
amended energy conservation standards based on SCP and SHP, should DOE 
adopt such standards.
    Should DOE adopt standards in a future energy conservation 
standards rulemaking in terms of the new metrics (SCP and SHP), the 
proposed test procedure in appendix H1 would be required. DOE has 
tentatively concluded that the proposed test procedure in appendix H1 
for measuring SCP and SHP, would increase third-party lab testing costs 
per unit relative to the current DOE test procedure. DOE estimates the 
expected cost increase for physical testing to range from $5,100 to 
$15,300, depending on the system configuration of the PTAC/HP unit 
(single-speed, two-speed or variable-speed). In addition to the 
increased costs due to required testing to determine SCP and SHP, make-
up air PTAC/HPs may incur an additional cost of $3,000 if manufacturers 
chose to make representations for dehumidification in terms of the DE 
metric. However, in accordance with 10 CFR 429.70, PTAC/HP 
manufacturers may elect to use AEDMs to rate models, which 
significantly reduces costs to industry. DOE estimates the per-
manufacturer cost to develop and validate an AEDM for PTAC/HPs to be 
$25,200. DOE estimates a cost of approximately $50 per basic model for 
determining energy efficiency using the validated AEDM.
    DOE estimates that developing an AEDM and re-rating all 219 basic 
models to new metrics would cost the identified small manufacturer 
approximately $40,000. DOE has tentatively determined that this amount 
would not constitute a significant economic impact on this small 
manufacturer. However, because these costs would only be incurred if 
DOE were to adopt a future energy conservation based on SCP and SHP 
metrics, the small manufacturer would incur no additional compliance 
costs as a direct result of this test procedure rulemaking. On this 
basis, DOE tentatively concludes that the proposed rule would not have 
a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    DOE has tentatively determined that the proposed amendments in this 
NOPR would improve the representativeness, accuracy, and 
reproducibility of the test results and would not be unduly burdensome 
for manufacturers to conduct.
    Issue 23: DOE requests comment on the number of small OEMs 
identified. DOE also seeks comment the estimated costs the small 
manufacturer may incur.
5. Duplication Overlap, and Conflict With Other Rules and Regulations
    DOE is not aware of any rules or regulations that duplicate, 
overlap, or conflict with the rule being considered today.
6. Significant Alternatives to the Rule
    DOE proposes to reduce burden on manufacturers, including small 
businesses, by allowing AEDMs in lieu of physically testing all basic 
models. The use of an AEDM is less costly than physical testing of PTAC 
and PTHP models. Without AEDMs, DOE estimates the cost to physically 
test all PTAC and PTHP basic models for the identified small 
manufacturer to be approximately $2 million.
    Additional compliance flexibilities may be available through other 
means. EPCA provides that a manufacturer whose annual gross revenue 
from all of its operations does not exceed $8 million may apply for an 
exemption from all or part of an energy conservation standard for a 
period not longer than 24 months after the effective date of a final 
rule establishing the standard. (42 U.S.C. 6295(t)) Additionally, 
manufacturers subject to DOE's energy efficiency standards may apply to 
DOE's Office of Hearings and Appeals for exception relief under certain 
circumstances. Manufacturers should refer to 10 CFR part 430, subpart 
E, and 10 CFR part 1003 for additional details.

C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    Manufacturers of PTAC/HPs must certify to DOE that their products 
comply with any applicable energy conservation standards. To certify 
compliance, manufacturers must first obtain test data for their 
products according to the DOE test procedures, including any amendments 
adopted for those test procedures. DOE has established regulations for 
the certification and recordkeeping requirements for all covered 
consumer products and commercial equipment, including PTAC/HPs. (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.
    DOE is not proposing to amend the certification or reporting 
requirements for PTAC/HPs in this NOPR. Instead, DOE may consider 
proposals to amend the certification requirements and reporting for 
PTAC/HPs under a separate rulemaking regarding appliance and equipment 
certification. DOE will address changes to OMB Control Number 1910-1400 
at that time, as necessary.

[[Page 30862]]

    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

    In this NOPR, DOE proposes test procedure amendments that it 
expects will be used to develop and implement future energy 
conservation standards for PTAC/HPs. DOE has determined that this rule 
falls into a class of actions that are categorically excluded from 
review under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 
4321 et seq.) and DOE's implementing regulations at 10 CFR part 1021. 
Specifically, DOE has determined that adopting test procedures for 
measuring energy efficiency of consumer products and industrial 
equipment is consistent with activities identified in 10 CFR part 1021, 
appendix A to subpart D, A5 and A6. Accordingly, neither an 
environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is 
required.

E. Review Under Executive Order 13132

    Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism,'' 64 FR 43255 (Aug. 4, 1999) 
imposes certain requirements on agencies formulating and implementing 
policies or regulations that preempt State law or that have federalism 
implications. The Executive order requires agencies to examine the 
constitutional and statutory authority supporting any action that would 
limit the policymaking discretion of the States and to carefully assess 
the necessity for such actions. The Executive order also requires 
agencies to have an accountable process to ensure meaningful and timely 
input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory 
policies that have federalism implications. On March 14, 2000, DOE 
published a statement of policy describing the intergovernmental 
consultation process it will follow in the development of such 
regulations. 65 FR 13735. DOE has examined this proposed rule and has 
determined that it would not have a substantial direct effect on the 
States, on the relationship between the national government and the 
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government. EPCA governs and prescribes Federal 
preemption of State regulations as to energy conservation for the 
products that are the subject of this proposed rule. States can 
petition DOE for exemption from such preemption to the extent, and 
based on criteria, set forth in EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6297(d)) No further 
action is required by Executive Order 13132.

F. Review Under Executive Order 12988

    Regarding the review of existing regulations and the promulgation 
of new regulations, section 3(a) of Executive Order 12988, ``Civil 
Justice Reform,'' 61 FR 4729 (Feb. 7, 1996), imposes on Federal 
agencies the general duty to adhere to the following requirements: (1) 
eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity, (2) write regulations to 
minimize litigation, (3) provide a clear legal standard for affected 
conduct rather than a general standard, and (4) promote simplification 
and burden reduction. Section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988 
specifically requires that Executive agencies make every reasonable 
effort to ensure that the regulation (1) clearly specifies the 
preemptive effect, if any, (2) clearly specifies any effect on existing 
Federal law or regulation, (3) provides a clear legal standard for 
affected conduct while promoting simplification and burden reduction, 
(4) specifies the retroactive effect, if any, (5) adequately defines 
key terms, and (6) addresses other important issues affecting clarity 
and general draftsmanship under any guidelines issued by the Attorney 
General. Section 3(c) of Executive Order 12988 requires Executive 
agencies to review regulations in light of applicable standards in 
sections 3(a) and 3(b) to determine whether they are met or it is 
unreasonable to meet one or more of them. DOE has completed the 
required review and determined that, to the extent permitted by law, 
the proposed rule meets the relevant standards of Executive Order 
12988.

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 proposed regulatory action likely to result in a rule that may 
cause the expenditure by State, local, and Tribal governments, in the 
aggregate, or by the private sector of $100 million or more in any one 
year (adjusted annually for inflation), section 202 of UMRA requires a 
Federal agency to publish a written statement that estimates the 
resulting costs, benefits, and other effects on the national economy. 
(2 U.S.C. 1532(a), (b)) The UMRA also requires a Federal agency to 
develop an effective process to permit timely input by elected officers 
of State, local, and Tribal governments on a proposed ``significant 
intergovernmental mandate,'' and requires an agency plan for giving 
notice and opportunity for timely input to potentially affected small 
governments before establishing any requirements that might 
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. On March 18, 1997, 
DOE published a statement of policy on its process for 
intergovernmental consultation under UMRA. 62 FR 12820; also available 
at www.energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel. DOE examined this proposed 
rule according to UMRA and its statement of policy and determined that 
the rule contains neither an intergovernmental mandate, nor a mandate 
that may result in the expenditure of $100 million or more in any year, 
so these requirements do not apply.

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 proposed rule would not have any impact on the autonomy or 
integrity of the family as an institution. Accordingly, DOE has 
concluded that it is not necessary to prepare a Family Policymaking 
Assessment.

I. Review Under Executive Order 12630

    DOE has determined, under Executive Order 12630, ``Governmental 
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property 
Rights'' 53 FR 8859 (March 18, 1988), that this proposed regulation 
would not result in any takings that might require compensation under 
the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

J. Review Under Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 
2001

    Section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations 
Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C. 3516 note) provides for agencies to review most 
disseminations of information to the public under guidelines 
established by each agency pursuant to general guidelines issued by 
OMB. OMB's guidelines were published at 67 FR 8452 (Feb. 22, 2002), and 
DOE's guidelines were published at 67 FR 62446 (Oct. 7, 2002). Pursuant 
to OMB Memorandum M-19-15, Improving Implementation of the Information 
Quality Act (April 24, 2019), DOE

[[Page 30863]]

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 proposed 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

    Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,'' 66 FR 28355 
(May 22, 2001), requires Federal agencies to prepare and submit to OMB, 
a Statement of Energy Effects for any proposed significant energy 
action. A ``significant energy action'' is defined as any action by an 
agency that promulgated or is expected to lead to promulgation of a 
final rule, and that (1) is a significant regulatory action under 
Executive Order 12866, or any successor order; and (2) is likely to 
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use 
of energy; or (3) is designated by the Administrator of OIRA as a 
significant energy action. For any proposed significant energy action, 
the agency must give a detailed statement of any adverse effects on 
energy supply, distribution, or use should the proposal be implemented, 
and of reasonable alternatives to the action and their expected 
benefits on energy supply, distribution, and use.
    The proposed regulatory action to amend the test procedure for 
measuring the energy efficiency of PTAC/HPs is not a significant 
regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. Moreover, it would not 
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use 
of energy, nor has it been designated as a significant energy action by 
the Administrator of OIRA. Therefore, it is not a significant energy 
action, and, accordingly, DOE has not prepared a Statement of Energy 
Effects.

L. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration Act of 
1974

    Under section 301 of the Department of Energy Organization Act 
(Pub. L. 95-91; 42 U.S.C. 7101), DOE must comply with section 32 of the 
Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974, as amended by the Federal 
Energy Administration Authorization Act of 1977. (15 U.S.C. 788; 
``FEAA'') Section 32 essentially provides in relevant part that, where 
a proposed rule authorizes or requires use of commercial standards, the 
notice of proposed rulemaking must inform the public of the use and 
background of such standards. In addition, section 32(c) requires DOE 
to consult with the Attorney General and the Chairman of the Federal 
Trade Commission (``FTC'') concerning the impact of the commercial or 
industry standards on competition.
    The proposed modifications to the test procedure for PTAC/HPs would 
incorporate testing methods contained in certain sections of the 
following commercial standards: AHRI 310/380-2017 and ASHRAE 16-2016. 
DOE has evaluated these standards and is unable to conclude whether 
they fully comply with the requirements of section 32(b) of the FEAA 
(i.e., whether it was developed in a manner that fully provides for 
public participation, comment, and review.) DOE will consult with both 
the Attorney General and the Chairman of the FTC concerning the impact 
of these test procedures on competition, prior to prescribing a final 
rule.

M. Description of Materials Incorporated by Reference

    In this NOPR, DOE proposes to incorporate by reference the 
following test standards:
    AHRI 310/380-2017 is an industry-accepted test standard for 
measuring the performance of PTAC/HPs, and is an update of AHRI 310/
380-2014. AHRI 310/380-2017 is available from AHRI at www.ahrinet.org/search-standards.aspx.
    ANSI/ASHRAE 16-2016 is an industry-accepted test procedure that 
provides a calorimetric method for rating the cooling and heating 
capacity of room air conditioners and PTAC/HPs, and is an update of 
ANSI/ASHRAE 16-1983. ANSI/ASHRAE 16-2016 is available on ANSI's website 
at webstore.ansi.org/standards/ashrae/ansiashraestandard162016.
    DOE proposes to maintain and update the incorporation by reference 
previously approved for the following test standards:
    AHRI 310/380-2014 is an industry-accepted test standard for 
measuring the performance of PTAC/HPs. AHRI 310/380-2014 is available 
from AHRI at www.ahrinet.org/search-standards.aspx.
    ANSI/ASHRAE 16-1983 (RA 2014) is an industry-accepted test 
procedure that provides a calorimetric method for rating the cooling 
and heating capacity of room air conditioners and PTAC/HPs. ANSI/ASHRAE 
16-1983 (RA 2014) is available on ANSI's website at https://webstore.ansi.org/standards/ashrae/ansiashraestandard161983r2014.
    ANSI/ASHRAE 58-1986 (RA 2014) is an industry-accepted test 
procedure that provides a psychometric method for rating the cooling 
and heating capacity of air conditioning and heating equipment. ANSI/
ASHRAE 58-1986 (RA 2014) is available on ANSI's website at 
webstore.ansi.org/standards/ashrae/ansiashraestandard581986r2014.
    ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009 is an industry-accepted test procedure that 
provides methods for determining cooling or heating capacities of 
several categories of air conditioning and heating equipment. ANSI/
ASHRAE 37-2009 is available on ANSI's website at webstore.ansi.org/standards/ashrae/ansiashrae372009r2019.
    The following standards included in the proposed regulatory text 
were previously approved for incorporation by reference for the 
locations in which they appear in this proposed rule: AHRI 210/240-
2008, AHRI 340/360-2007, and ISO Standard 13256-1.

V. Public Participation

A. Attendance at the Public Meeting

    The time, date, and location of the public meeting are listed in 
the DATES and ADDRESSES sections at the beginning of this document. If 
you plan to attend the public meeting, please notify the Appliance and 
Equipment Standards staff at (202) 287-1445 or 
[email protected].
    Please note that foreign nationals visiting DOE Headquarters are 
subject to advance security screening procedures which require advance 
notice prior to attendance at the public meeting. If a foreign national 
wishes to participate in the public meeting, please inform DOE of this 
fact as soon as possible by contacting Ms. Regina Washington at (202) 
586-1214 or by email ([email protected]) so that the 
necessary procedures can be completed.
    DOE requires visitors to have laptops and other devices, such as 
tablets, checked upon entry into the Forrestal Building. Any person 
wishing to bring these devices into the building will be required to 
obtain a property pass. Visitors should avoid bringing these devices, 
or allow an extra 45 minutes to check in. Please report to the 
visitor's desk to have devices checked before proceeding through 
security.
    Due to the REAL ID Act implemented by the Department of Homeland 
Security (``DHS''), there have been recent changes regarding ID 
requirements for individuals wishing to enter Federal buildings from 
specific States and U.S. territories. DHS maintains an updated website 
identifying the State and territory driver's licenses that currently 
are acceptable for entry into DOE facilities at www.dhs.gov/real-id-
enforcement-

[[Page 30864]]

brief. A driver's licenses from a State or territory identified as not 
compliant by DHS will not be accepted for building entry and one of the 
alternate forms of ID listed below will be required. Acceptable 
alternate forms of Photo-ID include U.S. Passport or Passport Card; an 
Enhanced Driver's License or Enhanced ID-Card issued by States and 
territories as identified on the DHS website (Enhanced licenses issued 
by these States and territories are clearly marked Enhanced or Enhanced 
Driver's License); a military ID or other Federal government-issued 
Photo-ID card.
    In addition, you can attend the public meeting via webinar. Webinar 
registration information, participant instructions, and information 
about the capabilities available to webinar participants will be 
published on DOE's website at https://www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/public-meetings-and-comment-deadlines. Participants are responsible for 
ensuring their systems are compatible with the webinar software.

B. Procedure for Submitting Prepared General Statements for 
Distribution

    Any person who has plans to present a prepared general statement 
may request that copies of his or her statement be made available at 
the public meeting. Such persons may submit requests, along with an 
advance electronic copy of their statement in PDF (preferred), 
Microsoft Word or Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file format, to 
the appropriate address shown in the ADDRESSES section at the beginning 
of this document. The request and advance copy of statements must be 
received at least one week before the public meeting and are to be 
emailed. Please include a telephone number to enable DOE staff to make 
follow-up contact, if needed.

C. Conduct of the Public Meeting

    DOE will designate a DOE official to preside at the public meeting 
and may also use a professional facilitator to aid discussion. The 
meeting will not be a judicial or evidentiary-type public hearing, but 
DOE will conduct it in accordance with section 336 of EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 
6306) A court reporter will be present to record the proceedings and 
prepare a transcript. DOE reserves the right to schedule the order of 
presentations and to establish the procedures governing the conduct of 
the public meeting. There shall not be discussion of proprietary 
information, costs or prices, market share, or other commercial matters 
regulated by U.S. anti-trust laws. After the public meeting, interested 
parties may submit further comments on the proceedings, as well as on 
any aspect of the rulemaking, until the end of the comment period.
    The public meeting will be conducted in an informal, conference 
style. DOE will present a general overview of the topics addressed in 
this rulemaking, allow time for prepared general statements by 
participants, and encourage all interested parties to share their views 
on issues affecting this rulemaking. Each participant will be allowed 
to make a general statement (within time limits determined by DOE), 
before the discussion of specific topics. DOE will allow, as time 
permits, other participants to comment briefly on any general 
statements.
    At the end of all prepared statements on a topic, DOE will permit 
participants to clarify their statements briefly. Participants should 
be prepared to answer questions by DOE and by other participants 
concerning these issues. DOE representatives may also ask questions of 
participants concerning other matters relevant to this proposed 
rulemaking. The official conducting the public meeting will accept 
additional comments or questions from those attending, as time permits. 
The presiding official will announce any further procedural rules or 
modification of the previous procedures that may be needed for the 
proper conduct of the public meeting.
    A transcript of the public meeting will be included in the docket, 
which can be viewed as described in the Docket section at the beginning 
of this document and will be accessible on the DOE website. In 
addition, any person may buy a copy of the transcript from the 
transcribing reporter.

D. Submission of Comments

    DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this 
proposed rule no later than the date provided in the DATES section at 
the beginning of this proposed rule.\28\ Interested parties may submit 
comments using any of the methods described in the ADDRESSES section at 
the beginning of this document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ DOE has historically provided a 75-day comment period for 
test procedure NOPRs pursuant to the North American Free Trade 
Agreement, U.S.-Canada-Mexico (``NAFTA''), Dec. 17, 1992, 32 I.L.M. 
289 (1993); the North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation 
Act, Public Law 103-182, 107 Stat. 2057 (1993) (codified as amended 
at 10 U.S.C.A. 2576) (1993) (``NAFTA Implementation Act''); and 
Executive Order 12889, ``Implementation of the North American Free 
Trade Agreement,'' 58 FR 69681 (Dec. 30, 1993). However, on July 1, 
2020, the Agreement between the United States of America, the United 
Mexican States, and the United Canadian States (``USMCA''), Nov. 30, 
2018, 134 Stat. 11 (i.e., the successor to NAFTA), went into effect, 
and Congress's action in replacing NAFTA through the USMCA 
Implementation Act, 19 U.S.C. 4501 et seq. (2020), implies the 
repeal of E.O. 12889 and its 75-day comment period requirement for 
technical regulations. Thus, the controlling laws are EPCA and the 
USMCA Implementation Act. Consistent with EPCA's public comment 
period requirements for consumer products, the USMCA only requires a 
minimum comment period of 60 days. Consequently, DOE now provides a 
60-day public comment period for test procedure NOPRs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Submitting comments via www.regulations.gov. The 
www.regulations.gov web page will require you to provide your name and 
contact information. Your contact information will be viewable to DOE 
Building Technologies staff only. Your contact information will not be 
publicly viewable except for your first and last names, organization 
name (if any), and submitter representative name (if any). If your 
comment is not processed properly because of technical difficulties, 
DOE will use this information to contact you. If DOE cannot read your 
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for 
clarification, DOE may not be able to consider your comment.
    However, your contact information will be publicly viewable if you 
include it in the comment or in any documents attached to your comment. 
Any information that you do not want to be publicly viewable should not 
be included in your comment, nor in any document attached to your 
comment. Persons viewing comments will see only first and last names, 
organization names, correspondence containing comments, and any 
documents submitted with the comments.
    Do not submit to www.regulations.gov information for which 
disclosure is restricted by statute, such as trade secrets and 
commercial or financial information (hereinafter referred to as 
Confidential Business Information (``CBI'')). Comments submitted 
through www.regulations.gov cannot be claimed as CBI. Comments received 
through the website will waive any CBI claims for the information 
submitted. For information on submitting CBI, see the Confidential 
Business Information section.
    DOE processes submissions made through www.regulations.gov before 
posting. Normally, comments will be posted within a few days of being 
submitted. However, if large volumes of comments are being processed 
simultaneously, your comment may not be viewable for up to several 
weeks. Please keep the comment tracking number that www.regulations.gov 
provides after you have successfully uploaded your comment.
    Submitting comments via email. Comments and documents submitted

[[Page 30865]]

via email also will be posted to www.regulations.gov. If you do not 
want your personal contact information to be publicly viewable, do not 
include it in your comment or any accompanying documents. Instead, 
provide your contact information on a cover letter. Include your first 
and last names, email address, telephone number, and optional mailing 
address. The cover letter will not be publicly viewable as long as it 
does not include any comments.
    Include contact information each time you submit comments, data, 
documents, and other information to DOE. No faxes will be accepted.
    Comments, data, and other information submitted to DOE 
electronically should be provided in PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or 
Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file format. Provide documents that 
are not secured, written in English and free of any defects or viruses. 
Documents should not contain special characters or any form of 
encryption and, if possible, they should carry the electronic signature 
of the author.
    Campaign form letters. Please submit campaign form letters by the 
originating organization in batches of between 50 to 500 form letters 
per PDF or as one form letter with a list of supporters' names compiled 
into one or more PDFs. This reduces comment processing and posting 
time.
    Confidential Business Information. Pursuant to 10 CFR 1004.11, any 
person submitting information that he or she believes to be 
confidential and exempt by law from public disclosure should submit via 
email two well-marked copies: one copy of the document marked 
confidential including all the information believed to be confidential, 
and one copy of the document marked non-confidential with the 
information believed to be confidential deleted. DOE will make its own 
determination about the confidential status of the information and 
treat it according to its determination.
    It is DOE's policy that all comments may be included in the public 
docket, without change and as received, including any personal 
information provided in the comments (except information deemed to be 
exempt from public disclosure).

E. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment

    Although DOE welcomes comments on any aspect of this proposal, DOE 
is particularly interested in receiving comments and views of 
interested parties concerning the following issues:
    Issue 1: DOE requests comment on its proposed A (95 [deg]F), B (82 
[deg]F) and C (75 [deg]F) test conditions to represent reduced cooling 
conditions experienced by PTACs and PTHPs in the field.
    Issue 2: DOE requests comment on whether setting the unit 
thermostat down to 75 [deg]F (i.e., a 5 [deg]F differential to the 
indoor condition of 80 [deg]F) is sufficient to ensure that the 
compressor runs at full speed. DOE requests comment on whether 
manufacturers will be able to provide override instructions to ensure 
operation at the low and intermediate compressor speeds.
    Issue 3: DOE requests comment on whether fan speed may vary with 
staging and whether it may have to be ``fixed'' at the right speed.
    Issue 4: DOE requests comment on its proposed cooling tests for 
single-speed, two-speed and variable-speed compressor systems.
    Issue 5: DOE requests comment on its proposed value of the cooling 
and heating degradation coefficients.
    Issue 6: DOE requests comment on its proposed approach to calculate 
SCP using a similar binned analysis as that of SEER2. DOE also requests 
comment on the proposed cooling building load line; specifically, 
whether an equal weighting of the small hotel and midrise apartment use 
cases is appropriate.
    Issue 7: DOE requests comment on its proposed temperature bins and 
associated fractional bin hours for cooling.
    Issue 8: DOE requests comment on its proposed H1 (47 [deg]F), H3 
(17 [deg]F) or HL and H4 (5 [deg]F) test conditions to represent 
different heating outdoor conditions experienced by PTACs and PTHPs in 
the field.
    Issue 9: DOE requests comment on whether setting the unit 
thermostat up to 75 [deg]F (i.e., a 5 [deg]F differential to the indoor 
condition of 70 [deg]F) is sufficient to ensure that the compressor 
runs at full speed for heating mode.
    Issue 10: DOE requests comment on its proposed heating tests for 
single-speed, two-speed and variable-speed compressor systems.
    Issue 11: DOE requests comment on its proposed method to evaluate 
cut-out and cut-in temperatures.
    Issue 12: DOE requests comment on its proposed defrost adjustment 
coefficients; specifically, DOE requests feedback on its approach to 
use appendix M1 to inform the adjustment values for performance at 35 
[deg]F. DOE requests data on defrost degradation particular to PTHPs.
    Issue 13: DOE requests comment on its proposed approach to 
calculate SHP using a similar binned analysis as that of HSPF2. DOE 
also requests comment on the proposed heating building load line; 
specifically, whether an equal weighting of the small hotel and midrise 
apartment use cases is appropriate.
    Issue 14: DOE requests comment on its proposed temperature bins and 
associated fractional bin hours for heating.
    Issue 15: DOE requests comment on its proposed definitions for 
make-up air PTAC, make-up air PTHP, add-on dehumidifier and integrated 
dehumidifier.
    Issue 16: DOE requests comment on the required make-up airflow rate 
of 30 CFM and the proposed test setup to ensure this make-up airflow 
rate.
    Issue 17: DOE requests comment on the proposed test conditions for 
the make-up air dehumidification test; specifically, whether the indoor 
air entering conditions, outdoor air entering conditions are 
appropriate.
    Issue 18: DOE requests comment on its proposed test measurements 
and instructions for both make-up air system designs.
    Issue 19: DOE requests comment on its proposed metric to evaluate 
dehumidification energy use.
    Issue 20: DOE requests feedback on whether a separate metric is 
appropriate for evaluating dehumidification energy use, or whether 
dehumidification energy use be integrated into the cooling metric. If 
integrated into the cooling metric, DOE requests comment on the 
approach outlined above to represent the dehumidification energy use.
    Issue 21: DOE requests data addressing potential inconsistency of 
test results when testing PTAC/HPs using psychrometric test methods as 
opposed to calorimetric test methods.
    Issue 22: DOE requests comment on its understanding of the impact 
of the test procedure proposals in this NOPR, specifically DOE's 
estimates of the costs associated with testing using appendix H1 of 
this document.
    Issue 23: DOE requests comment on the number of small OEMs 
identified. DOE also seeks comment on the estimated costs the small 
manufacturer may incur.

VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

    The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of this notice of 
proposed rulemaking and request for comment.

List of Subjects

10 CFR Part 429

    Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business 
information, Energy conservation, Household appliances, Imports, 
Intergovernmental relations, Reporting

[[Page 30866]]

and recordkeeping requirements, Small businesses.

10 CFR Part 431

    Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business 
information, Energy conservation test procedures, Incorporation by 
reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Signing Authority

    This document of the Department of Energy was signed on April 21, 
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 April 24, 2023.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, DOE is proposing to amend 
parts 429 and 431 of Chapter II of Title 10, Code of Federal 
Regulations as set forth below:

PART 429--CERTIFICATION, COMPLIANCE, AND ENFORCEMENT FOR CONSUMER 
PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT

0
1. The authority citation for part 429 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 6291-6317; 28 U.S.C. 2461 note.

0
2. Amend Sec.  429.43 by revising paragraph (a)(1)(iii) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  429.43   Commercial heating, ventilating, air conditioning (HVAC) 
equipment (excluding air-cooled, three-phase, small commercial package 
air conditioning and heating equipment with a cooling capacity of less 
than 65,000 British thermal units per hour and air-cooled, three-phase, 
variable refrigerant flow multi-split air conditioners and heat pumps 
with less than 65,000 British thermal units per hour cooling capacity).

    (a) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (iii) Packaged terminal air conditioners and packaged terminal heat 
pumps.
    (A) The represented value of cooling capacity shall be the average 
of the capacities measured for the sample selected as described in 
paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of this section, rounded to the nearest 100 Btu/h.
    (B) For make-up air PTACs and PTHPs, the represented value of 
dehumidification capacity will be the average of the capacities 
measured for the sample selected as described in paragraph (a)(1)(ii) 
of this section, rounded to the nearest 0.01 liters/hr.
    (C) For make-up air PTACs and PTHPs, the represented value of 
dehumidification efficiency (DE) will be the average of the DE values 
measured for the sample selected as described in paragraph (a)(1)(ii) 
of this section, rounded to the nearest 0.01 liters/kWh.
* * * * *
0
3. Amend Sec.  429.70 by revising table 2 to paragraph (c)(5)(vi)(B) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  429.70   Alternative methods for determining energy efficiency 
and energy use.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (5) * * *
    (vi) * * *
    (B) * * *

                   Table 2 to Paragraph (c)(5)(vi)(B)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Applicable
             Equipment                     Metric            tolerance
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commercial Packaged Boilers.......  Combustion                 5% (0.05)
                                     Efficiency.
                                    Thermal Efficiency..       5% (0.05)
Commercial Water Heaters or Hot     Thermal Efficiency..       5% (0.05)
 Water Supply Boilers.
                                    Standby Loss........       10% (0.1)
Unfired Storage Tanks.............  R-Value.............       10% (0.1)
Air-Cooled, Split and Packaged ACs  Energy Efficiency          5% (0.05)
 and HPs Greater than or Equal to    Ratio.                    5% (0.05)
 65,000 Btu/h Cooling Capacity and  Coefficient of             10% (0.1)
 Less than 760,000 Btu/h Cooling     Performance.
 Capacity.                          Integrated Energy
                                     Efficiency Ratio.
Water-Cooled, Split and Packaged    Energy Efficiency          5% (0.05)
 ACs and HPs, All Cooling            Ratio.                    5% (0.05)
 Capacities.                        Coefficient of
                                     Performance.
                                    Integrated Energy          10% (0.1)
                                     Efficiency Ratio.
Evaporatively-Cooled, Split and     Energy Efficiency          5% (0.05)
 Packaged ACs and HPs, All           Ratio.                    5% (0.05)
 Capacities.                        Coefficient of
                                     Performance.
                                    Integrated Energy          10% (0.1)
                                     Efficiency Ratio.
Water-Source HPs, All Capacities..  Energy Efficiency          5% (0.05)
                                     Ratio.
                                    Coefficient of             5% (0.05)
                                     Performance.
                                    Integrated Energy          10% (0.1)
                                     Efficiency Ratio.
Single Package Vertical ACs and     Energy Efficiency          5% (0.05)
 HPs.                                Ratio.
                                    Coefficient of             5% (0.05)
                                     Performance.
Packaged Terminal ACs and HPs.....  Energy Efficiency          5% (0.05)
                                     Ratio.
                                    Coefficient of             5% (0.05)
                                     Performance.
                                    Seasonal Cooling           10% (0.1)
                                     Performance.
                                    Seasonal Heating           10% (0.1)
                                     Performance.
                                    Dehumidification           10% (0.1)
                                     Efficiency.
Variable Refrigerant Flow ACs and   Energy Efficiency          5% (0.05)
 HPs (Excluding Air-Cooled, Three-   Ratio.                    5% (0.05)
 phase with Less than 65,000 Btu/h  Coefficient of             10% (0.1)
 Cooling Capacity).                  Performance.
                                    Integrated Energy
                                     Efficiency Ratio.
Computer Room Air Conditioners....  Sensible Coefficient       5% (0.05)
                                     of Performance.
Direct Expansion-Dedicated Outdoor  Integrated Seasonal        10% (0.1)
 Air Systems.                        Coefficient of
                                     Performance 2.
                                    Integrated Seasonal        10% (0.1)
                                     Moisture Removal
                                     Efficiency 2.

[[Page 30867]]

 
Commercial Warm-Air Furnaces......  Thermal Efficiency..       5% (0.05)
Commercial Refrigeration Equipment  Daily Energy               5% (0.05)
                                     Consumption.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

PART 431--ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAM FOR CERTAIN COMMERCIAL AND 
INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT

0
4. 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
5. Amend Sec.  431.92 by adding, in alphabetical order, definitions for 
``Dehumidification efficiency'', ``Make-up air PTAC'', ``Make-up air 
PTHP'', ``Seasonal cooling performance'' and ``Seasonal heating 
performance'' to read as follows:


Sec.  431.92   Definitions concerning commercial air conditioners and 
heat pumps.

* * * * *
    Dehumidification efficiency, or DE, means the ratio of water 
removed from the air by the energy consumed, measured in liters per 
kilowatt-hour (L/kWh).
* * * * *
    Make-up air PTAC means a PTAC for which a portion of the total 
airflow is drawn in from the outside of the conditioned space and in 
which this outside air passes through a dehumidifying or cooling coil, 
either before or after mixing with the air drawn into the unit from 
inside the conditioned space, but before being discharged from the 
unit.
    Make-up air PTHP means a PTHP for which a portion of the total 
airflow is drawn in from outside the conditioned space and in which 
this outside air passes through a dehumidifying or cooling coil, either 
before or after mixing with the air drawn into the unit from inside the 
conditioned space, but before being discharged from the unit.
* * * * *
    Seasonal cooling performance or SCP means the total heat removed 
from the conditioned space during the cooling season, expressed in 
Btu's, divided by the total electrical energy consumed by the package 
terminal air conditioner or heat pump during the same season, expressed 
in watt-hours. SCP is determined in accordance with appendix H1.
* * * * *
    Seasonal heating performance or SHP means the total heat added to 
the conditioned space during the heating season, expressed in Btu's, 
divided by the total electrical energy consumed by the package terminal 
air conditioner or heat pump during the same season, expressed in watt-
hours. SHP is determined in accordance with appendix H1.
* * * * *
0
6. Amend Sec.  431.95 by:
0
a. Redesignating paragraphs (b)(4) through (9) as paragraphs (b)(5) 
through (10);
0
b. Adding paragraph (b)(4);
0
c. Revising paragraph (c)(1);
0
d. Redesignating paragraphs (c)(2) through (8) as paragraphs (c)(3) 
through (9);
0
e. Adding paragraph (c)(2);
0
f. In newly redesignated paragraph (c)(3), removing the words ``and 
G1'' and adding in its place, the words ``and G1, H and H1''; and
0
g. In newly redesignated paragraph (c)(7), removing the text ``Sec.  
431.96'' and adding in its place, the text ``Sec.  431.96 and appendix 
H to this subpart''.
    The additions and revision read as follows:


Sec.  431.95   Materials incorporated by reference.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (4) AHRI Standard 310/380-2017 (``AHRI 310/380-2017''), ``Packaged 
Terminal Air-Conditioners and Heat Pumps,'' July 2017; IBR approved for 
appendices H and H1 to this subpart.
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-1983 (RA 2014), (``ANSI/ASHRAE 16-
1983''), ``Method of Testing for Rating Room Air Conditioners and 
Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners,'' ASHRAE reaffirmed July 3, 2014, 
IBR approved for appendix H to this subpart.
    (2) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-2016, (``ANSI/ASHRAE 16-2016''), 
``Method of Testing for Rating Room Air Conditioners, Packaged Terminal 
Air Conditioners, and Packaged Terminal Heat Pumps for Cooling and 
Heating Capacity,'' November 2016, IBR approved for appendix H1 to this 
subpart.
* * * * *
0
7. Amend Sec.  431.96 by:
0
a. Removing paragraph (b)(2);
0
b. Revising table 1 to paragraph (b); and
0
c. Removing paragraph (g).
    The revisions read as follows:


Sec.  431.96   Uniform test method for the measurement of energy 
efficiency of commercial air conditioners and heat pumps.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *

                                Table 1 to Paragraph (b)--Test Procedures for Commercial Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                      Additional test
                                                               Cooling capacity or                                Use tests,        procedure provisions
           Equipment type                   Category            moisture removal       Energy efficiency       conditions, and      as indicated in the
                                                                  capacity \2\             descriptor         procedures \1\ in     listed paragraphs of
                                                                                                                                        this section
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Small Commercial Package Air-        Air-Cooled, 3-Phase,    <65,000 Btu/h.........  SEER and HSPF........  Appendix F to this     None.
 Conditioning and Heating Equipment.  AC and HP.                                     .....................   subpart \3\.          .....................
                                                                                     SEER2 and HSPF2......  Appendix F1 to this    None.
                                                                                                             subpart \3\.
                                     Air-Cooled AC and HP..  >=65,000 Btu/h and      EER, IEER, and COP...  Appendix A of this     None.
                                                              <135,000 Btu/h.                                subpart.
                                     Water-Cooled and        <65,000 Btu/h.........  EER..................  AHRI 210/240-2008      Paragraphs (c) and
                                      Evaporatively-Cooled                                                   (omit section 6.5).    (e).
                                      AC.
                                                             >=65,000 Btu/h and      EER..................  AHRI 340/360-2007      Paragraphs (c) and
                                                              <135,000 Btu/h.                                (omit section 6.3).    (e).
                                     Water-Source HP.......  <135,000 Btu/h........  EER and COP..........  ISO Standard 13256-1.  Paragraph (e).

[[Page 30868]]

 
Large Commercial Package Air-        Air-Cooled AC and HP..  >=135,000 Btu/h and     EER, IEER and COP....  Appendix A to this     None.
 Conditioning and Heating Equipment. ......................   <240,000 Btu/h.        .....................   subpart.              .....................
                                     Water-Cooled and        >=135,000 Btu/h and     EER..................  AHRI 340/360-2007      Paragraphs (c) and
                                      Evaporatively-Cooled    <240,000 Btu/h.                                (omit section 6.3).    (e).
                                      AC.
Very Large Commercial Package Air-   Air-Cooled AC and HP..  >=240,000 Btu/h and     EER, IEER and COP....  Appendix A to this     None.
 Conditioning and Heating Equipment. ......................   <760,000 Btu/h.        .....................   subpart.              .....................
                                     Water-Cooled and        >=240,000 Btu/h and     EER..................  AHRI 340/360-2007      Paragraphs (c) and
                                      Evaporatively-Cooled    <760,000 Btu/h.                                (omit section 6.3).    (e).
                                      AC.
Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners   AC and HP.............  <760,000 Btu/h........  EER and COP..........  Appendix H to this     None.
 and Heat Pumps.                     ......................  ......................  .....................   subpart \3\.          .....................
                                     AC and HP.............  <760,000 Btu/h........  SCP and SHP..........  Appendix H1 to this    None.
                                                                                                             subpart \3\.
Computer Room Air Conditioners.....  AC....................  <760,000 Btu/h........  SCOP.................  Appendix E to this     None.
                                                                                                             subpart \3\.
                                                             <760,000 Btu/h........  NSenCOP..............  Appendix E1 to this    None.
                                                                                                             subpart \3\.
Variable Refrigerant Flow Multi-     AC....................  <65,000 Btu/h (3-       SEER.................  Appendix F to this     None.
 split Systems.                                               phase).                                        subpart \3\.
                                                                                     SEER2................  Appendix F1 to this    None.
                                                                                                             subpart \3\.
Variable Refrigerant Flow Multi-     HP....................  <65,000 Btu/h (3-       SEER and HSPF........  Appendix F to this     None.
 split Systems, Air-cooled.                                   phase).                .....................   subpart \3\.          .....................
                                                                                     SEER2 and HSPF2......  Appendix F1 to this    None.
                                                                                                             subpart \3\.
Variable Refrigerant Flow Multi-     AC and HP.............  >=65,000 Btu/h and      EER and COP..........  Appendix D of this     None.
 split Systems, Air-cooled.                                   <760,000 Btu/h.        .....................   subpart \3\.          .....................
                                                             >=65,000 Btu/h and      IEER and COP.........  Appendix D1 of this    None.
                                                              <760,000 Btu/h.                                subpart \3\.
Variable Refrigerant Flow Multi-     HP....................  <760,000 Btu/h........  EER and COP..........  Appendix D of this     None.
 split Systems, Water-source.                                ......................  .....................   subpart \3\.          .....................
                                                             <760,000 Btu/h........  IEER and COP.........  Appendix D1 of this    None.
                                                                                                             subpart \3\.
Single Package Vertical Air          AC and HP.............  <760,000 Btu/h........  EER and COP..........  Appendix G to this     None.
 Conditioners and Single Package                                                     .....................   subpart \3\.          .....................
 Vertical Heat Pumps.                                                                EER, IEER, and COP...  Appendix G1 to this    None.
                                                                                                             subpart \3\.
Direct Expansion-Dedicated Outdoor   All...................  <324 lbs. of moisture   ISMRE2 and ISCOP2....  Appendix B of this     None.
 Air Systems.                                                 removal/hr.                                    subpart.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Incorporated by reference; see Sec.   431.95.
\2\ Moisture removal capacity applies only to direct expansion-dedicated outdoor air systems.
\3\ For equipment with multiple appendices listed in table 1, consult the notes at the beginning of those appendices to determine the applicable
  appendix to use for testing.

* * * * *
0
8. Add appendix H to subpart F of part 431 to read as follows:

Appendix H to Subpart F of Part 431--Uniform Test Method for Measuring 
the Energy Consumption of Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners and 
Packaged Terminal Heat Pumps

    Note: Manufacturers must use the results of testing under this 
appendix to determine compliance with the relevant standard from 
Sec.  431.97 as that standard appeared in the January 1, 2022 
edition of 10 CFR parts 200-499. Specifically, representations must 
be based upon results generated either under this appendix H or 
under 10 CFR 431.96 as it appeared in the 10 CFR parts 200-499 
edition revised as of January 1, 2022.
    For any amended standards for packaged terminal air conditioners 
and packaged terminal heat pumps that rely on seasonal cooling 
performance (SCP) and seasonal heating performance (SHP) published 
after January 1, 2022, manufacturers must use the results of testing 
under appendix H1 of this subpart to determine compliance. 
Representations related to energy consumption must be made in 
accordance with the appropriate appendix that applies (i.e., 
appendix H or appendix H1) when determining compliance with the 
relevant standard.

1. Incorporation by Reference

    DOE incorporated by reference in Sec.  431.95, the entire 
standard for AHRI 310/380-2017, ANSI/ASHRAE 16-1983, ANSI/ASHRAE 37-
2009, and ANSI/ASHRAE 58-1986. However, only enumerated provisions 
of AHRI 310/380-2017, ANSI/ASHRAE 16-1983, ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009, and 
ANSI/ASHRAE 58-1986, as listed in this section 1.1 are required. To 
the extent there is a conflict between the terms or provisions of a 
referenced industry standard and the CFR, the CFR provisions 
control.

1.1 AHRI 310/380-2017

    (a) Section 3--Definitions and Table 1--Operating Conditions for 
Standard Rating and Performance Tests, as referenced in sections 2.1 
and 2.2 of this appendix;
    (b) Section 4--Test Requirements, as referenced in sections 2.1, 
2.1.2 and 2.2 of this appendix;
    (c) Section 5--Rating Requirements, as referenced in section 2.2 
of this appendix.

1.2 ANSI/ASHRAE 16-1983

    (a) Section 2--Definitions, as referenced in section 2.1.1 of 
this appendix;
    (b) Section 4--Calorimeters, as referenced in section 2.1.1 of 
this appendix;
    (c) Section 5--Instruments, as referenced in section 2.1.1 of 
this appendix;
    (d) Section 6--Cooling Capacity Test, as referenced in section 
2.1.1 of this appendix;
    (e) Section 7.2--Nozzles, as referenced in section 2.1.1 of this 
appendix;
    (f) Section 7.3--Apparatus, as referenced in section 2.1.1 of 
this appendix;
    (g) Section 7.5--Ventilation, Exhaust, and Leakage Airflow 
Measurement, as referenced in section 2.1.1 of this appendix;

1.3 ANSI/ASHRAE 58-1986

    (a) Section 3--Definitions, as referenced in section 2.2 of this 
appendix;
    (b) Section 5--Instruments, as referenced in section 2.2 of this 
appendix;
    (c) Section 6--Apparatus, as referenced in section 2.2 of this 
appendix;
    (d) Section 7--Test Procedures, as referenced in section 2.2 of 
this appendix;
    (e) Section 8--Data to be Recorded, as referenced in section 2.2 
of this appendix;

[[Page 30869]]

    (f) Section 9--Calculation of Test Results, as referenced in 
section 2.2 of this appendix;

1.4 ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009

    (a) Section 3--Definitions, as referenced in section 2.1.2 of 
this appendix;
    (b) Section 5--Instruments, as referenced in section 2.1.2 of 
this appendix;
    (c) Section 6--Airflow and Air Differential Pressure Measurement 
Apparatus, as referenced in section 2.1.2 of this appendix;
    (d) Section 7--Methods of Testing and Calculation, as referenced 
in section 2.1.2 of this appendix;
    (e) Section 8--Test Procedures, as referenced in section 2.1.2 
of this appendix;
    (f) Section 9--Data to be Recorded, as referenced in section 
2.1.2 of this appendix; and
    (g) Section 11--Symbols Used in Equations, as referenced in 
section 2.1.2 of this appendix.

2. Test Method

2.1 Cooling Mode Testing

    The test method for testing packaged terminal air conditioners 
and packaged terminal heat pumps in cooling mode shall consist of 
application of the methods and conditions in AHRI 310/380-2017 
sections 3, 4, and, and in the enumerated sections of the following 
test standards, depending on the cooling mode test standard 
utilized.

2.1.1 Calorimetric Test Method

    The calorimetric test method shall consist of application of the 
methods and conditions in ANSI/ASHRAE 16-1983, sections 2, 4, 5, 6, 
7.2, 7.3, and 7.5.

2.1.2 Psychrometric Test Method

    The psychrometric test method shall consist of application of 
the methods and conditions in ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009, sections 3, 5, 6, 
7, 8, 9, and 11, subject to the requirement of AHRI 310/380-2017, 
section 4.2.1.1(b) indicating that no secondary capacity check is 
required and no ductwork shall be attached to the condenser.

2.2 Heating Mode Testing

    The test method for testing packaged terminal heat pumps in 
heating mode shall consist of application of the methods and 
conditions in AHRI 310/380-2017 sections 3, 4, and 5, and in ANSI/
ASHRAE 58-1986, sections 3, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9.

2.3 Precedence

    Where definitions provided in AHRI 310/380-2017, ANSI/ASHRAE 16-
1983, ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009 and/or ANSI/ASHRAE 58-1986 conflict with 
the definitions provided in 10 CFR 431.92, the 10 CFR 431.92 
definitions shall be used.

0
9. Add appendix H1 to subpart F of part 431 to read as follows:

Appendix H1 to Subpart F of Part 431--Uniform Test Method for Measuring 
the Energy Consumption of Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners and 
Packaged Terminal Heat Pumps

    Note: Manufacturers must use the results of testing under this 
appendix to determine compliance with any amended standards for 
packaged terminal air conditioners and packaged terminal heat pumps 
provided in Sec.  431.97 that are published after January 1, 2022, 
and that rely on seasonal cooling performance (SCP) and seasonal 
heating performance (SHP). Representations related to energy 
consumption, must be made in accordance with the appropriate 
appendix that applies (i.e., appendix H or appendix H1) when 
determining compliance with the relevant standard. Manufacturers may 
make representations of dehumidification capacity and efficiency 
only if measured in accordance with this appendix.

1. Incorporation by Reference

    DOE incorporated by reference in Sec.  431.95, the entire 
standard for AHRI 310/380-2017, ANSI/ASHRAE 16-2016, and ANSI/ASHRAE 
37-2009. However, enumerated provisions of AHRI 310/380-2017 and 
ANSI/ASHRAE 16-2016, as listed in this section 1 are required. To 
the extent there is a conflict between the terms or provisions of a 
referenced industry standard and the CFR, the CFR provisions 
control.

1.1 AHRI 310/380-2017

    (a) Section 3--Definitions, as referenced in section 2 of this 
appendix;
    (b) Section 4--Test Requirements, as referenced in section 3.1 
of this appendix;
    (c) Section 5--Rating Requirements, as referenced in section 3.1 
of this appendix.

1.2 ASHRAE 16-2016

    (a) Section 3--Definitions, as referenced in section 2 of this 
appendix,
    (b) Section 5--Instruments, as referenced in section 3.1 of this 
appendix,
    (c) Section 6--Apparatus, as referenced in section 4.1 of this 
appendix,
    (d) Section 7--Methods of Testing, as referenced in sections 
4.4.2.1.2 and 4.4.2.2.2 of this appendix,
    (e) Section 8--Test Procedures, as referenced in sections 3.1, 
4.4.2.1.2, and 4.4.2.2.2 of this appendix;
    (e) Section 9--Data to be recorded, as referenced in section 3.1 
of this appendix,
    (f) Section 10--Measurement Uncertainty and Table 5--
Uncertainties of Measurement for the Indicated Values, as referenced 
in section 3.1 of this appendix,
    (g) Section 11--Test Results, as referenced in section 3.1 of 
this appendix,
    (h) Normative Appendix A--Cooling Capacity Calculations--
Calorimeter Test Indoor and Calorimeter Test Outdoor, as referenced 
in section 3.1 of this appendix,
    (i) Normative Appendix B--Cooling Capacity Calculations--
Calorimeter Test Indoor and Psychrometric Test Indoor, as referenced 
in section 3.1 of this appendix,
    (j) Normative Appendix C--Cooling Capacity Calculations--
Psychrometric Test Indoor and Calorimeter Test Outdoor, as 
referenced in section 3.1 of this appendix,
    (k) Normative Appendix E--Heating Capacity Calculations--
Calorimeter Test Indoor and Calorimeter Test Outdoor, as referenced 
in section 3.1 of this appendix,
    (l) Normative Appendix F--Heating Capacity Calculations--
Calorimeter Test Indoor and Psychrometric Test Indoor, as referenced 
in section 3.1 of this appendix,
    (m) Normative Appendix G--Heating Capacity Calculations--
Psychrometric Test Indoor and Calorimeter Test Outdoor, as 
referenced in section 3.1 of this appendix,

1.2 ASHRAE 37-2009

    (a) Section 6.2--Nozzle Airflow Measuring Apparatus, as 
referenced in section 4.1.1 of this appendix;
    (b) Section 6.5--Recommended Practices for Static Pressure 
Measurements, as referenced in section 4.2.1 of this appendix;
    (c) Section 7.3.3--Cooling Calculations, as referenced in 
section 3.1 of this appendix;
    (d) Section 7.3.4--Heating Calculations When Using the ``S'' 
Test Method of section 8.8.2, as referenced in section 3.1 of this 
appendix;
    (e) Section 7.8.2.1--Latent Cooling Capacity Calculation, as 
referenced in section 4.4.2.1.2 of this appendix.
    2. Definitions. In addition to the definitions in section 3 of 
AHRI 310/380-2017 and section 3 of ANSI/ASHRAE 16-2016, the 
following definitions apply.
    Add-on dehumidifier means a dehumidification system of a make-up 
air PTAC or PTHP that has its own complete dehumidification system 
and does not use the main PTAC/HP system indoor coil for any portion 
of the outdoor air dehumidification.
    Degradation coefficient (CD) means a parameter used in 
calculating the part load factor. The degradation coefficient for 
cooling is denoted by CD\c\. The degradation coefficient 
for heating is denoted by CD\h\.
    Dehumidification efficiency, or DE, means the quantity of water 
removed from the air divided by the energy consumed, measured in 
liters per kilowatt-hour (L/kWh).
    Integrated dehumidifier means a dehumidification system of a 
make-up air PTAC or PTHP for which some of the dehumidification of 
the outdoor air is provided by the main PTAC/HP system indoor coil.
    Part-load factor (PLF) means the ratio of the cyclic EER (or COP 
for heating) to the steady-state EER (or COP), where both EERs (or 
COPs) are determined based on operation at the same ambient 
conditions.
    Make-up air PTAC means a PTAC for which a portion of the total 
airflow is drawn in from outside the conditioned space and in which 
this outside air passes through a dehumidifying or cooling coil, 
either before or after mixing with the air drawn into the unit from 
the conditioned space, but before being discharged from the unit.
    Make-up air PTHP means a PTHP for which a portion of the total 
airflow is drawn in from outside the conditioned space and in which 
this outside air passes through a dehumidifying or cooling coil, 
either before or after mixing with the air drawn into the unit from 
inside the conditioned space, but before being discharged from the 
unit.
    Seasonal cooling performance or SCP means the total heat removed 
from the conditioned space during the cooling season, expressed in 
Btu's, divided by the total electrical energy consumed by the 
package terminal air conditioner or heat pump during the same 
season, expressed in watt-hours. SCP is determined in accordance 
with appendix H1.

[[Page 30870]]

    Seasonal heating performance or SHP means the total heat added 
to the conditioned space during the heating season, expressed in 
Btu's, divided by the total electrical energy consumed by the 
package terminal heat pump during the same season, expressed in 
watt-hours. SHP is determined in accordance with appendix H1.
    Variable speed PTAC/HP means a packaged terminal air-conditioner 
or heat pump with a compressor that uses a variable-speed drive to 
vary the compressor speed to achieve variable capacities or three or 
more capacities for any operating condition for which the compressor 
would be running.

3. Heating and Cooling Test Procedures

    3.1 General. Evaluate SCP and SHP using instructions in sections 
3.1 to 3.8 to this appendix. For the cooling tests required to 
evaluate SCP, use the cooling test conditions in section 3.5 of this 
appendix. For the heating tests required to evaluate SHP, use the 
heating test conditions in section 3.7 of this appendix. The 
capacity and power input measurements for the cooling tests shall be 
determined using section 4 and section 5 of AHRI 310/380-2017; 
section 8, section 11, appendix A, appendix B and appendix C of 
ANSI/ASHRAE 16-2016 and section 7 of ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009. The 
capacity and power input measurements for the heating tests shall be 
determined using section 4 and section 5 of AHRI 310/380-2017; 
section 8, section 11, appendix E, appendix F and appendix G of 
ANSI/ASHRAE 16-2016 and section 7 of ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009. Test 
measurements shall be made in accordance with section 5, section 9 
and section 10 of ANSI/ASHRAE 16-2016.
    3.2 Additional setup instructions. If applicable, unit 
dehumidification mode will be turned off. Any controls setting for 
dehumidification (e.g., for lower fan speed) shall not to be 
activated. Any make-up air opening or opening in the unit bulkhead 
shall be sealed shut for the cooling and heating tests.
    3.3 Compressor speeds. Use compressor speeds as required by the 
cooling and heating tests in section 3.5 and 3.7 respectively, of 
this appendix. To operate the unit at full compressor speed, set the 
room thermostat at 75 [deg]F for both heating and cooling tests, 
representing a 5 [deg]F differential above the heating test 
condition and 5 [deg]F below the cooling test condition. Use the 
certified values for the low and intermediate compressor speeds.
    3.4 Indoor Fan Settings. Conduct all tests with the fan control 
selections that set the fan speed to high and the indoor fan to 
cycle with the compressor. If the fan control selections do not 
allow for indoor fan to cycle with the compressor, use the alternate 
selection that runs the fan continuously. If needed, the 
manufacturer supplemental test instructions must provide a means for 
overriding the controls to achieve this high airflow.
    3.5 Cooling Mode Tests
    3.5.1 Tests for a System with a Single-Speed Compressor. Conduct 
two steady-state full-load tests, at the A and C conditions. Table 1 
specifies test conditions for the two tests.

                Table 1--Cooling Mode Test Conditions for Units Having a Single-Speed Compressor
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Air entering indoor unit        Air entering outdoor unit
                                     temperature ([deg]F)            temperature ([deg]F)
       Test description        ---------------------------------------------------------------- Compressor speed
                                   Dry bulb        Wet bulb        Dry bulb        Wet bulb
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afull Test--required..........              80              67              95              75  Full.
Cfull Test--required..........              80              67              75              60  Full.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3.5.2 Tests for a System with a Two-Speed Compressor. Conduct 
two full-load tests, at the A and B conditions. Conduct two low-load 
tests, at the B and C conditions. Table 2 specifies test conditions 
for the four tests.

               Table 2--Cooling Mode Test Conditions for Units Having a Two-Capacity Compressor\1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Air entering indoor unit        Air entering outdoor unit
                                     temperature ([deg]F)            temperature ([deg]F)
       Test description        ---------------------------------------------------------------- Compressor speed
                                   Dry bulb        Wet bulb        Dry bulb        Wet bulb
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afull Test--required..........              80              67              95              75  Full.
Bfull Test--required..........              80              67              82              65  Full.
Blow Test--required...........              80              67              82              65  Low.
Clow Test--required...........              80              67              75              60  Low.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This includes units with compressors that achieve no more than two capacity levels using variable speed
  technology for any one of the test conditions used for the tests.

    3.5.3 Tests for a System with a Variable-Speed Compressor. 
Conduct two full-load tests, at the A and B conditions. Conduct two 
low-load tests, at the B and C conditions. Conduct an optional 
intermediate test at the B condition. Table 3 specifies test 
conditions for the four tests.

                        Table 3--Cooling Mode Test Conditions for Variable-Speed PTAC/HPs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Air entering indoor unit        Air entering outdoor unit
                                     temperature ([deg]F)            temperature ([deg]F)
       Test description        ---------------------------------------------------------------- Compressor speed
                                   Dry bulb        Wet bulb        Dry bulb        Wet bulb
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afull Test--required..........              80              67              95              75  Full.
Bfull Test--required..........              80              67              82              65  Full.
Blow Test--required...........              80              67              82              65  Low.
Bint Test--optional...........              80              67              82              65  Intermediate.
Clow Test--required...........              80              67              75              60  Low.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 30871]]

    3.6 Evaluation of Cut-out and Cut-in Temperatures in Heating 
Mode
    3.6.1 Setup. Set the unit to operate in heating mode with the 
thermostat set at 75 [deg]F and the conditioned space at a lower 
temperature of 70 [deg]F.
    3.6.2 Cut-out Temperature. Reduce outdoor chamber temperature in 
steps or continuously at an average rate of 1 [deg]F every 5 
minutes. The average outdoor coil air inlet temperature when the 
PTHP operation stops is noted as the cut-out temperature.
    3.6.3 Cut-in Temperature. Hold outdoor temperature constant for 
5 minutes where the cut-out occurred--then increase outdoor chamber 
temperature by 1 [deg]F every 5 minutes. Continue temperature ramp 
until 5 minutes after the HP operation restarts. The average outdoor 
coil air inlet temperature when the HP operation restarts is noted 
as the cut-in temperature.
    3.7 Heating Mode Tests
    3.7.1 Tests for a System with a Single-Speed Compressor. Conduct 
two steady-state full-load tests, at the H1 and 
H3 (or HL) conditions. Table 4 specifies test 
conditions for the two tests.

                Table 4--Heating Mode Test Conditions for Units Having a Single-Speed Compressor
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Air entering indoor unit         Air entering outdoor unit
                                    temperature ([deg]F)             temperature ([deg]F)           Compressor
      Test description       -------------------------------------------------------------------      speed
                                 Dry bulb         Wet bulb         Dry bulb         Wet bulb
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H1,full Test--required......              70  60 max.........  47.............  43.............  Full.
H3,full Test--required......              70  60 max.........  17.............  15.............  Full.
HL,full Test \1\............              70  60 max.........  See note 2.....  See note 3.....  Full.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ To be conducted only if the unit is unable to test at H3 conditions.
\2\ Use the average of the cut-in and cut-out temperatures.
\3\ Use a wet-bulb temperature corresponding to a maximum 60% RH level.

    3.7.2 Tests for a System with a Two-Speed Compressor. Conduct 
two full-load tests, at the H1 and H3 (or 
HL) conditions. Conduct two low-load tests, at the 
H1 and H3 (or HL). Conduct an 
optional full-load test at the H4 condition. Table 5 
specifies test conditions for the four tests.

               Table 5--Heating Mode Test Conditions for Units Having a Two-Capacity Compressor *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Air entering indoor unit        Air entering outdoor unit
                                    temperature ([deg]F)             temperature ([deg]F)           Compressor
       Test description       ------------------------------------------------------------------      speed
                                 Dry bulb       Wet bulb          Dry bulb          Wet bulb
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H1,full Test--required.......           70  60 max..........  47..............  43.............  Full.
H3,full Test--required.......           70  60 max..........  17..............  15.............  Full.
HL,full Test \1\.............           70  60 max..........  See note 2......  See note 3.....  Full.
H4,full Test--optional.......           70  60 max..........  5...............  4..............  Full.
H1,low Test--required........           70  60 max..........  47..............  43.............  Low.
H3,low Test--required........           70  60 max..........  17..............  15.............  Low.
HL,low Test \1\..............           70  60 max..........  See note 2......  See note 3.....  Low.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* This includes units with compressors that achieve no more than two capacity levels using variable speed
  technology for any one of the test conditions used for the tests.
\1\ To be conducted only if the unit is unable to test at H3 conditions.
\2\ Use the average of the cut-in and cut-out temperatures.
\3\ Use a wet-bulb temperature corresponding to a maximum 60% RH level.

    3.7.3 Tests for a System with a Variable-Speed Compressor. 
Conduct tests as indicated in section 3.7.2 of this appendix. 
Conduct an additional optional intermediate low load test at the 
H3 (or HL) condition.

   Table 6--Heating Mode Test Conditions for Units Having a Variable-Speed Compressor With Three or More Speed
                                     Levels at Any Given Outdoor Temperature
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Air entering indoor unit        Air entering outdoor unit
                                    temperature ([deg]F)             temperature ([deg]F)           Compressor
       Test description       ------------------------------------------------------------------      speed
                                 Dry bulb       Wet bulb          Dry bulb          Wet bulb
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H1,full Test--required.......           70  60 max..........  47..............  43.............  Full.
H3,full Test--required.......           70  60 max..........  17..............  15.............  Full.
HL,full Test \1\.............           70  60 max..........  See note 2......  See note 3.....  Full.
H4,full Test--optional.......           70  60 max..........  5...............  4..............  Full.
H1,low Test--required........           70  60 max..........  47..............  43.............  Low.
H3,low Test--required........           70  60 max..........  17..............  15.............  Low.
HL,low Test \1\..............           70  60 max..........  See note 2......  See note 3.....  Low.
H3,int Test--optional........           70  60 max..........  17..............  15.............  Intermediate.
HL,int Test--optional \1\....           70  60 max..........  See note 2......  See note 3.....  Intermediate.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ To be conducted only if the unit is unable to test at H3 conditions.
\2\ Use the average of the cut-in and cut-out temperatures.
\3\ Use a wet-bulb temperature corresponding to a maximum 60% RH level.


[[Page 30872]]

    3.8 Calculation of seasonal performance descriptors
    3.8.1 SCP Calculation
    The SCP is calculated per equation 3.8.1-1:
    Equation 3.8.1-1:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.002
    
Where:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.003

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.101

Tj = the outdoor bin temperature, [deg]F, which are 
binned in bins of 5[deg]F with the 8 cooling season bin temperatures 
being 67,72,77,82,87,92,97 and 102[deg]F.
j = the bin number, For cooling season calculations, j ranges from 1 
to 8.

    Evaluate the building cooling load, BL(Tj) using equation 3.8.1-
2:
    Equation 3.8.1-2:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.004
    
Where:

QA,fullis the space cooling capacity measured in the 
Afull test

    Use the fractional cooling hours for each temperature bin, j as 
defined in Table 7

                Table 7--Distribution of Fractional Hours Within Cooling Season Temperature Bins
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                              Representative   Fraction of total
                     Bin number, j                        Bin temperature    temperature for    temperature bin
                                                            range [deg]F        bin [deg]F        hours, nj/N
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1......................................................              65-69                 67              0.229
2......................................................              70-74                 72              0.238
3......................................................              75-79                 77              0.220
4......................................................              80-84                 82              0.150
5......................................................              85-89                 87              0.094
6......................................................              90-94                 92              0.047
7......................................................              95-99                 97              0.014
8......................................................            100-104                102              0.007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3.8.1.1 Single-speed system
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.005
    
    Equation 3.8.1.1-1:

[[Page 30873]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.006

    Equation 3.8.1.1-2:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.007
    
Where:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.008

Qc(Tj) = the space cooling capacity of the unit when operating at 
outdoor temperature, Tj, Btu/h;
Ec(Tj) = the electrical power consumption of the test unit when 
operating at outdoor temperature Tj, W;
PLF = 1-CDC [middot] [1 - X (Tj)], the part load factor, 
dimensionless;
CDC = 0.3, the cooling degradation coefficient, dimensionless; and
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.009

    Evaluate the terms Qc(Tj) and Ec(Tj) using equations 3.8.1.1-3 
and 3.8.1.1-4:
    Equation 3.8.1.1-3:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.010
    
    Equation 3.8.1.1-4:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.011
    
    Where QC,full and EC,full are determined from the 
Cfull test, QA,full and EA,full are determined from the 
Afull test, and all four quantities are measured as 
specified in section 3.5.1 of this appendix.
    3.8.1.2 Two-speed systems
    Calculate SCP using Equation 3.8.1-1. Evaluate the space cooling 
capacity Qc,low (Tj), and electrical power consumption, Ec,low (Tj), 
of the test unit when operating at low compressor capacity and 
outdoor temperature Tj using:
    Equation 3.8.1.2-1:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.012
    
    Equation 3.8.1.2-2:

[[Page 30874]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.013

    Where QC,low and EC,low are determined from the Clow 
test, QB,low and EB,low are determined from the Blow 
test, and all four quantities are measured as specified in section 
3.5.2 of this appendix.
    Evaluate the space cooling capacity Qc,full (Tj), and electrical 
power consumption, Ec,full (Tj), of the test unit when operating at 
full compressor capacity and outdoor temperature Tj using:
    Equation 3.8.1.2-3:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.014
    
    Equation 3.8.1.2-4:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.015
    
    Where QB,full and EB,full are determined from the 
Bfull test, and QA,full and EA,full are determined from 
the Afull test, and all four quantities are measured as 
specified in section 3.5.2 of this appendix.
    The calculation of equation 3.8.1-1 quantities differs depending 
on whether the test unit would operate at low capacity (section 
3.8.1.2.1 of this appendix), cycle between low and high capacity 
(section 3.8.1.2.2 of this appendix), or operate at high capacity 
(section 3.8.1.2.3) in responding to the building load. Use Equation 
3.8.1-2 to calculate the building load, BL(Tj), for each temperature 
bin.
    3.8.1.2.1 Building load is less than low-stage cooling capacity 
(BL(Tj) < Qc,low)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.016

    Equation 3.8.1.2.1-1:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.017
    
    Equation 3.8.1.2.1-2:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.018
    
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.019
    
Where:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.020

PLF = 1-CDC. [1-Xlow (Tj)], the part load factor, dimensionless;
CDC = 0.3, the cooling degradation coefficient, dimensionless; and

[[Page 30875]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.021

    3.8.1.2.2 Building load is higher than the low-stage capacity 
and less than the full-stage capacity (Qc,low < BL(Tj) < Qc,full)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.022

    Equation 3.8.1.2.2-1:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.023
    
    Equation 3.8.1.2.2-2:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.024
    
Where:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.025

Xfull (Tj) = 1-Xlow (Tj) is the cooling mode, full capacity load 
factor for temperature bin j, dimensionless.

    3.8.1.2.3 Building load is higher than the full-stage capacity 
(BL(Tj) > Qc,full)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.026


[[Page 30876]]


    Evaluate Qc,full (Tj) and Ec,full (Tj) using equations 3.8.1.2-3 
and 3.8.1.2-4.
    3.8.1.3 Variable-speed system
    Calculate SCP using Equation 3.8.1-1. Evaluate the space cooling 
capacity Qc,low (Tj), and electrical power consumption, Ec,low (Tj), 
of the test unit when operating at low compressor capacity and 
outdoor temperature Tj using equations 3.8.1.2-1 and 3.8.1.2-2.
    Calculate the space cooling capacity, Qc,int (Tj), and 
electrical power consumption, Ec,int (Tj), of the test unit when 
operating at outdoor temperature Tj and the intermediate compressor 
speed used during using the following:
    Equation 3.8.1.3-1:

Qc,int (Tj) = QB,int + MQ * (Tj-82)

    Equation 3.8.1.3-2:

Ec,int (Tj) = EB,int + ME * (Tj-82)

    Where QB,int and EB,int are determined from the optional 
Bint test or interpolated from the Blow and 
Bfull tests.
    Approximate the slopes of the intermediate speed cooling 
capacity and electrical power input curves, MQ and ME, as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.027

Where:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.028

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.029

    Use Equations 3.8.1.2-1, 3.8.1.2-2, 3.8.1.2-3 and 3.8.1.2-4, 
respectively, to calculate Qc,low(87), Ec,low(87), Qc,full(87) and 
Ec,full(87).
    3.8.1.3.1 Building load is less than low-stage capacity (BL(Tj) 
< Qc,low)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.030

Where:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.031

PLF = 1-CDC. [1-Xlow (Tj)], the part load factor, dimensionless.
CDC = Cooling degradation coefficient, 0.3

[[Page 30877]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.032

    Obtain the fractional bin hours for the cooling season,
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.033
    
from Table 7. Use Equations 3.8.1.2-1 and 3.8.1.2-2, respectively, 
to evaluate Qc,low (Tj) and Ec,low (Tj).
    3.8.1.3.2 Building load is higher than the low-stage capacity 
and lesser than the full-stage capacity and the unit operates at an 
intermediate speed to match capacity to load (Qc,low < BL(Tj) < 
Qc,full)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.034

Where:

Qc,int-bin(Tj) = BL(Tj), the space cooling capacity delivered by the 
unit in matching the building load at temperature Tj, Btu/h.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.035

    EERint-bin(Tj) = the steady-state energy efficiency ratio of the 
test unit when operating at an intermediate compressor speed and 
temperature Tj, Btu/h per W.
    Obtain the fractional bin hours for the cooling season,
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.036
    
from Table 7 of this appendix. For each temperature bin where the 
unit operates at an intermediate compressor speed, determine the 
energy efficiency ratio EERint-bin(Tj) using the following 
equations:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.037

Where:

    EERlow(Tj) is the steady-state energy efficiency ratio of the 
test unit when operating at minimum compressor speed and temperature 
Tj, Btu/h per W, calculated using capacity Qc,low(Tj) calculated 
using Equation 3.8.1.2-1 and electrical power consumption Ec,low(Tj) 
calculated using Equation 3.8.1.2-2;
    EERint(Tj) is the steady-state energy efficiency ratio of the 
test unit when operating at intermediate compressor speed and 
temperature Tj, Btu/h per W, calculated using capacity Qc,int(Tj) 
calculated using Equation 3.8.1.3-1 and electrical power consumption 
Ec,int(Tj) calculated using Equation 3.8.1.3-2;
    EERfull(Tj) is the steady-state energy efficiency ratio of the 
test unit when operating at full compressor speed and temperature 
Tj, Btu/h per W, calculated using capacity Qc,full(Tj) calculated 
Equation 3.8.1.2-3 and electrical power consumption Ec,full(Tj), 
calculated using Equation 3.8.1.2-4.
    BL(Tj) is the building cooling load at temperature Tj, Btu/h.
    3.8.1.3.3 Building load is higher than the full-stage capacity a 
(BL(Tj) > Qc,full(Tj))

[[Page 30878]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.038

    3.8.2 SHP Calculation
    The SHP is calculated using equation 3.8.2-1:
    Equation 3.8.2-1
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.039
    
Where:

    BL(Tj) = the value of the heating building load evaluated at the 
outdoor bin temperature, btu/hr.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.040

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.041

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.042

    Tj = the outdoor bin temperature, [deg]F, which are binned in 
bins of 5[deg]F with the 7 heating season bin temperatures being 7, 
12, 17, 22, 27, 32, 37.
    j = the bin number, For heating season calculations, j ranges 
from 1 to 7.

    Evaluate the building heating load, BL(Tj) using equation 3.8.2-
2:
    Equation 3.8.2-2:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.043
    

[[Page 30879]]


Where:

QA,full = is the space cooling capacity from the Afull 
test
Tzl the zero-load temperature, [deg]F, is equal to 40 [deg]F
Tj the outdoor bin temperature, [deg]F

    Use the fractional heating hours for each temperature bin, j as 
defined in table 8.

                Table 8--Distribution of Fractional Hours Within Heating Season Temperature Bins
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                              Representative   Fraction of total
                     Bin number, j                        Bin temperature    temperature for    temperature bin
                                                            range [deg]F        bin [deg]F        hours, nj/N
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1......................................................              39-35                 37              0.337
2......................................................              34-30                 32              0.298
3......................................................              29-25                 27              0.192
4......................................................              24-20                 22              0.108
5......................................................              19-15                 17              0.051
6......................................................              14-10                 12              0.008
7......................................................                9-5                  7              0.006
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3.8.2.1 Single-speed system
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.044
    
    Equation 3.8.2.1-1:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.045
    
    Equation 3.8.2.1-2:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.046
    
Where:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.047

    Qh(Tj) = the space heating capacity of the heat pump when 
operating at outdoor temperature Tj, Btu/h.
    Eh(Tj) = the electrical power consumption of the heat pump when 
operating at outdoor temperature Tj, W.
    [delta](Tj) = the heat pump low temperature cut-out factor, 
dimensionless.
    PLFj = CDh * [1 - XTj] (the part load factor, dimensionless.
    CDh = Heating degradation coefficient = 0.3

    Use Equation 3.8.2-2 to determine BL(Tj). Obtain fractional bin 
hours for the heating season,
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.048

from Table 8.
    Determine the low temperature cut-out factor, [delta](Tj), using 
the equation below:
    Equation 3.8.2.1-3:

[[Page 30880]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.049

Where:

Toff = the outdoor temperature when the compressor is automatically 
shut off, [deg]F. (If no such temperature exists, Tj is always 
greater than Toff and Ton).
Ton = the outdoor temperature when the compressor is automatically 
turned back on, if applicable, following an automatic shut-off, 
[deg]F.

    If the H4 test is not conducted, calculate Qh(Tj) and 
Eh(Tj) using Equations 3.8.2.1-4 and 3.8.2.1-5 if the H3 
is conducted, or equations 3.8.2.1-6 and 3.8.2.1-7 if the 
HL test is conducted.
    Equation 3.8.2.1-4:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.050
    
Where:

Qh,full(35) = 0.9 * {QH3,full + 0.6 * [QH1,full - QH3,full]{time} 

    Equation 3.8.2.1-5:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.051
    
Where:

Eh,full(35) = 0.985 * {EH3,full + 0.6 * [EH1,full - EH3,full]{time} 
    Equation 3.8.2.1-6:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.052
    
Where:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.053

    Equation 3.8.2.1-7:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.054
    
Where:

[[Page 30881]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.055

    If the H4 test is conducted, calculate Qh(Tj) and 
Eh(Tj) using equations 3.8.2.1-8 and 3.8.2.1-9:
    Equation 3.8.2.1-8:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.056
    
Where:

Qh,full(35) = 0.9 * {QH3,full + 0.6 * [QH1,full - QH3,full]{time} 
    Equation 3.8.2.1-9:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.057
    
Where:

Eh,full(35) = 0.985 * {EH3,full + 0.6 * [EH1,full - EH3,full{time} 

    3.8.2.2 Two-speed system
    The calculation of Equation 3.8.2-1 quantities differs depending 
upon whether the heat pump would operate at low capacity (section 
3.8.2.2.1 of this appendix), cycle between low and high capacity 
(section 3.8.2.2.2 of this appendix), or operate at high capacity 
(section 3.8.2.2.3 of this appendix) in responding to the building 
load.
    Evaluate the space heating capacity and electrical power 
consumption of the heat pump when operating at low compressor 
capacity and outdoor temperature Tj using equations 
3.8.2.2-1 and 3.8.2.2-2 if the H3 is conducted, or 
equations 3.8.2.2-3 and 3.8.2.2-4 if the HL is conducted:
    Equation 3.8.2.2-1:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.058
    
Where:

Qh,low(35) = 0.9 * {QH3,low + 0.6 * [QH1,low - 
QH3,low]{time} 

    Equation 3.8.2.2-2:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.059
    
Where:

Eh,low(35) = 0.985 * {EH3,low + 0.6 * [EH1,low 
- HH3,low]{time} 

    Equation 3.8.2.2-3:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.060
    
Where:

[[Page 30882]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.061

    Equation 3.8.2.2-4:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.062
    
Where:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.063

    If the H4 test is not conducted, evaluate the space 
heating capacity and electrical power consumption (Qh,full(Tj) and 
Eh,full(Tj) of the heat pump when operating at high compressor 
capacity and outdoor temperature Tj by solving Equations 3.8.2.1-4 
and 3.8.2.1-5, or Equations 3.8.2.1-6 and 3.8.2.1-7 as appropriate . 
If the H4 test is conducted, evaluate the space heating 
capacity and electrical power consumption (Qh,full(Tj) and 
Eh,full(Tj) of the heat pump when operating at high compressor 
capacity and outdoor temperature Tj using Equations 3.8.2.1-8 and 
3.8.2.1-9, respectively.
    3.8.2.2.1 Building load is less than low-stage capacity (BL(Tj) 
< Qh,low)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.064

    Equation 3.8.2.2.1-1:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.065
    
    Equation 3.8.2.2.1-2:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.066
    
Where:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.067

PLFj = 1-CD^h * [1-Xlow>(Tj)], the part load 
factor, dimensionless.
    [delta](Tj) the low temperature cutoff factor, dimensionless.
    CD^h = Heating degradation coefficient = 
0.3

    Determine the low temperature cut-out factor using Equation 
3.8.2.2.1-3:
    Equation 3.8.2.2.1-3:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.068
    

[[Page 30883]]


Where:

Toff = the outdoor temperature when the compressor is automatically 
shut off, [deg]F. (If no such temperature exists, Tj is always 
greater than Toff and Ton).
Ton = the outdoor temperature when the compressor is automatically 
turned back on, if applicable, following an automatic shut-off, 
[deg]F.

    3.8.2.2.2 Building load is higher than the low-stage capacity 
and lesser than the full-stage capacity (Qh,low < BL(Tj) < Qh,full)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.069

    Equation 3.8.2.2.2-1:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.070
    
    Equation 3.8.2.2.2-2:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.071
    
Where:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.072

    Xfull(Tj) = 1 - Xlow (Tj) the heating mode, high capacity load 
factor for temperature bin j, dimensionless.

    Determine the low temperature cut-out factor, [delta] (Tj), 
using equation 3.8.2.2.1-3.
    3.8.2.2.3 Building load is higher than the full-stage capacity a 
(BL(Tj) > Qh,full)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.073

    Equation 3.8.2.2.3-1:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.074
    
    Equation 3.8.2.2.3-2:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.075
    
Where:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.076


[[Page 30884]]


    3.8.2.3 Variable-speed system
    The calculation of the Equation 3.8.2-1 quantities differs 
depending upon whether the heat pump would operate at low capacity 
(section 3.8.2.3.1 of this appendix), cycle between low and high 
capacity (section 3.8.2.3.2 of this appendix), or operate at high 
capacity (section 3.8.2.3.3 of this appendix) in responding to the 
building load.
    Calculate the space heating capacity, Qh,int(Tj), and electrical 
power consumption, Eh,int(Tj), of the test unit when operating at 
outdoor temperature Tj and the intermediate compressor speed used 
during using the following equations:
    Equation 3.8.2.3-1:

Qh,int(Tj) = Qh,int(35) + MQ * (Tj - 35)

    Equation 3.8.2.3-2:

Eh,int(Tj) = Eh,int(35) + ME * (Tj - 35)

Where:

Qh,int(35) = 0.9 * {QH3,int + 0.6 * [QH1,full 
- QH3,int]
Eh,int(35) = 0.985 * {EH3,int + 0.6 * 
[EH1,full - EH3,int]

    Where QH3,int and EH3,int are determined 
from the optional H3,int test or interpolated from the 
H3,low and H3,full tests.
    Approximate the slopes of the intermediate speed heating 
capacity and electrical power input curves, MQ and ME, as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.077

Where:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.078

    3.8.2.3.1 Building load is less than low-stage capacity (BL(Tj) 
< Qh,low)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.079

    3.8.2.3.2 Building load is higher than the low-stage capacity 
and lesser than the full-stage capacity (Qh,low < BL(Tj) < Qh,full) 
and the compressor operates at an intermediate speed) in order to 
match the building heating load at a temperature Tj
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.080

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.081

Where:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.082

and [dgr](Tj) is evaluated using Equation 3.8.2.2.1-3 while, Qh,int-
bin(Tj) = (BL(Tj), the space heating capacity delivered by the unit 
in matching the building load at temperature (Tj), Btu/h. The 
matching occurs with the heat pump operating at an intermediate 
compressor speed.
    COPint-bin(Tj) = the steady-state coefficient of performance of 
the heat pump when operating at an intermediate compressor speed and 
temperature (Tj), dimensionless.
    For each temperature bin where the heat pump operates at an 
intermediate compressor speed, determine COPint-bin(Tj) using the 
following equations,
    For each temperature bin where Qh,low(Tj) < BL(Tj) < Qh,int(Tj)-

[[Page 30885]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.083

    For each temperature bin where Qh,int(Tj <= BL(Tj) < 
Qh,full(Tj)-
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.084

Where:

    COPlow(Tj) is the steady-state coefficient of performance of the 
heat pump when operating at minimum compressor speed and temperature 
Tj, dimensionless, calculated using capacity Qh,low(Tj) calculated 
using Equation 3.8.2.2.1 and electrical power consumption Eh,low(Tj) 
calculated using Equation 3.8.2.2.2;
    COPint(Tj) is the steady-state coefficient of performance of the 
heat pump when operating at intermediate compressor speed and 
temperature Tj, dimensionless, calculated using capacity Qh,int(Tj) 
calculated using Equation 3.8.2.3-1 and electrical power consumption 
Eh,int(Tj) calculated using Equation 3.8.2.3-2;
    COPfull(Tj) is the steady-state coefficient of performance of 
the heat pump when operating at full compressor speed and 
temperature Tj, dimensionless, calculated using capacity Qh,full(Tj) 
and electrical power consumption Eh,full(Tj), both calculated as 
described in section 3.8.2.1; and
    BL(Tj) is the building heating load at temperature Tj, Btu/h.
    3.8.2.3.3 Building load is higher than the full-stage capacity a 
(BL(Tj) > Qh,full)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.085

4. Dehumidification Test Procedures

    4.1 Test Setup for Dehumidification Tests. Install the unit 
according to section 6 of ANSI/ASHRAE 16-2016, subject to the 
following additional requirements:
    4.1.1 Makeup Air Inlet Duct Assembly.
    (1) Connect a makeup air inlet duct assembly as shown in Figure 
1. The inlet duct assembly will include a nozzle airflow measuring 
apparatus and an inlet plenum, with interconnecting duct sections. 
The inlet plenum shall be insulated to a level of R-19. The 
interconnecting duct between the inlet plenum and the unit's makeup 
air inlet shall be insulated to a level or R-19 up to the inlet 
grill.
    (2) The connecting duct between the code tester and the inlet 
plenum shall have cross-sectional dimensions such that the air 
velocity within it is no more than 200 fpm.
    (3) The connecting duct between the inlet plenum and the makeup 
air inlet of the unit under test shall have dimensions equal to 
those of the dehumidification air inlet. If this is not possible due 
to interference of components within the unit under test, the 
dimensions of the duct may be different, but the cross-sectional 
area of the connecting duct shall be equal to that of the inlet. A 
hole shall be cut in the air inlet grill to make room for the duct. 
External to the inlet grill, the duct shall have an area-reducing 
section with reducing angle no greater than 45 degrees. At the 
connection to the inlet plenum, the connecting duct cross section 
shall be at least twice the cross section of the connection to the 
dehumidification air inlet. The duct shall extend beyond the grill 
such that the inlet plenum wall insulation is at least 3 inches 
distant from the grill.
    (4) When testing a PTAC/HP with an integrated dehumidification 
system, the inlet plenum shall be located offset to the side, away 
from the center of the unit under test to impose minimal air flow 
restriction on outdoor coil air inlet and discharge.
    (5) The inlet plenum shall have interior dimensions of at least 
12 inches high and at least 12 inches wide in the plane 
perpendicular to air flow, and an interior dimension of at least 24 
inches between the edges of the inlet and outlet ducts that are 
closest to each other.
    (6) Install a thermocouple grid consisting of nine thermocouples 
in a three-by-three arrangement in the inlet air plenum upstream of 
the plane of the pressure taps
    (7) Seal all duct connections between the code tester inlet and 
the connection to the unit's dehumidification air inlet.
    (8) Use a nozzle airflow measuring apparatus as described in 
section 6.2 of ASHRAE 37-2009 with an adjustable fan to allow 
adjustment of the inlet plenum pressure. Set up the nozzle airflow 
measuring apparatus to take in outdoor room air and move it into the 
unit under test in a blow-through arrangement.
    (9) If testing a makeup air PTAC/HP with an integrated 
dehumidification system, provide means to heat or cool the inlet air 
as needed to achieve the target makeup air dry bulb temperature at a 
location between the measurement of conditions at the nozzle airflow 
measuring apparatus inlet and the apparatus fan. The applied heating 
or cooling shall not affect the makeup air dew point temperature.
    4.1.2 Indoor air duct connection. When testing a makeup air 
PTAC/HP with an add-on dehumidification system, test the system 
without connection of an indoor air duct. When testing a makeup air 
PTAC/HP with an integrated dehumidification system, if the cooling 
performance of the unit was tested using the psychrometric method, 
keep the indoor air duct assembly connected.
    4.1.3 Transfer Fan. Install an adjustable transfer fan to 
transfer makeup air from the indoor room back to the outdoor room. 
The fan shall be adjustable to allow setting of the needed pressure 
differential when the target makeup air is passing through the test 
unit.
    4.1.4 Thermostatic plug. Remove the thermostatic plug that 
prevents condensate drainage from the unit in cooling mode. Attach 
an adapter if needed, and a tube to transfer collected condensate to 
a measurement location in the outdoor room. Collect condensate in a 
bucket placed on a scale with mass measurement resolution of 1 gram. 
Provide a cover for the bucket to limit re-evaporation.
    4.2 Measurements
    4.2.1 Pressure Measurement. Consistent with section 6.5 of 
ASHRAE 37-2009, static pressure taps shall be placed at four 
locations around the inlet air plenum as shown in Figure 1, halfway 
between the nearest edges of the connecting ducts to the nozzle 
airflow measuring apparatus and the PTAC/HP makeup air inlet. The 
pressure taps shall be manifolded together as indicated section 
6.5.3 of ASHRAE 37-2009. Measure pressure differential between the 
outdoor room and the inlet air plenum.
    4.2.2 Temperature Measurements. Outdoor inlet dry bulb and wet 
bulb temperature shall be measured at the inlet of the nozzle 
airflow measurement apparatus, as described in ASHRAE 16-2016.
    4.2.3 Outdoor Coil Temperature Measurement for PTAC/HPs with 
Integrated Dehumidification Systems. For PTAC/HPs with integrated 
dehumidification systems, measure outdoor coil temperature using 
provisions as described in this section, for both the cooling 
Afull test and all of the dehumidification tests. Attach 
a thermocouple with +/- 0.5 \0\F measurement accuracy to a return 
bend at approximately the midpoint of the outdoor coil circuit.

[[Page 30886]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.086

    Figure 1--Makeup Air Inlet Duct Assembly
    4.4 Tests to be Conducted
    4.4.1 Units with Add-on dehumidification system
    4.4.1.1 Preliminary Power Measurement. Operate the PTAC/HP in 
fan-only mode or with the thermostat and fan controls set such that 
the indoor fan is energized, but the compressor and outdoor fan are 
not. Establish operating conditions as specified in Table 10, 
keeping indoor air dry bulb and wet bulb within 3 [deg]F of 
specified values, and preliminarily setting dry bulb and dew point 
of air at the nozzle airflow measuring apparatus inlet within 3 
[deg]F of specified values. Make a preliminary measurement of PTAC/
HP power input for a duration of 5 minutes when operating in this 
mode without the dehumidification system activated.
    4.4.1.2 Establishing Test Conditions. Set up the makeup air flow 
by starting operation of the transfer fan and the nozzle airflow 
measuring apparatus fan. Activate the dehumidification system. 
Adjust the transfer fan and the nozzle airflow measuring apparatus 
fan so that the pressure differential from the inlet plenum to 
outdoor room is 0 +/-0.005 inches of W.C. and the certified airflow 
is flowing as measured by the nozzle airflow measuring apparatus. 
Adjust outdoor room conditions such that the dew point of air 
entering the nozzle airflow measuring apparatus matches the 
specified outdoor air dew point and the dry bulb temperature 
measured by the thermocouple grid in the inlet plenum matches the 
specified outdoor air dry bulb temperature, both within required 
tolerances as specified in Table 10 of this appendix.
    4.4.1.3 Equilibrium and Test Periods. Equilibrium test 
conditions shall be maintained within tolerances shown in Table 10 
for not less than one hour before recording data for the capacity 
test. The dehumidification test shall then be conducted over a 1-
hour period, confirming that at no time any measured parameter 
exceeds the allowable tolerances specified in Table 10. Measurements 
of test conditions, input power and energy, and airflow shall be 
taken at least every 60 seconds and logged. Measurements of 
condensate mass shall be made every 10 minutes.
    4.4.2 Units with Integrated dehumidification
    4.4.2.1 Preliminary Test
    4.4.2.1.1 Calculate the average coil temperature measured during 
the Afull cooling test using the temperature measurement 
described in section 4.2.3 of this section.
    4.4.2.1.2 With the make-up airflow passage blocked as for the 
Afull test, but with the makeup air inlet duct assembly 
installed as described in section 4.1.1 of this appendix and with 
the condensate plug removed to allow collection of condensate as 
described in section 4.1.4 of this appendix, conduct a repeat of the 
Afull test. For this preliminary test, reduce outdoor 
room dry bulb temperature to a level for which the outdoor coil 
return bend temperature is within 0.5 \0\F of the temperature 
measured during the official Afull test. Measure capacity 
and latent capacity as described in ASHRAE 16-2016. Measure 
condensate every 10 minutes. Calculate latent capacity based on the 
condensate measurement as described in section 7.8.2.1 of ASHRAE 37-
2009. When conditions have been stable for 60 minutes, as described 
in section 8.5.3 of ASHRAE 16-2016, measure performance for a 60 
minute test period. The test is valid when energy balance 
requirements described in section 7 of ASHRAE 16-2016 have been met 
and the latent capacity calculated based on the condensate 
measurement is within 6 percent of the latent capacity measurement 
based on the psychrometric or calorimetric test method, whichever is 
used.
    4.4.2.2 Makeup air test
    4.4.2.2.1 Remove the blockage of the makeup air passage. Restart 
cooling operation as conducted for the preliminary test and set up 
the makeup air flow and conditions as described in section 4.4.1.2 
of this appendix. However, maintain outdoor room dry bulb 
temperature within 0.3 \0\F of the average measured during the 
preliminary test, and set dry bulb temperature of the makeup air by 
adjusting the heating or cooling thereof using provisions set up in 
the nozzle airflow measuring apparatus as described in section 
4.1.1(9) of this appendix.
    4.4.2.2.2 When conditions have been stable for 60 minutes, as 
described in section 8.5.3 of ASHRAE 16-2016, measure performance 
for a 60 minute test period. The test is valid when energy balance 
requirements described in section 7 of ASHRAE 16-2016 have been met 
and the latent capacity calculated based on the condensate 
measurement is within 6 percent of the latent capacity measurement 
based on the psychrometric or calorimetric test method, whichever is 
used.

[[Page 30887]]



                                    Table 9--Dehumidification Test Conditions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Air entering makeup air inlet  temperatures        Air entering indoor side of unit
                  ([deg]F)                                temperature ([deg]F)                Make-up air flow
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------        (scfm)
       Dry bulb              Dew point               Dry bulb               Wet bulb
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               95                     67                     80                     67                     30
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


               Table 10--Dehumidification Test Tolerances
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Variation of
                                        arithmetic
                                       average from    Maximum  observed
              Reading                   specified      range of readings
                                     conditions (test   (test operating
                                        condition          tolerance)
                                        tolerance)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air entering makeup air inlet dry                 0.3                1.2
 bulb ([deg]F)....................
Dew point ([deg]F)................                0.5                1.5
Add-on dehumidification system
 test:
    Air entering indoor side dry                    3                  5
     bulb ([deg]F)................
    Wet bulb ([deg]F).............                  3                  5
Integrated dehumidification system
 test:
    Air entering indoor side dry                  0.3                1.5
     bulb ([deg]F)................
    Wet bulb ([deg]F).............                0.3                1.0
Makeup airflow (scfm).............                  1  .................
Makeup airflow Nozzle pressure      .................                  5
 drop (%).........................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    4.3 Calculations
    4.3.1 Dehumidifier capacity for PTAC/HP with add-on 
dehumidification system. Calculate the capacity of an add-on 
dehumidification system using the data obtained and the formula:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.087

Where:

wd,add is the mass of collected condensate during the 
test period in pounds;
[tau] is the test period duration in hours; and
24 is a conversion from hours to 24-hour period.

    4.3.2 Dehumidifier capacity for PTAC/HP with integrated 
dehumidification system.
    Calculate the capacity of an integrated dehumidification system 
using the data obtained and the formula:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.088

Where:

wd,int and wd,pre are the masses of collected 
condensate during the tests with the dehumidification system 
operative and non-operative, respectively, in pounds;
[tau]test and [tau]pre are the test period 
durations in hours for the test with the dehumidification system 
operative and the preliminary test with the system non-operative, 
respectively; and
24 is a conversion from hours to 24-hour period.

    4.3.3 Dehumidifier Capacity in Pints per 24 hours. Calculate 
capacity in pints per 24 hours by dividing the capacity in pounds 
per 24 hours by 1.04.
    4.3.4 Dehumidification Energy Use. Calculate the 24-hour energy 
use associated with system dehumidification as follows.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.089

Where:

Etest and Epre are the energy use measured 
during the dehumidification test and the preliminary test, 
respectively, both in watt-hours (kWh);
[tau]test and [tau]pre are the durations of 
the dehumidification test and the preliminary test, respectively, 
both in hours; and
24 is a conversion from hours to 24-hour period.

    4.3.5 Dehumidification Efficiency. Calculate the 
dehumidification efficiency DE as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12MY23.090

Where:

Cd is dehumidification capacity in pounds per 24 hour 
period;
Ed is the energy use in kWh per 24 hour period; and
0.454 is a conversion factor from pounds to liters of water.
Values of DE shall be rounded to the nearest 0.01 L/kWh.

[FR Doc. 2023-08897 Filed 5-11-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.