Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Computer Room Air Conditioners, 36392-36428 [2023-10859]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
36392
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 431
[EERE–2020–BT–STD–0008]
RIN 1904–AF01
Energy Conservation Program: Energy
Conservation Standards for Computer
Room Air Conditioners
Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Energy Policy and
Conservation Act, as amended (EPCA),
prescribes energy conservation
standards for various consumer
products and certain commercial and
industrial equipment, including small,
large, and very large commercial
package air conditioning and heating
equipment, of which computer room air
conditioners (CRACs) are a category.
EPCA requires the U.S. Department of
Energy (DOE or the Department) to
consider the need for amended
standards each time American Society
of Heating, Refrigeration and Air
Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE)
Standard 90.1 is amended with respect
to the standard levels or design
requirements applicable to that
equipment, or periodically under a sixyear-lookback review provision. In this
final rule, DOE is adopting amended
energy conservation standards for
CRACs that rely on a new efficiency
metric and are equivalent to those levels
specified in ASHRAE Standard 90.1–
2019. DOE has determined that it lacks
the clear and convincing evidence
required by the statute to adopt
standards more stringent than the levels
specified in the industry standard.
DATES: The effective date of this rule is
August 1, 2023. Compliance with the
amended standards established for
computer room air conditioners in this
final rule is required on and after May
28, 2024.
ADDRESSES: The docket for this
rulemaking, which includes Federal
Register notices, public meeting
attendee lists and transcripts,
comments, and other supporting
documents/materials, is available for
review at www.regulations.gov. All
documents in the docket are listed in
the www.regulations.gov index.
However, not all documents listed in
the index may be publicly available,
such as information that is exempt from
public disclosure.
The docket web page can be found at:
www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE2020-BT-STD-0008. The docket web
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jun 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
page contains instructions on how to
access all documents, including public
comments, in the docket.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ms. Catherine Rivest, U.S. Department
of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency
and Renewable Energy, Building
Technologies Office, EE–5B, 1000
Independence Avenue SW, Washington,
DC 20585–0121. Telephone: (202) 586–
7335. Email: ApplianceStandards
Questions@ee.doe.gov.
Mr. Eric Stas, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of the General Counsel,
GC–33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW,
Washington, DC 20585–0121.
Telephone: (202) 586–5827. Email:
Eric.Stas@hq.doe.gov.
For further information on how to
review the docket, contact the
Appliance and Equipment Standards
Program staff at (202) 287–1445 or by
email: ApplianceStandardsQuestions@
ee.doe.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Synopsis of the Final Rule
II. Introduction
A. Authority
B. Background
1. Current Standards
2. History of Standards Rulemaking for
CRACs
III. General Discussion
A. Background
B. Test Procedure
C. Efficiency and Capacity Crosswalk
Analyses
1. Increase in Return Air Dry-Bulb
Temperature From 75 °F to 85 °F
2. Decrease in Entering Water Temperature
for Water-Cooled CRACs
3. Changes in External Static Pressure
Requirements for Upflow Ducted CRACs
4. Power Adder To Account for Pump and
Heat Rejection Fan Power in NSenCOP
Calculation for Water-Cooled and GlycolCooled CRACs
5. Calculating Overall Changes in
Measured Efficiency and Capacity From
Test Procedure Changes
a. Calculation of Crosswalked NSenCOP
Levels
b. Calculation of Translated NSCC
Boundaries
6. Crosswalk Results
7. Comments Received Regarding DOE’s
Crosswalk
IV. Methodology for Estimates of Potential
Energy Savings From ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2019 Levels
A. Annual Energy Use
1. Equipment Classes and Analytical Scope
2. Efficiency Levels
3. Analysis Method and Annual Energy
Use Results
B. Shipments Analysis
C. No-New-Standards-Case Efficiency
Distribution
D. Compliance Dates and Analysis Period
E. Estimates of Potential Energy Savings
V. Conclusions
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
A. Consideration of More-Stringent
Efficiency Levels
B. Review Under Six-Year Lookback
Provision
C. Definition for Ducted Condenser
D. Amended Energy Conservation
Standards
1. Impact of Any Lessening of Competition
VI. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866
and 13563
B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act
C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995
D. Review Under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
F. Review Under Executive Order 12988
G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995
H. Review Under the Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act, 1999
I. Review Under Executive Order 12630
J. Review Under the Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act, 2001
K. Review Under Executive Order 13211
L. Review Under the Information Quality
Bulletin for Peer Review
M. Congressional Notification
VII. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
I. Synopsis of the Final Rule
The Energy Policy and Conservation
Act, Public Law 94–163 (42 U.S.C.
6291–6317, as codified), as amended
(EPCA),1 authorizes DOE to regulate the
energy efficiency of a number of
consumer products and certain
industrial equipment. Title III, Part C 2
of EPCA established the Energy
Conservation Program for Certain
Industrial Equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6311–
6317) Such equipment includes CRACs,
the subject of this rulemaking. (42
U.S.C. 6311(1)(B)–(D))
Pursuant to EPCA, DOE is triggered to
consider amending the energy
conservation standards for certain types
of commercial and industrial
equipment, including CRACs, whenever
ASHRAE amends the standard levels or
design requirements prescribed in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1, ‘‘Energy
Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise
Residential Buildings’’ (ASHRAE
Standard 90.1). Under a separate
provision of EPCA, DOE is required to
review the existing energy conservation
standards for those types of covered
equipment subject to ASHRAE Standard
90.1 every six years to determine
whether those standards need to be
amended. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)–(C))
For each type of equipment, EPCA
1 All references to EPCA in this document refer
to the statute as amended through the Energy Act
of 2020, Public Law 116–260 (Dec. 27, 2020), which
reflect the last statutory amendments that impact
Parts A and A–1 of EPCA.
2 For editorial reasons, upon codification in the
U.S. Code, Part C was re-designated Part A–1.
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
36393
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
directs that if ASHRAE Standard 90.1 is
amended, DOE must adopt amended
energy conservation standards at the
new efficiency level in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1, unless clear and
convincing evidence supports a
determination that adoption of a morestringent efficiency level would produce
significant additional energy savings
and be technologically feasible and
economically justified. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)) If DOE adopts as a
uniform national standard the efficiency
level specified in the amended ASHRAE
Standard 90.1, DOE must establish such
standard not later than 18 months after
publication of the amended industry
standard. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(I))
If DOE determines that a more-stringent
standard is appropriate under the
statutory criteria, DOE must establish
such more-stringent standard not later
than 30 months after publication of the
revised ASHRAE Standard 90.1. (42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(i)) ASHRAE
updated ASHRAE Standard 90.1 on
October 24, 2019 (ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2019), thereby triggering DOE’s
previously referenced obligations
pursuant to EPCA to determine for
CRACs, whether: (1) the amended
industry standard should be adopted; or
(2) clear and convincing evidence exists
to justify more-stringent standard levels.
An update to ASHRAE Standard 90.1,
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2022,
published in January 2023 and retained
the same standards levels for CRACs as
those in ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019.
The current Federal energy
conservation standards for CRACs are
set forth at title 10 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR), 10 CFR
431.97 and, as specified in 10 CFR
431.96, those standards are
denominated in terms of Sensible
Coefficient of Performance (SCOP) and
based on the rating conditions in
American National Standards Institute
(ANSI)/ASHRAE 127–2007, ‘‘Method of
Testing for Rating Computer and Data
Processing Room Unitary Air
Conditioners’’ (ANSI/ASHRAE 127–
2007). However, the efficiency levels for
CRACs set forth in ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2019 are specified in terms of Net
Sensible Coefficient of Performance
(NSenCOP) and based on rating
conditions in Air-Conditioning, Heating,
and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI)
Standard 1360–2017, ‘‘Performance
Rating of Computer and Data Processing
Room Air Conditioners’’ (AHRI 1360–
2017), which differ from the rating
conditions specified in ANSI/ASHRAE
127–2007 for most configurations of
CRACs. Therefore, while SCOP and
NSenCOP are both ratios of the net
sensible cooling capacity (NSCC) to the
power consumed by the unit, they are
measured at different rating conditions
for most configurations of CRACs 3 and
correspondingly provide different
representations of efficiency. DOE has
compared the stringency of standards in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 (in terms
of NSenCOP) to the corresponding
current Federal energy conservation
standards (in terms of SCOP) by
conducting a crosswalk analysis. Based
on the results of that analysis, DOE has
concluded that the ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2019 levels are equivalent in
stringency to the current Federal
standards for six equipment classes and
are more stringent than the current
Federal standards for the remaining 46
equipment classes of CRACs.
For all CRAC equipment classes, DOE
has determined that there is not clear
and convincing evidence of significant
additional energy savings to justify
amended standards for CRACs that are
more stringent than the ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2019 levels. Clear and
convincing evidence would exist only
where the specific facts and data made
available to DOE regarding a particular
ASHRAE amendment demonstrate that
there is no substantial doubt that a
standard more stringent than that
contained in the ASHRAE Standard 90.1
amendment is permitted because it
would result in a significant additional
amount of energy savings, and it is
technologically feasible and
economically justified.
DOE normally performs multiple indepth analyses to determine whether
there is clear and convincing evidence
to support more-stringent energy
conservation standards (i.e., whether
more-stringent standards would
produce significant additional
conservation of energy and be
technologically feasible and
economically justified). However, as
discussed in section V.A of this
document, due to the lack of available
market and performance data, DOE is
unable to conduct the analysis
necessary to evaluate the potential
energy savings or evaluate whether
more-stringent standards would be
technologically feasible or economically
justified, with sufficient certainty.
Therefore, in accordance with the
statutory provisions discussed in this
section and elsewhere in this document,
DOE is amending the energy
conservation standards for CRACs so as
to correspond to the efficiency levels
specified for CRACs in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2019. The amended
standards, which are expressed in terms
of NSenCOP, are presented in Table I–
1 and Table I–2. These standards will
apply to all CRACs listed in Table I–1
and Table I–2 manufactured in, or
imported into, the United States starting
on the compliance date 360 days after
the publication date of this final rule.
See section IV.D of this final rule for a
discussion on the applicable lead times
considered to determine this
compliance date.
TABLE I–1—AMENDED ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS FOR FLOOR-MOUNTED CRACS
Minimum NSenCOP
efficiency
Equipment type
Net sensible cooling capacity 1
Downflow
Air-Cooled ................
Air-Cooled with Fluid
Economizer.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
Water-Cooled ...........
Water-Cooled with
Fluid Economizer.
<80,000 Btu/h 2 ......................................
≥80,000 Btu/h and <295,000 Btu/h ........
≥295,000 Btu/h and <930,000 Btu/h ......
<80,000 Btu/h .........................................
≥80,000 Btu/h and <295,000 Btu/h ........
≥295,000 Btu/h and <930,000 Btu/h ......
<80,000 Btu/h .........................................
≥80,000 Btu/h and <295,000 Btu/h ........
≥295,000 Btu/h and <930,000 Btu/h ......
<80,000 Btu/h .........................................
≥80,000 Btu/h and <295,000 Btu/h ........
3 Additionally, for water-cooled and glycol-cooled
CRACs, NSenCOP includes power adders to
account for power that would be consumed in field
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jun 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
Minimum NSenCOP
efficiency
Net sensible cooling capacity
2.70
2.58
2.36
2.70
2.58
2.36
2.82
2.73
2.67
2.77
2.68
Upflow
ducted
2.67
3 2.55
2.33
2.67
3 2.55
2.33
2.79
3 2.70
2.64
2.74
3 2.65
Upflow
non-ducted
<65,000 Btu/h .........................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h ........
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ......
<65,000 Btu/h .........................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h ........
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ......
<65,000 Btu/h .........................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h ........
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ......
<65,000 Btu/h .........................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h ........
installations by pumps and heat rejection
component (e.g., cooling tower or dry cooler) fans.
See section III.C of this final rule for further
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
2.16
2.04
1.89
3 2.09
3 1.99
1.81
2.43
2.32
2.20
2.35
2.24
Horizontal
flow
2.65
2.55
2.47
2.65
2.55
2.47
2.79
2.68
2.60
2.71
2.60
discussion of the evaluation of differences between
SCOP and NSenCOP.
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
36394
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE I–1—AMENDED ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS FOR FLOOR-MOUNTED CRACS—Continued
Minimum NSenCOP
efficiency
Net sensible cooling capacity 1
Equipment type
Upflow
ducted
Downflow
Glycol-Cooled ..........
Glycol-Cooled with
Fluid Economizer.
Minimum NSenCOP
efficiency
Net sensible cooling capacity
≥295,000 Btu/h and <930,000 Btu/h ......
<80,000 Btu/h .........................................
≥80,000 Btu/h and <295,000 Btu/h ........
≥295,000 Btu/h and <930,000 Btu/h ......
<80,000 Btu/h .........................................
≥80,000 Btu/h and <295,000 Btu/h ........
≥295,000 Btu/h and <930,000 Btu/h ......
2.61
2.56
2.24
2.21
2.51
2.19
2.15
2.58
2.53
2.21
2.18
2.48
2.16
2.12
Upflow
non-ducted
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ......
<65,000 Btu/h .........................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h ........
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ......
<65,000 Btu/h .........................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h ........
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ......
Horizontal
flow
2.12
2.08
1.90
1.81
2.00
1.82
1.73
2.54
2.48
2.18
2.18
2.44
2.10
2.10
1 For downflow and upflow-ducted CRACs, the NSCC measured per AHRI 1360–2017 and the latest update to the standard, AHRI 1360–2022, is higher than the
NSCC measured per the current Federal test procedure (which references ANSI/ASHRAE 127–2007). Therefore, to ensure equipment currently covered by Federal
standards is not removed from coverage, DOE translated the currently applicable upper capacity limit for these classes (760,000 Btu/h) to NSCC as measured per
AHRI 1360–2017 and AHRI 1360–2022, resulting in a crosswalked upper capacity boundary of 930,000 Btu/h. Consequently, DOE has used 930,000 Btu/h as the
translated upper capacity limit for downflow and upflow-ducted CRACs in the analysis presented in this notice. For up-flow non-ducted CRACs, because there is no
change in return air temperature conditions between ANSI/ASHRAE 127–2007 and AHRI 1360–2022, the capacity boundaries in ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 remain the same as those specified in the current Federal standards, and DOE correspondingly retains the current capacity boundaries. For horizontal-flow CRACs,
DOE does not currently prescribe standards; therefore, a crosswalk of current capacity boundaries is not applicable. See section III.C.5 of this final rule for further discussion of DOE’s crosswalk analysis of capacity boundaries for CRACs.
2 Btu/h refers to ‘‘British thermal units per hour.’’
3 The amended standard for this equipment class is of equivalent stringency to the currently applicable Federal standard—the adopted level is a translation from the
current metric (SCOP) to the adopted metric (NSenCOP) and aligns with the corresponding level in ASHRAE Standard 90.1.
TABLE I–2—AMENDED ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS FOR CEILING-MOUNTED CRACS
Equipment type
Minimum NSenCOP
efficiency
Net sensible cooling capacity
Ducted
Air-Cooled with Free Air Discharge Condenser ...........
Air-Cooled with Free Air Discharge Condenser and
Fluid Economizer.
Air-Cooled with Ducted Condenser ..............................
Air-Cooled with Ducted Condenser and Fluid Economizer.
Water-Cooled ................................................................
Water-Cooled with Fluid Economizer ...........................
Glycol-Cooled ...............................................................
Glycol-Cooled with Fluid Economizer ..........................
II. Introduction
The following section briefly
discusses the statutory authority
underlying this final rule, as well as
some of the relevant historical
background related to the establishment
of standards for CRACs.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
A. Authority
EPCA, Public Law 94–163 (42 U.S.C.
6291–6317, as codified), among other
things, authorizes DOE to regulate the
energy efficiency of a number of
consumer products and certain
industrial equipment. Title III, Part C of
EPCA, added by Public Law 95–619,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jun 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
<29,000 Btu/h ...............................................................
≥29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h ................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............................
<29,000 Btu/h ...............................................................
≥29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h ................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............................
<29,000 Btu/h ...............................................................
≥29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h ................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............................
<29,000 Btu/h ...............................................................
≥29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h ................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............................
<29,000 Btu/h ...............................................................
≥29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h ................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............................
<29,000 Btu/h ...............................................................
≥29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h ................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............................
<29,000 Btu/h ...............................................................
≥29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h ................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............................
<29,000 Btu/h ...............................................................
≥29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h ................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............................
Title IV, section 441(a), (42 U.S.C. 6311–
6317, as codified), established the
Energy Conservation Program for
Certain Industrial Equipment, which
sets forth a variety of provisions
designed to improve energy efficiency.
This equipment includes small, large,
and very large commercial package air
conditioning and heating equipment,
which includes CRACs, the subject of
this rulemaking. (42 U.S.C.
6311(1)(B)–(D)) Pursuant to EPCA, DOE
is required to consider amending the
energy conservation standards for
certain types of commercial and
industrial equipment, including the
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
2.05
2.02
1.92
2.01
1.97
1.87
1.86
1.83
1.73
1.82
1.78
1.68
2.38
2.28
2.18
2.33
2.23
2.13
1.97
1.93
1.78
1.92
1.88
1.73
Non-ducted
2.08
2.05
1.94
2.04
2.00
1.89
1.89
1.86
1.75
1.85
1.81
1.70
2.41
2.31
2.20
2.36
2.26
2.16
2.00
1.98
1.81
1.95
1.93
1.76
equipment at issue in this document,
whenever ASHRAE amends the
standard levels or design requirements
prescribed in ASHRAE/IES Standard
90.1, and under a separate statutory
provision, DOE must consider
amendments to the standards for such
equipment, at a minimum, every six
years, regardless of ASHRAE action. (42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)–(C))
Under EPCA, the energy conservation
program consists essentially of four
parts: (1) testing, (2) labeling, (3) the
establishment of Federal energy
conservation standards, and (4)
certification and enforcement
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
procedures. Relevant provisions of
EPCA specifically include definitions
(42 U.S.C. 6311), energy conservation
standards (42 U.S.C. 6313), test
procedures (42 U.S.C. 6314), labeling
provisions (42 U.S.C. 6315), and the
authority to require information and
reports from manufacturers (42 U.S.C.
6316).
Federal energy efficiency
requirements for covered equipment
established under EPCA generally
supersede State laws and regulations
concerning energy conservation testing,
labeling, and standards. (42 U.S.C.
6316(a) and 42 U.S.C. 6316(b); 42 U.S.C.
6297) DOE may, however, grant waivers
of Federal preemption in limited
circumstances for particular State laws
or regulations, in accordance with the
procedures and other provisions set
forth under EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6297(d);
42 U.S.C. 6316(a); 42 U.S.C.
6316(b)(2)(D))
Subject to certain criteria and
conditions, DOE is required to develop
test procedures to measure the energy
efficiency, energy use, or estimated
annual operating cost of each covered
equipment during a representative
average use cycle and that are not
unduly burdensome to conduct. (42
U.S.C. 6314(a)(2)) Manufacturers of
covered equipment must use the Federal
test procedures as the basis for: (1)
certifying to DOE that their equipment
complies with the applicable energy
conservation standards adopted
pursuant to EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6316(b); 42
U.S.C. 6296), and (2) making
representations about the energy use or
efficiency of that equipment (42 U.S.C.
6314(d)). Similarly, DOE uses these test
procedures to determine whether the
equipment complies with relevant
standards promulgated under EPCA.
The DOE test procedures for CRACs
appear at 10 CFR part 431, subpart F.
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 sets industry
energy efficiency levels for small, large,
and very large commercial package airconditioning and heating equipment,
packaged terminal air conditioners,
packaged terminal heat pumps, warm
air furnaces, packaged boilers, storage
water heaters, instantaneous water
heaters, and unfired hot water storage
tanks (collectively referred to as
‘‘ASHRAE equipment’’). For each type
of listed equipment, EPCA directs that
if ASHRAE amends ASHRAE Standard
90.1 with respect to the standard levels
or design requirements applicable under
that standard, DOE must adopt amended
standards at the new ASHRAE
efficiency level, unless DOE determines,
supported by clear and convincing
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jun 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
evidence,4 that adoption of a morestringent level would produce
significant additional conservation of
energy and would be technologically
feasible and economically justified. (42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)) If DOE makes
such a determination, it must publish a
final rule to establish the more-stringent
standards. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(i))
Although EPCA does not explicitly
define the term ‘‘amended’’ in the
context of what type of revision to
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 would trigger
DOE’s obligation, DOE’s longstanding
interpretation has been that the
statutory trigger is an amendment to the
standard applicable to that equipment
under ASHRAE Standard 90.1 that
increases the energy efficiency level for
that equipment. See 72 FR 10038, 10042
(March 7, 2007). If the revised ASHRAE
Standard 90.1 leaves the energy
efficiency level unchanged (or lowers
the energy efficiency level) as compared
to the energy efficiency level specified
by the uniform national standard
adopted pursuant to EPCA, regardless of
the other amendments made to the
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 requirement
(e.g., the inclusion of an additional
metric), DOE has stated that it does not
have authority to conduct a rulemaking
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A) to
consider a higher standard for that
equipment, although this does not limit
DOE’s authority to consider higher
standards as part of a six-year-lookback
rulemaking analysis (pursuant to 42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C); see discussion in
the following paragraphs). See 74 FR
36312, 36313 (July 22, 2009) and 77 FR
28928, 28937 (May 16, 2012). If an
amendment to ASHRAE Standard 90.1
changes the metric for the standard on
which the Federal requirement was
based, DOE performs a crosswalk
analysis to determine whether the
amended metric under ASHRAE
Standard 90.1 results in an energy
efficiency level more stringent than the
current DOE standard.
Under EPCA, DOE must also review
its energy conservation standards for
CRACs every six years and either: (1)
issue a notice of determination that the
standards do not need to be amended,
as adoption of a more stringent level is
not supported by clear and convincing
4 The clear and convincing threshold is a
heightened standard, and would only be met where
the Secretary has an abiding conviction, based on
available facts, data, and DOE’s own analyses, that
it is highly probable an amended standard would
result in a significant additional amount of energy
savings, and is technologically feasible and
economically justified. American Public Gas
Association v. U.S. Dep’t of Energy, No. 20–1068,
2022 WL 151923, at *4 (D.C. Cir. January 18, 2022)
(citing Colorado v. New Mexico, 467 U.S. 310, 316,
104 S.Ct. 2433, 81 L.Ed.2d 247 (1984)).
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
36395
evidence; or (2) issue a notice of
proposed rulemaking including new
proposed standards based on certain
criteria and procedures in subparagraph
(B).5 (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C))
In deciding whether a more-stringent
standard is economically justified,
under either the provisions of 42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(A) or 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C),
DOE must determine whether the
benefits of the standard exceed its
burdens. DOE must make this
determination after receiving comments
on the proposed standard, and by
considering, to the maximum extent
practicable, the following seven factors:
(1) The economic impact of the
standard on manufacturers and
consumers of products subject to the
standard;
(2) The savings in operating costs
throughout the estimated average life of
the covered equipment in the type (or
class) compared to any increase in the
price, initial charges, or maintenance
expenses for the covered equipment that
are likely to result from the standard;
(3) The total projected amount of
energy savings likely to result directly
from the standard;
(4) Any lessening of the utility or the
performance of the covered equipment
likely to result from the standard;
(5) The impact of any lessening of
competition, as determined in writing
by the Attorney General, that is likely to
result from the standard;
(6) The need for national energy
conservation; and
(7) Other factors the Secretary of
Energy considers relevant.
(42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(ii)(I)–(VII))
Further, EPCA establishes a rebuttable
presumption that an energy
conservation standard is economically
justified if the Secretary finds that the
additional cost to the consumer of
purchasing a product that complies with
the standard will be less than three
times the value of the energy (and, as
applicable, water) savings during the
first year that the consumer will receive
as a result of the standard, as calculated
under the applicable test procedure. (42
5 In relevant part, subparagraph (B) specifies that:
(1) in making a determination of economic
justification, DOE must consider, to the maximum
extent practicable, the benefits and burdens of an
amended standard based on the seven criteria
described in EPCA; (2) DOE may not prescribe any
standard that increases the energy use or decreases
the energy efficiency of covered equipment; and (3)
DOE may not prescribe any standard that interested
persons have established by a preponderance of
evidence is likely to result in the unavailability in
the United States of any product type (or class) of
performance characteristics (including reliability,
features, sizes, capacities, and volumes) that are
substantially the same as those generally available
in the United States. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(ii)–
(iii))
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
36396
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(iii)) However,
while this rebuttable presumption
analysis applies to most commercial and
industrial equipment (42 U.S.C.
6316(a)), it is not a required analysis for
ASHRAE equipment (42 U.S.C.
6316(b)(1)).
EPCA, as codified, also contains what
is known as an ‘‘anti-backsliding’’
provision, which prevents the Secretary
from prescribing any amended standard
that either increases the maximum
allowable energy use or decreases the
minimum required energy efficiency of
a covered product. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(B)(iii)(I)) Also, the Secretary
may not prescribe an amended or new
standard if interested persons have
established by a preponderance of the
evidence that the standard is likely to
result in the unavailability in the United
States in any covered equipment type
(or class) of performance characteristics
(including reliability), features, sizes,
capacities, and volumes that are
substantially the same as those generally
available in the United States. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(B)(iii)(II)(aa))
B. Background
1. Current Standards
EPCA defines ‘‘commercial package
air conditioning and heating
equipment’’ as air-cooled, water-cooled,
evaporatively-cooled, or water-source
(not including ground-water-source)
electrically operated, unitary central air
conditioners and central air
conditioning heat pumps for
commercial application. (42 U.S.C.
6311(8)(A); 10 CFR 431.92) EPCA
further classifies ‘‘commercial package
air conditioning and heating
equipment’’ into categories based on
cooling capacity (i.e., small, large, and
very large categories). (42 U.S.C.
6311(8)(B)–(D); 10 CFR 431.92) ‘‘Small
commercial package air conditioning
and heating equipment’’ means
equipment rated below 135,000 Btu/h
(cooling capacity). (42 U.S.C. 6311(8)(B);
10 CFR 431.92) ‘‘Large commercial
package air conditioning and heating
equipment’’ means equipment rated: (i)
At or above 135,000 Btu/h; and (ii)
below 240,000 Btu/h (cooling capacity).
(42 U.S.C. 6311(8)(C); 10 CFR 431.92)
‘‘Very large commercial package air
conditioning and heating equipment’’
means equipment rated: (i) At or above
240,000 Btu/h; and (ii) below 760,000
Btu/h (cooling capacity). (42 U.S.C.
6311(8)(D); 10 CFR 431.92)
Pursuant to its authority under EPCA
(42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)) and in
response to updates to ASHRAE
Standard 90.1, DOE has established the
category of CRAC, which meets the
EPCA definition of ‘‘commercial
package air conditioning and heating
equipment,’’ but which EPCA did not
expressly identify. See 10 CFR 431.92
and 10 CFR 431.97. Within this
equipment category, further distinctions
are made at the equipment class level
based on capacity and other equipment
attributes.
DOE has recently amended the
definition of CRAC in a test procedure
final rule issued in March 2023 (March
2023 TP final rule). See EERE–2021–
BT–TP–0017. Specifically, DOE has
revised the definition to include how
the manufacturer markets a model for
use, consistent with the definition in the
industry standard, AHRI 1360–2022,
which also defines CRACs based on
marketing. Id. The amended definition
notes that CRACs include, but are not
limited to, the following configurations
as defined in 10 CFR 431.92: downflow, horizontal-flow, up-flow ducted,
up-flow non-ducted, ceiling-mounted
ducted, ceiling mounted non-ducted,
roof-mounted, and wall-mounted. Id.
In a final rule published in the
Federal Register on May 16, 2012 (May
2012 final rule), DOE established energy
conservation standards for CRACs.
Compliance with standards was
required for units manufactured: (1) on
and after October 29, 2012, for
equipment classes with NSCC less than
65,000 Btu/h and (2) on or after October
29, 2013, for equipment classes with
NSCC greater than or equal to 65,000
Btu/h and less than 760,000 Btu/h. 77
FR 28929, 28995. These standards are
set forth in DOE’s regulations at 10 CFR
431.97 and are repeated in Table II–1.
TABLE II–1—CURRENT FEDERAL ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS
Minimum SCOP efficiency
Equipment type
Net sensible cooling capacity
Downflow
Air-Cooled .....................................................................
Water-Cooled ................................................................
Water-Cooled with a Fluid Economizer ........................
Glycol-Cooled ...............................................................
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
Glycol-Cooled with a Fluid Economizer .......................
DOE’s current equipment classes for
CRACs are differentiated by condenser
heat rejection medium (air-cooled,
water-cooled, water-cooled with fluid
economizer, glycol-cooled, or glycolcooled with fluid economizer), NSCC
(less than 65,000 Btu/h, greater than or
equal to 65,000 Btu/h and less than
240,000 Btu/h, or greater than or equal
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jun 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
<65,000 Btu/h ...............................................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h ..............................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ............................
<65,000 Btu/h ...............................................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h ..............................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ............................
<65,000 Btu/h ...............................................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h ..............................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ............................
<65,000 Btu/h ...............................................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h ..............................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ............................
<65,000 Btu/h ...............................................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h ..............................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ............................
to 240,000 Btu/h and less than 760,000
Btu/h), and direction of conditioned air
over the cooling coil (upflow or
downflow). 10 CFR 431.97.
As noted previously, DOE’s test
procedure for CRACs was last amended
in the March 2023 TP final rule, and is
set forth at appendix E1 to Subpart F of
10 CFR part 431. See EERE–2021–BT–
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
2.20
2.10
1.90
2.60
2.50
2.40
2.55
2.45
2.35
2.50
2.15
2.10
2.45
2.10
2.05
Upflow
2.09
1.99
1.79
2.49
2.39
2.29
2.44
2.34
2.24
2.39
2.04
1.99
2.34
1.99
1.94
TP–0017. The amended test procedure
incorporates by reference AHRI
Standard 1360–2022, ‘‘Performance
Rating of Computer and Data Processing
Room Air Conditioners’’ (AHRI 1360–
2022) and uses the energy efficiency
metric, NSenCOP, for all CRAC
equipment classes. Id. Testing in
accordance with the amended test
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
disaggregated the upflow CRAC
equipment classes into upflow ducted
and upflow non-ducted equipment
classes, and established different sets of
efficiency levels for upflow ducted and
upflow non-ducted equipment classes
based on the corresponding rating
conditions specified in AHRI 1360–
2016.
DOE published a notice of data
availability and request for information
(NODA/RFI) in response to the
amendments to the industry consensus
standard contained in ASHRAE
2. History of Standards Rulemaking for
Standard 90.1–2016 in the Federal
CRACs
Register on September 11, 2019
As discussed, the energy conservation (September 2019 NODA/RFI). 84 FR
standards for CRACs were most recently 48006. In the September 2019 NODA/
amended in the May 2012 final rule. 77
RFI, DOE explained its methodology
FR 28928 (May 16, 2012). The May 2012 and assumptions to compare the current
final rule established equipment classes Federal standards for CRACs (in terms
for CRACs and adopted energy
of SCOP as measured per ANSI/
conservation standards that correspond
ASHRAE 127–2007) to the levels in
to the levels in the 2010 revision of
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2016 (in terms
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 (ASHRAE
of NSenCOP and measured per AHRI
Standard 90.1–2010).
1360–2016) and requested comment on
ASHRAE released the 2016 version of its methodology and results. 84 FR
48006, 48014–48019 (Sept. 11, 2019).
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 (ASHRAE
On October 24, 2019, ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2016) on October 26,
officially released for distribution and
2016, which updated its test procedure
made public ASHRAE Standard 90.1–
reference for CRACs from ANSI/
2019. ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019
ASHRAE 127–2007 to AHRI Standard
updated its test procedure reference for
1360–2016, ‘‘Performance Rating of
CRACs from AHRI 1360–2016 to AHRI
Computer and Data Processing Room
1360–2017, which also references ANSI/
Air Conditioners’’ (AHRI 1360–2016),
which in turn references ANSI/ASHRAE ASHRAE 127–2012. ASHRAE Standard
127–2012, ‘‘Method of Testing for Rating 90.1–2019 maintained the equipment
class structure for floor-mounted CRACs
Computer and Data Processing Room
as established in ASHRAE Standard
Unitary Air Conditioners’’ (ANSI/
90.1–2016 and updated the efficiency
ASHRAE 127–2012). The energy
levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2016
efficiency metric for CRACs in AHRI
for all but three of those equipment
1360–2016 is NSenCOP. ASHRAE
classes. ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019
Standard 90.1–2016 established new
equipment classes and added efficiency also added classes for air-cooled CRACs
with fluid economizers and a new table
levels for horizontal-flow CRACs,
procedure is not required until such
time as compliance is required with
amended energy conservation standards
for CRACs that rely on NSenCOP. Id. In
parallel, DOE also established appendix
E, which continues to reference ANSI/
ASHRAE 127–2007 and provide
instructions for determining SCOP. Id.
CRACs are required to be tested
according to appendix E until such time
as compliance is required with amended
energy conservation standards that rely
on the NSenCOP metric. Id.
36397
with new efficiency levels for ceilingmounted CRAC equipment classes. The
equipment in the horizontal-flow and
ceiling-mounted classes is currently not
subject to Federal standards set forth in
10 CFR 431.97.6 In contrast, upflow and
downflow air-cooled CRACs with fluid
economizers are currently subject to the
Federal standards in 10 CFR 431.97 for
air-cooled equipment classes.
DOE also published a NODA/RFI in
response to the amendments in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 and the
comments received in response to the
September 2019 NODA/RFI, in the
Federal Register on September 25, 2020
(September 2020 NODA/RFI). 85 FR
60642. In the September 2020 NODA/
RFI, DOE conducted a crosswalk
analysis (similar to the September 2019
NODA/RFI) to compare the current
Federal standards for CRACs (in terms
of SCOP as measured per ANSI/
ASHRAE 127–2007) to the levels in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 (in terms
of NSenCOP as measured per AHRI
1360–2017) and requested comment on
its methodology and results. 85 FR
60642, 60653–60660 (Sept. 25, 2020).
Subsequently, on March 7, 2022, DOE
published in the Federal Register a
NOPR proposing amended CRAC
standards in alignment with ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2019 (March 2022 ECS
NOPR). 87 FR 12802. In the March 2022
ECS NOPR, DOE outlined the plan to
crosswalk the existing CRAC energy
conservation standards (denominated in
terms of SCOP) to the standards in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019
(denominated in terms of NSenCOP)
and requested comment. DOE received
comments in response to the March
2022 ECS NOPR from the interested
parties listed in Table II–2.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
TABLE II–2—MARCH 2022 ECS NOPR WRITTEN COMMENTS
Commenter(s)
Abbreviation
Air-Conditioning, Heating & Refrigeration Institute ...................
New York State Energy Research and Development Authority
Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San Diego Gas & Electric,
Southern California Edison (collectively referred to as the
California Investor-owned Utilities or CA IOUs).
AHRI .......................................
NYSERDA 7 ............................
CA IOUs ..................................
Comment
number in the
docket
0012
0014
0013
Commenter type
Industry Trade Association.
State Agency.
Utilities.
A parenthetical reference at the end of
a comment quotation or paraphrase
provides the location of the item in the
public record.8 To the extent that
interested parties have provided written
comments that are substantively
consistent with any oral comments
provided during the April 13, 2022,
public meeting webinar for the CRACs
ECS NOPR, DOE cites the written
comments throughout this final rule. In
this case, there were no relevant
6 DOE issued a draft guidance document on
October 7, 2015, to clarify that horizontal-flow and
ceiling-mounted CRACs are covered equipment and
are required to be tested under the current DOE test
procedure for purposes of making representations of
energy consumption. (Docket No. EERE–2014–BT–
GUID–0022, No. 3, pp. 1–2)
7 NYSERDA’s comment was received three days
after the comment deadline.
8 The parenthetical reference provides a reference
for information located in the docket of DOE’s
rulemaking to develop energy conservation
standards for CRACs. (Docket No. EERE–2020–BT–
STD–0008, which is maintained at
www.regulations.gov). The references are arranged
as follows: (commenter name, comment docket ID
number, page of that document).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jun 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
36398
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
webinar comments that were not
reflected in written comments.
Additionally, on February 7, 2022,
DOE published in the Federal Register
a test procedure NOPR (February 2022
TP NOPR), in which DOE proposed an
amended test procedure for CRACs that
would incorporate by reference the
substance of a draft version of AHRI
1360 standard, AHRI Standard 1360–
202X, Performance Rating of Computer
and Data Processing Room Air
Conditioners (AHRI 1360–202X Draft)
and adopts NSenCOP as the test metric
for CRACs. 87 FR 6948. At the time of
the publication of the February 2022 TP
NOPR, AHRI Standard 1360–202X Draft
was in draft form, and its text was
provided to the Department for the
purposes of review. As stated in the
February 2022 TP NOPR, DOE intended
to update the reference to the final
published version of AHRI 1360–202X
Draft. 87 FR 6948, 6951 (Feb. 7, 2022).
In November 2022, AHRI finalized
AHRI 1360–202X Draft by publishing
AHRI 1360–2022. AHRI 1360–2022 did
not include any substantial changes
from the AHRI–1360–202X Draft that
was referenced in the February 2022 TP
NOPR.
Subsequently, in March 2023, DOE
issued the March 2023 TP final rule
updating the reference to AHRI 1360–
2022. See EERE–2021–BT–TP–0017.
III. General Discussion
DOE developed this final rule after
considering oral and written comments,
data, and information from interested
parties that represent a variety of
interests. The following discussion
addresses issues raised by these
commenters.
This final rule covers commercial
equipment that meet the definition of
CRACs, as codified at 10 CFR 431.92.
A. Background
As mentioned, DOE presented an
efficiency crosswalk analysis in the
September 2020 NODA/RFI to compare
the stringency of the current Federal
standards (represented in terms of SCOP
based on the current DOE test
procedure) for CRACs to the stringency
of the efficiency levels for this
equipment in ASHRAE Standard 90.1–
2019 (represented in terms of NSenCOP
and based on AHRI 1360–2017). 85 FR
60642, 60648 (Sept. 25, 2020). In the
February 2022 TP NOPR, DOE proposed
to incorporate by reference the then
latest draft version of AHRI Standard
1360, AHRI 1360–202X Draft, and to
adopt NSenCOP as the test metric in the
DOE test procedure for CRACs. 87 FR
6948 (Feb. 7, 2022). In the March 2022
ECS NOPR, DOE noted that because the
rating conditions specified in AHRI
1360–2017 and AHRI 1360–202X Draft
are the same for the classes covered by
DOE’s crosswalk analysis (upflow
ducted, upflow non-ducted, and
downflow), the same crosswalk as
described in the September 2020
NODA/RFI can be used to compare
DOE’s current SCOP-based CRAC
standards to relevant NSenCOP values
determined according to AHRI 1360–
202X Draft. 87 FR 12802, 12808 (March
7, 2022).
In November 2022, AHRI finalized
AHRI 1360–202X Draft and published
AHRI 1360–2022. Subsequently, in the
March 2023 TP final rule, DOE adopted
AHRI 1360–2022. See EERE–2021–BT–
TP–0017. The rating conditions
specified in AHRI 1360–2022 and AHRI
1360–202X Draft are unchanged for the
classes covered by DOE’s crosswalk
analysis, so accordingly, DOE has
concluded that the crosswalk as
described in the September 2020
NODA/RFI can be used to compare
DOE’s current SCOP-based CRAC
standards to relevant NSenCOP values
determined according to AHRI 1360–
2022.
In the September 2020 NODA/RFI,
DOE’s analysis focused on whether DOE
had been triggered by ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2019 updates to
minimum efficiency levels for CRACs
and whether more-stringent standards
were warranted. As discussed in detail
in section III.C of this final rule, DOE
conducted a crosswalk analysis of the
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 standard
levels (in terms of NSenCOP) and the
corresponding current Federal energy
conservation standards (in terms of
SCOP) to compare the stringencies. DOE
has determined that the updates in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 increased
the stringency of efficiency levels for 48
equipment classes and maintained
equivalent levels for 6 equipment
classes of CRACs relative to the current
Federal standard. In addition, ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2019 includes efficiency
levels for 18 classes of horizontal-flow
CRACs and 48 classes of ceilingmounted CRACs which are not
currently subject to Federal standards
and, therefore, require no crosswalk. As
discussed in section V of this document,
DOE is adopting standards for
horizontal-flow CRACs and ceilingmounted CRACs.
Table III–1 shows the equipment
classes and efficiency levels for CRACs
provided in ASHRAE Standard 90.1–
2019 alongside the current Federal
energy conservation standards. Table
III–1 also displays the corresponding
existing Federal equipment classes for
clarity and indicates whether the
updated levels in ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2019 trigger DOE’s evaluation
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A) (i.e.,
whether the update results in a standard
level more stringent than the current
Federal level).
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
TABLE III–1—ENERGY EFFICIENCY LEVELS FOR CRACS IN ASHRAE STANDARD 90.1–2019 AND THE CORRESPONDING
FEDERAL ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS
ASHRAE standard 90.1–2019
equipment class 1
Current federal equipment class 1
Energy efficiency
levels in ASHRAE
standard
90.1–2019 2
Federal energy
conservation
standards 2
Air-Cooled, <80,000 Btu/h, Downflow
Air-Cooled, <65,000 Btu/h, Horizontalflow.
Air-Cooled, <80,000 Btu/h, Upflow
Ducted.
Air-Cooled, <65,000 Btu/h, Upflow
Non-Ducted.
Air-Cooled, ≥80,000 and <295,000
Btu/h, Downflow.
Air-Cooled, ≥65,000 and <240,000
Btu/h, Horizontal-flow.
Air-Cooled, ≥80,000 and <295,000
Btu/h, Upflow Ducted.
Air-Cooled, <65,000 Btu/h, Downflow
N/A ......................................................
2.70 NSenCOP ....
2.65 NSenCOP ....
2.20 SCOP ...........
N/A .......................
Yes
Yes 3
Air-Cooled, <65,000 Btu/h, Upflow .....
2.67 NSenCOP ....
2.09 SCOP ...........
Yes
Air-Cooled, <65,000 Btu/h, Upflow .....
2.16 NSenCOP ....
2.09 SCOP ...........
Yes
Air-Cooled, ≥65,000 and <240,000
Btu/h, Downflow.
N/A ......................................................
2.58 NSenCOP ....
2.10 SCOP ...........
Yes
2.55 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 3
Air-Cooled, ≥65,000 and <240,000
Btu/h, Upflow.
2.55 NSenCOP ....
1.99 SCOP ...........
No 4
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jun 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
DOE triggered by
ASHRAE standard
90.1–2019
amendment?
36399
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
TABLE III–1—ENERGY EFFICIENCY LEVELS FOR CRACS IN ASHRAE STANDARD 90.1–2019 AND THE CORRESPONDING
FEDERAL ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS—Continued
Federal energy
conservation
standards 2
Air-Cooled, ≥65,000 and <240,000
Btu/h, Upflow.
Air-Cooled, ≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h, Downflow.
N/A ......................................................
2.04 NSenCOP ....
1.99 SCOP ...........
Yes
2.36 NSenCOP ....
1.90 SCOP ...........
Yes
2.47 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 3
Air-Cooled, ≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h, Upflow.
Air-Cooled, ≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h, Upflow.
Air-Cooled, <65,000 Btu/h, Downflow
2.33 NSenCOP ....
1.79 SCOP ...........
Yes
1.89 NSenCOP ....
1.79 SCOP ...........
Yes
2.70 NSenCOP ....
2.20 SCOP ...........
Yes 5
N/A ......................................................
2.65 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 3
Air-Cooled, <65,000 Btu/h, Upflow .....
2.67 NSenCOP ....
2.09 SCOP ...........
Yes 5
Air-Cooled, <65,000 Btu/h, Upflow .....
2.09 NSenCOP ....
2.09 SCOP ...........
No 4
Air-Cooled, ≥65,000 and <240,000
Btu/h, Downflow.
2.58 NSenCOP ....
2.10 SCOP ...........
Yes 5
N/A ......................................................
2.55 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 3
Air-Cooled, ≥65,000 and <240,000
Btu/h, Upflow.
2.55 NSenCOP ....
1.99 SCOP ...........
No 4
Air-Cooled, ≥65,000 and <240,000
Btu/h, Upflow.
1.99 NSenCOP ....
1.99 SCOP ...........
No 4
Air-Cooled, ≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h, Downflow.
N/A ......................................................
2.36 NSenCOP ....
1.90 SCOP ...........
Yes 5
2.47 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 3
Air-Cooled, ≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h, Upflow.
Air-Cooled, ≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h, Upflow.
Water-Cooled, <65,000 Btu/h,
Downflow.
N/A ......................................................
2.33 NSenCOP ....
1.79 SCOP ...........
Yes 5
1.81 NSenCOP ....
1.79 SCOP ...........
Yes 5
2.82 NSenCOP ....
2.60 SCOP ...........
Yes
2.79 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 3
Water-Cooled, <65,000 Btu/h, Upflow
2.79 NSenCOP ....
2.49 SCOP ...........
Yes
Water-Cooled, <65,000 Btu/h, Upflow
2.43 NSenCOP ....
2.49 SCOP ...........
Yes
Water-Cooled, ≥65,000 and <240,000
Btu/h, Downflow.
N/A ......................................................
2.73 NSenCOP ....
2.50 SCOP ...........
Yes
2.68 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 3
Water-Cooled, ≥65,000 and <240,000
Btu/h, Upflow.
Water-Cooled, ≥65,000 and <240,000
Btu/h, Upflow.
Water-Cooled, ≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h, Downflow.
N/A ......................................................
2.70 NSenCOP ....
2.39 SCOP ...........
No 4
2.32 NSenCOP ....
2.39 SCOP ...........
Yes
2.67 NSenCOP ....
2.40 SCOP ...........
Yes
2.60 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 3
Water-Cooled, ≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h, Upflow.
Water-Cooled, ≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h, Upflow.
Water-Cooled with fluid economizer,
<65,000 Btu/h, Downflow.
N/A ......................................................
2.64 NSenCOP ....
2.29 SCOP ...........
Yes
2.20 NSenCOP ....
2.29 SCOP ...........
Yes
2.77 NSenCOP ....
2.55 SCOP ...........
Yes
2.71 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 3
Water-Cooled with fluid economizer,
<65,000 Btu/h, Upflow.
2.74 NSenCOP ....
2.44 SCOP ...........
Yes
Current federal equipment class 1
Air-Cooled, ≥65,000 and <240,000
Btu/h, Upflow Non-Ducted.
Air-Cooled, ≥295,000 Btu/h, Downflow
Air-Cooled, ≥240,000 Btu/h, Horizontal-flow.
Air-Cooled, ≥295,000 Btu/h, Upflow
Ducted.
Air-Cooled, ≥240,000 Btu/h, Upflow
Non-ducted.
Air-Cooled with fluid economizer,
<80,000 Btu/h, Downflow.
Air-Cooled with fluid economizer,
<65,000 Btu/h, Horizontal-flow.
Air-Cooled with fluid economizer,
<80,000 Btu/h, Upflow Ducted.
Air-Cooled with fluid economizer,
<65,000 Btu/h, Upflow Non-Ducted.
Air-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥80,000 and <295,000 Btu/h,
Downflow.
Air-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥65,000 and <240,000 Btu/h, Horizontal-flow.
Air-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥80,000 and <295,000 Btu/h,
Upflow Ducted.
Air-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥65,000 and <240,000 Btu/h,
Upflow Non-Ducted.
Air-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥295,000 Btu/h, Downflow.
Air-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥240,000 Btu/h, Horizontal-flow.
Air-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥295,000 Btu/h, Upflow Ducted.
Air-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥240,000 Btu/h, Upflow Non-ducted.
Water-Cooled, <80,000 Btu/h,
Downflow.
Water-Cooled, <65,000 Btu/h, Horizontal-flow.
Water-Cooled, <80,000 Btu/h, Upflow
Ducted.
Water-Cooled, <65,000 Btu/h, Upflow
Non-ducted.
Water-Cooled, ≥80,000 and <295,000
Btu/h, Downflow.
Water-Cooled, ≥65,000 and <240,000
Btu/h, Horizontal-flow.
Water-Cooled, ≥80,000 and <295,000
Btu/h, Upflow Ducted.
Water-Cooled, ≥65,000 and <240,000
Btu/h, Upflow Non-ducted.
Water-Cooled, ≥295,000 Btu/h,
Downflow.
Water-Cooled, ≥240,000 Btu/h, Horizontal-flow.
Water-Cooled, ≥295,000 Btu/h, Upflow
Ducted.
Water-Cooled, ≥240,000 Btu/h, Upflow
Non-ducted.
Water-Cooled with fluid economizer,
<80,000 Btu/h, Downflow.
Water-Cooled with fluid economizer,
<65,000 Btu/h, Horizontal-flow.
Water-Cooled with fluid economizer,
<80,000 Btu/h, Upflow Ducted.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jun 01, 2023
DOE triggered by
ASHRAE standard
90.1–2019
amendment?
Energy efficiency
levels in ASHRAE
standard
90.1–2019 2
ASHRAE standard 90.1–2019
equipment class 1
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
36400
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE III–1—ENERGY EFFICIENCY LEVELS FOR CRACS IN ASHRAE STANDARD 90.1–2019 AND THE CORRESPONDING
FEDERAL ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS—Continued
Water-Cooled with fluid economizer,
<65,000 Btu/h, Upflow Non-ducted.
Water-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥80,000 and <295,000 Btu/h,
Downflow.
Water-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥65,000 and <240,000 Btu/h, Horizontal-flow.
Water-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥80,000 and <295,000 Btu/h,
Upflow Ducted.
Water-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥65,000 and <240,000 Btu/h,
Upflow Non-ducted.
Water-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥295,000 Btu/h, Downflow.
Water-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥240,000 Btu/h, Horizontal-flow.
Water-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥295,000 Btu/h, Upflow Ducted.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
Water-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥240,000 Btu/h, Upflow Non-ducted.
Glycol-Cooled, <80,000 Btu/h,
Downflow.
Glycol-Cooled, <65,000 Btu/h, Horizontal-flow.
Glycol-Cooled, <80,000 Btu/h, Upflow
Ducted.
Glycol-Cooled, <65,000 Btu/h, Upflow
Non-ducted.
Glycol-Cooled, ≥80,000 and <295,000
Btu/h, Downflow.
Glycol-Cooled, ≥65,000 and <240,000
Btu/h, Horizontal-flow.
Glycol-Cooled, ≥80,000 and <295,000
Btu/h, Upflow Ducted.
Glycol-Cooled, ≥65,000 and <240,000
Btu/h, Upflow Non-ducted.
Glycol-Cooled, ≥295,000 Btu/h,
Downflow.
Glycol-Cooled, ≥240,000 Btu/h, Horizontal-flow.
Glycol-Cooled, ≥295,000 Btu/h, Upflow
Ducted.
Glycol-Cooled, ≥240,000 Btu/h, Upflow
Non-ducted.
Glycol-Cooled with fluid economizer,
<80,000 Btu/h, Downflow.
Glycol-Cooled with fluid economizer,
<65,000 Btu/h, Horizontal-flow.
Glycol-Cooled with fluid economizer,
<80,000 Btu/h, Upflow Ducted.
Glycol-Cooled with fluid economizer,
<65,000 Btu/h, Upflow Non-ducted.
Glycol-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥80,000 and <295,000 Btu/h,
Downflow.
Glycol-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥65,000 and <240,000 Btu/h, Horizontal-flow.
Glycol-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥80,000 and <295,000 Btu/h,
Upflow Ducted.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jun 01, 2023
DOE triggered by
ASHRAE standard
90.1–2019
amendment?
Energy efficiency
levels in ASHRAE
standard
90.1–2019 2
Federal energy
conservation
standards 2
Water-Cooled with fluid economizer,
<65,000 Btu/h, Upflow.
Water-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥65,000 and <240,000 Btu/h,
Downflow.
N/A ......................................................
2.35 NSenCOP ....
2.44 SCOP ...........
Yes
2.68 NSenCOP ....
2.45 SCOP ...........
Yes
2.60 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 3
Water-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥65,000 and <240,000 Btu/h,
Upflow.
Water-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥65,000 and <240,000 Btu/h,
Upflow.
Water-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/
h, Downflow.
N/A ......................................................
2.65 NSenCOP ....
2.34 SCOP ...........
No 4
2.24 NSenCOP ....
2.34 SCOP ...........
Yes
2.61 NSenCOP ....
2.35 SCOP ...........
Yes
2.54 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 3
Water-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/
h, Upflow.
Water-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/
h, Upflow.
Glycol-Cooled, <65,000 Btu/h,
Downflow.
N/A ......................................................
2.58 NSenCOP ....
2.24 SCOP ...........
Yes
2.12 NSenCOP ....
2.24 SCOP ...........
Yes
2.56 NSenCOP ....
2.50 SCOP ...........
Yes
2.48 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 3
Glycol-Cooled, <65,000 Btu/h, Upflow
Ducted.
Glycol-Cooled, <65,000 Btu/h, Upflow
Non-ducted.
Glycol-Cooled, ≥65,000 and <240,000
Btu/h, Downflow.
N/A ......................................................
2.53 NSenCOP ....
2.39 SCOP ...........
Yes
2.08 NSenCOP ....
2.39 SCOP ...........
Yes
2.24 NSenCOP ....
2.15 SCOP ...........
Yes
2.18 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 3
Glycol-Cooled, ≥65,000 and <240,000
Btu/h, Upflow.
Glycol-Cooled, ≥65,000 and <240,000
Btu/h, Upflow.
Glycol-Cooled, ≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h, Downflow.
N/A ......................................................
2.21 NSenCOP ....
2.04 SCOP ...........
Yes
1.90 NSenCOP ....
2.04 SCOP ...........
Yes
2.21 NSenCOP ....
2.10 SCOP ...........
Yes
2.18 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 3
Glycol-Cooled, ≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h, Upflow Ducted.
Glycol-Cooled, ≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h, Upflow Non-ducted.
Glycol-Cooled with fluid economizer,
<65,000 Btu/h, Downflow.
N/A ......................................................
2.18 NSenCOP ....
1.99 SCOP ...........
Yes
1.81 NSenCOP ....
1.99 SCOP ...........
Yes
2.51 NSenCOP ....
2.45 SCOP ...........
Yes
2.44 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 3
Glycol-Cooled with fluid economizer,
<65,000 Btu/h, Upflow Ducted.
Glycol-Cooled with fluid economizer,
<65,000 Btu/h, Upflow Non-ducted.
Glycol-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥65,000 and <240,000 Btu/h,
Downflow.
N/A ......................................................
2.48 NSenCOP ....
2.34 SCOP ...........
Yes
2.00 NSenCOP ....
2.34 SCOP ...........
Yes
2.19 NSenCOP ....
2.10 SCOP ...........
Yes
2.10 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 3
Glycol-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥65,000 and <240,000 Btu/h,
Upflow.
2.16 NSenCOP ....
1.99 SCOP ...........
Yes
ASHRAE standard 90.1–2019
equipment class 1
Current federal equipment class 1
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
36401
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE III–1—ENERGY EFFICIENCY LEVELS FOR CRACS IN ASHRAE STANDARD 90.1–2019 AND THE CORRESPONDING
FEDERAL ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS—Continued
Glycol-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥65,000 and <240,000 Btu/h,
Upflow Non-ducted.
Glycol-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥295,000 Btu/h, Downflow.
Glycol-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥240,000 Btu/h, Horizontal-flow.
Glycol-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥295,000 Btu/h, Upflow Ducted.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
Glycol-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥240,000 Btu/h, Upflow Non-ducted.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled with free
air discharge condenser, Ducted,
<29,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled with free
air discharge condenser, Ducted,
≥29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled with free
air discharge condenser, Ducted,
≥65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled with free
air discharge condenser, Nonducted, <29,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled with free
air discharge condenser, Nonducted, ≥29,000 Btu/h and <65,000
Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled with free
air discharge condenser, Nonducted, ≥65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled with free
air discharge condenser with fluid
economizer, Ducted, <29,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled with free
air discharge condenser with fluid
economizer, Ducted, ≥29,000 Btu/h
and <65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled with free
air discharge condenser with fluid
economizer, Ducted, ≥65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled with free
air discharge condenser with fluid
economizer, Non-ducted, <29,000
Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled with free
air discharge condenser with fluid
economizer, Non-ducted, ≥29,000
Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled with free
air discharge condenser with fluid
economizer, Non-ducted, ≥65,000
Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled with
ducted condenser, Ducted, <29,000
Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled with
ducted condenser, Ducted, ≥29,000
Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled with
ducted condenser, Ducted, ≥65,000
Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled with
ducted condenser, Non-ducted,
<29,000 Btu/h.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jun 01, 2023
DOE triggered by
ASHRAE standard
90.1–2019
amendment?
Energy efficiency
levels in ASHRAE
standard
90.1–2019 2
Federal energy
conservation
standards 2
Glycol-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥65,000 and <240,000 Btu/h,
Upflow.
Glycol-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/
h, Downflow.
N/A ......................................................
1.82 NSenCOP ....
1.99 SCOP ...........
Yes
2.15 NSenCOP ....
2.05 SCOP ...........
Yes
2.10 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 3
Glycol-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/
h, Upflow Ducted.
Glycol-Cooled with fluid economizer,
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/
h, Upflow Non-ducted.
N/A ......................................................
2.12 NSenCOP ....
1.94 SCOP ...........
Yes
1.73 NSenCOP ....
1.94 SCOP ...........
Yes
2.05 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
2.02 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
1.92 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
2.08 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
2.05 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
1.94 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
2.01 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
1.97 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
1.87 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
2.04 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
2.00 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
1.89 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
1.86 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
1.83 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
1.73 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
1.89 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
ASHRAE standard 90.1–2019
equipment class 1
Current federal equipment class 1
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
36402
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
TABLE III–1—ENERGY EFFICIENCY LEVELS FOR CRACS IN ASHRAE STANDARD 90.1–2019 AND THE CORRESPONDING
FEDERAL ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS—Continued
DOE triggered by
ASHRAE standard
90.1–2019
amendment?
ASHRAE standard 90.1–2019
equipment class 1
Current federal equipment class 1
Energy efficiency
levels in ASHRAE
standard
90.1–2019 2
Federal energy
conservation
standards 2
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled with
ducted condenser, Non-ducted,
≥29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled with
ducted condenser, Non-ducted,
≥65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled with
ducted condenser with fluid economizer, Ducted, <29,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled with
ducted condenser with fluid economizer, Ducted, ≥29,000 Btu/h and
<65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled with
ducted condenser with fluid economizer, Ducted, ≥65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled with
ducted condenser with fluid economizer, Non-ducted, <29,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled with
ducted condenser with fluid economizer, Non-ducted, ≥29,000 Btu/h
and <65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled with
ducted condenser with fluid economizer, Non-ducted, ≥65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Water-cooled,
Ducted, <29,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Water-cooled,
Ducted, ≥29,000 Btu/h and <65,000
Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Water-cooled,
Ducted, ≥65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Water-cooled, Nonducted, <29,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Water-cooled, Nonducted, ≥29,000 Btu/h and <65,000
Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Water-cooled, Nonducted, ≥65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Water-cooled with
fluid economizer, Ducted, <29,000
Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Water-cooled with
fluid economizer, Ducted, ≥29,000
Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Water-cooled with
fluid economizer, Ducted, ≥65,000
Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Water-cooled with
fluid economizer, Non-ducted,
<29,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Water-cooled with
fluid economizer, Non-ducted,
≥29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Water-cooled with
fluid economizer, Non-ducted,
≥65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Glycol-cooled,
Ducted, <29,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Glycol-cooled,
Ducted, ≥29,000 Btu/h and <65,000
Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Glycol-cooled,
Ducted, ≥65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Glycol-cooled, Nonducted, <29,000 Btu/h.
N/A ......................................................
1.86 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
1.75 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
1.82 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
1.78 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
1.68 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
1.85 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
1.81 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
1.70 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
2.38 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
2.28 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
2.18 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
2.41 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
2.31 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
2.20 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
2.33 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
2.23 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
2.13 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
2.36 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
2.26 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
2.16 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
1.97 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
1.93 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
1.78 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
2.00 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jun 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
36403
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE III–1—ENERGY EFFICIENCY LEVELS FOR CRACS IN ASHRAE STANDARD 90.1–2019 AND THE CORRESPONDING
FEDERAL ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS—Continued
DOE triggered by
ASHRAE standard
90.1–2019
amendment?
ASHRAE standard 90.1–2019
equipment class 1
Current federal equipment class 1
Energy efficiency
levels in ASHRAE
standard
90.1–2019 2
Federal energy
conservation
standards 2
Ceiling-mounted, Glycol-cooled, Nonducted, ≥29,000 Btu/h and <65,000
Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Glycol-cooled, Nonducted, ≥65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Glycol-cooled with
fluid economizer, Ducted, <29,000
Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Glycol-cooled with
fluid economizer, Ducted, ≥29,000
Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Glycol-cooled with
fluid economizer, Ducted, ≥65,000
Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Glycol-cooled with
fluid economizer, Non-ducted,
<29,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Glycol-cooled with
fluid economizer, Non-ducted,
≥29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Glycol-cooled with
fluid economizer, Non-ducted,
≥65,000 Btu/h.
N/A ......................................................
1.98 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
1.81 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
1.92 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
1.88 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
1.73 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
1.95 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
1.93 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
N/A ......................................................
1.76 NSenCOP ....
N/A .......................
Yes 6
1 Note that equipment classes specified in ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 do not necessarily correspond to the equipment classes defined in
DOE’s regulations. Capacity ranges in ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 are specified in terms of NSCC, as measured according to AHRI 1360–
2017 (which, as discussed, would produce the same results for the crosswalked classes as AHRI 1360–2022). Capacity ranges in current Federal equipment classes are specified in terms of NSCC, as measured according to ANSI/ASHRAE 127–2007. As discussed in section III.C of this
document, for certain equipment classes AHRI 1360–2017 (and AHRI 1360–2022) results in increased NSCC measurements as compared to the
NSCC measured in accordance with ANSI/ASHRAE 127–2007. Therefore, some CRACs would switch classes (i.e., move into a higher capacity
equipment class) if the equipment class boundaries are not changed accordingly. Consequently, DOE performed a ‘‘capacity crosswalk’’ analysis
to translate the capacity boundaries for certain equipment classes.
2 For CRACs, ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 adopted efficiency levels in terms of NSenCOP based on test procedures in AHRI 1360–2017,
while DOE’s current standards are in terms of SCOP based on the test procedures in ANSI/ASHRAE 127–2007. DOE performed a crosswalk
analysis to compare the stringency of the ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 efficiency levels with the current Federal standards. See section III.C of
this final rule for further discussion on the crosswalk analysis performed for CRACs.
3 Horizontal-flow CRACs are new equipment classes included in ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2016 and ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 (and not
subject to current Federal standards), but DOE does not have any data to indicate the market share of horizontal-flow units. In the absence of
data regarding market share and efficiency distribution, DOE is unable to estimate potential savings for horizontal-flow equipment classes.
4 The crosswalk analysis indicates that there is no difference in stringency of efficiency levels for this class between ASHRAE Standard 90.1–
2019 and the current Federal standard.
5 Air-cooled CRACs with fluid economizers are new equipment classes included in ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 and are currently subject to
the Federal standard for air-cooled CRACs. DOE does not have data regarding market share for air-cooled CRACs with fluid economizers. Although DOE is unable to disaggregate the estimated potential savings for these equipment classes, energy savings for these equipment classes
are included in the savings presented for air-cooled CRACs.
6 Ceiling-mounted CRACs are new equipment classes in ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 (and not subject to current Federal standards), and
DOE does not have any data to indicate the market share of ceiling-mounted units. In the absence of data regarding market share and efficiency
distribution, DOE is unable to estimate potential savings for ceiling-mounted equipment classes.
The remainder of this section explains
DOE’s methodology for evaluating the
updated levels in ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2019 and addresses comments
received regarding CRAC efficiency
levels and associated analyses discussed
in the March 2022 ECS NOPR.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
B. Test Procedure
As noted in section III.A of this
document, ASHRAE adopted efficiency
levels for all CRAC equipment classes
denominated in terms of NSenCOP in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019
(measured per AHRI 1360–2017),
whereas DOE’s current standards are
denominated in terms of SCOP
(measured per ANSI/ASHRAE 127–
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jun 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
2007). ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019
incorporates by references AHRI 1360–
2017. In the February 2022 TP NOPR,
DOE proposed to adopt an amended test
procedure for CRACs that incorporates
by reference the substance of the
updated draft version of the AHRI 1360
Standard, AHRI 1360–202X Draft. 87 FR
6948 (Feb. 7, 2022). DOE has since
adopted the finalized version of that
standard, AHRI 1360–2022, in the
March 2023 TP final rule. See EERE–
2021–BT–TP–0017. Because the rating
conditions specified in AHRI 1360–2022
and AHRI 1360–2017 are the same for
the classes for which DOE requires a
crosswalk (upflow ducted, upflow nonducted, and downflow), DOE has
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
concluded that the NSenCOP levels
specified for equipment classes in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 as
measured per AHRI 1360–2017 would
remain unchanged if measured per
AHRI 1360–2022. Therefore, in the
crosswalk analysis presented in the
following sections, DOE considers that
the ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019
NSenCOP levels are measured per AHRI
1360–2022.
On this topic, AHRI expressed
concern with DOE proposing to adopt a
test procedure, still in draft form, that is
not yet cited by ASHRAE Standard 90.1,
and the commenter urged DOE to follow
its understanding of the statutorilymandated process and to only adopt a
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
36404
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
revised industry test method after it has
been published by AHRI and adopted
into ASHRAE Standard 90.1 by the
consensus standards writing body.
(AHRI, No. 12 at pp. 1–2) In particular,
AHRI commented that manufacturers,
particularly of upflow CRACs, will
experience significant impact if the
proposed draft test procedure is adopted
by DOE, rather than AHRI 1360–2017.
More specifically, AHRI stated that as
the draft procedure includes an external
static pressure (ESP) adjustment for
upflow CRACs tested in limited height
chambers, which could result in upflow ducted products not achieving
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 efficiency
values during test, thereby substantially
impacting all upflow unit CRAC
manufacturers. Id. AHRI commented
that there is only one modification to
AHRI 1360–2017 required to support
the minimum energy levels included in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019, and that
DOE should immediately adopt that test
procedure. (AHRI, No. 12 at p. 3)
As discussed in the March 2023 TP
final rule, AHRI’s concern regarding the
draft status of AHRI 1360–202X Draft no
longer applies, given the subsequent
finalization of the draft and publication
of AHRI 1360–2022. See EERE–2021–
BT–TP–0017. DOE notes that AHRI
1360–2022 represents an industry
consensus update to AHRI 1360–2017.
Regarding AHRI’s challenge to DOE’s
authority, the Department disagrees
with AHRI’s argument that it lacks
statutory authority for the adoption of
AHRI 1360–2022, rather than AHRI
1360–2017. Although DOE’s rationale
was explained in the March 2023 TP
final rule (see EERE–2021–BT–TP–
0017), because issues related to the test
procedure and energy conservation
standards for CRACs are somewhat
linked, the Department will explain
again here its understanding of the
relevant statutory requirements, as
presented in the paragraphs that follow.
With respect to small, large, and very
large commercial package air
conditioning and heating equipment (of
which CRACs are a category), EPCA
directs that when the generally accepted
industry testing procedure or rating
procedure developed or recognized by
AHRI or by ASHRAE, as referenced in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1, is amended,
the Secretary shall amend the DOE test
procedure consistent with the amended
industry test procedure or rating
procedure unless the Secretary
determines, by clear and convincing
evidence, that to do so would not meet
the requirements for test procedures to
produce results representative of an
average use cycle and is not unduly
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jun 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C.
6314(a)(4)(B))
As noted, DOE has a duty under the
statute to adopt a test procedure that
produces results representative of the
covered equipment’s average use cycle.
In this case, DOE has concluded,
supported by clear and convincing
evidence, that AHRI 1360–2022 would
better meet that criterion of EPCA than
AHRI 1360–2017. First, AHRI 1360–
2022 includes test provisions for
measuring performance of roof-mounted
and wall-mounted CRACs,
configurations which are not considered
in AHRI 1360–2017. Were DOE to adopt
AHRI 1360–2017 instead of AHRI 1360–
2022, the DOE test procedure would not
address representations for these
configurations in terms of NSenCOP.
Second, AHRI 1360–2022 provides
clarifications and additional test
requirements on several test procedure
elements, including test tolerances,
enclosure for CRACs with compressors
in indoor units, secondary verification
of capacity, ducted condensers, and
refrigerant charging instructions. These
elements were discussed in detail in the
February 2022 NOPR (see 87 FR 6948,
6960–6963 (Feb. 7, 2022)). These
additional test requirements improve
the representativeness of the CRACs test
procedure. For these reasons, DOE
considers AHRI 1360–2022 to be more
representative of CRAC operation than
AHRI 1360–2017. With this finding
made, DOE does not read EPCA as
requiring the Department to dissect the
industry standard and surgically
transplant individual provisions of the
new industry standard into the prior
industry standard. DOE views the
industry test standard as a functioning
whole, so the approach AHRI suggests
could insert errors and inconsistencies
into the industry standard, as would
prevent its proper functioning in
practice as part of the DOE test
procedure. Further, even if AHRI’s
approach were possible, it would be
largely unnecessary; adoption of all the
major provisions of the latest industry
test standard would arguably result in
the remaining provisions being
uncontroversial. Again, DOE would
point out that the test procedure in
question is the most current version of
the industry’s own approved test
procedure, even if ASHRAE Standard
90.1 has not yet caught up with such
change. DOE considered AHRI 1360–
2017, as EPCA requires, but it ultimately
determined that it would not produce
results that reflect an average use cycle,
in light of the availability of AHRI
1360–2022, which would be expected to
do so. DOE has concluded that EPCA
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
does not allow the Department to turn
a blind eye to such real world
developments, as would be the
implication of following AHRI’s
suggested approach.
Furthermore, DOE believes that
Congress foresaw the practical benefits
of a statutory reading consistent with
DOE’s interpretation. To wit, although
DOE recognizes that adopting AHRI
1360–2022 as the Federal test procedure
for CRACs may create some disharmony
between the Federal test procedure and
the test procedure currently specified in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 for a period of
time, such situation is arguably
preferable to the alternative in which
DOE and stakeholders would need to
waste significant resources to reinitiate
another rulemaking in short order to
once again amend the Federal test
procedure for CRACs to update the
reference therein from AHRI 1360–2017
to AHRI 1360–2022—the very same
testing standard already available for
consideration.
Therefore, for the reasons previously
stated, the Department decided in the
March 2023TP final rule to incorporate
by reference AHRI 1360–2022 into the
CRACs test procedure (see EERE–2021–
BT–TP–0017).
Regarding AHRI’s substantive test
concerns, DOE notes that the current
Federal test procedure, which references
ANSI/ASHRAE 127–2007, does not
have any provisions that allow for
testing up-flow CRAC units in a limitedheight set-up. As such, the crosswalk
analysis conducted to translate
standards from SCOP to NSenCOP (as
presented in the March 2022 ECS
NOPR; See 87 FR 12802, 12817–12822
(March 7, 2022)) compared SCOP as
measured per ANSI/ASHRAE 127–2007
to NSenCOP as measured per AHRI
1360–202X Draft (which is the test
procedure DOE proposed to adopt in the
February 2022 TP NOPR). DOE’s
original crosswalk, conducted in the
September 2020 NODA/RFI, also did
not consider the limited height
approach included in AHRI 1360–2017.
Therefore, the limited height test
approaches in any intermediate CRAC
industry test procedures released
between ANSI/ASHRAE 127–2007 and
AHRI 1360–202X Draft (e.g., AHRI
1360–2017 as mentioned by AHRI) are
not relevant for DOE’s crosswalk
analysis, as such intermediate industry
test procedures were never proposed or
adopted as part of the Federal test
procedure. DOE’s crosswalk analysis in
this final rule would only consider test
procedures in AHRI 1360–2017 if DOE’s
amended CRAC test procedure adopted
test provisions from AHRI 1360–2017.
However, as stated previously, since the
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
time of AHRI’s comment, DOE has
finalized its test procedure for CRACs,
adopting AHRI 1360–2022 in the March
2023 TP final rule. See EERE–2021–BT–
TP–0017. The amended test procedure
adopted in the March 2023 TP final rule
does not impose any additional test
ducting provisions beyond those
included in the amended industry
consensus test procedure, AHRI 1360–
2022. Additionally, DOE notes that the
test provision for up-flow CRACs
highlighted by AHRI is an alternate
ducting methodology to be used when
there is limited chamber height to meet
the ducting requirements of ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 37, which are
referenced in both ANSI/ASHRAE 127–
2007 and AHRI 1360–2022. For most
up-flow CRAC units (i.e., all CRACs
except for tall units with large discharge
duct dimensions), manufacturers can
still choose to test their units in taller
test chambers using the ducting
requirements of ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 37, which comply with both
the current CRAC test procedure and the
amended test procedure adopted in this
final rule. Further, DOE notes that the
AEDM provision in 10 CFR 429.70
allow the use of AEDMs to develop
ratings for CRACs, and, thus,
manufacturers would not be required to
test their very tall up-flow CRACs.
AHRI provided extensive additional
comments regarding industry-wide
regulatory burdens that support the
adoption of the test procedure and
minimum efficiencies in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1. (AHRI, No. 12 at pp. 3–
5) These comments are identical to
those AHRI provided on the February
2022 TP NOPR, and DOE responded to
the test procedure-related comments in
detail in the March 2023 TP final rule.
See EERE–2021–BT–TP–0017.
Furthermore, as discussed in section
V.D. of this document, DOE is adopting
the minimum efficiencies in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1.
C. Efficiency and Capacity Crosswalk
Analyses
In the March 2022 ECS NOPR, DOE
explained the efficiency and capacity
crosswalk it had performed to translate
SCOP levels as measured per ANSI/
ASHRAE 127–2007 to NSenCOP levels
as measured per AHRI 1360–202X Draft.
87 FR 12802, 12808–12826 (March 7,
2022). As previously mentioned, AHRI
1360–202X Draft has now been finalized
as AHRI 1360–2022 but retains the same
rating conditions as AHRI 1360–202X
Draft (and AHRI 1360–2017), such that
the crosswalk initially presented in the
September 2020 NODA/RFI can be
extended without change. The following
paragraphs present a brief summary of
the crosswalk methodology.
For the efficiency crosswalk, DOE
analyzed the CRAC equipment classes
in ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 that are
currently subject to Federal standards
(i.e., all upflow and downflow classes).9
As discussed in the subsequent
paragraphs, for certain CRAC classes,
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 specifies
classes that disaggregate the current
Federal equipment classes into
additional classes.
For upflow CRACs, ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2019 and AHRI 1360–
2022 include separate efficiency levels
and rating conditions, respectively, for
ducted and non-ducted units. However,
36405
the current Federal test procedure and
standards do not specify different rating
conditions for upflow non-ducted and
upflow ducted units; thus, in this
crosswalk, DOE converted the single set
of SCOP standards for upflow units to
two ‘‘crosswalked’’ NSenCOP levels for
ducted and non-ducted unit classes.
Similarly, for air-cooled CRACs,
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 includes
separate sets of efficiency levels for
equipment with and without fluid
economizers, while the current DOE
standards set forth do not distinguish
air-cooled CRACs based on the presence
of fluid economizers. Thus, in this
crosswalk, DOE converted the single set
of current Federal standards for aircooled classes (in terms of SCOP) to two
sets of standards in terms of NSenCOP
for air-cooled classes distinguishing
CRACs with and without fluid
economizers. The crosswalk analysis
also found no difference between aircooled CRACs with and without fluid
economizers, so the NSenCOP standards
are identical for the two classes.
The efficiency levels for CRACs in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 rely on a
different metric (NSenCOP) and test
procedure (AHRI 1360–2017, and now
by extension AHRI 1360–2022) than the
metric and test procedure required
under the current Federal standards
(relying on SCOP and ANSI/ASHRAE
127–2007, respectively). AHRI 1360–
2022 and ANSI/ASHRAE 127–2007
notably also specify different rating
conditions. These differences are listed
in Table III–2, and are discussed in
detail in sections III.C.1 through III.C.4
of this document.
TABLE III–2—DIFFERENCES IN RATING CONDITIONS BETWEEN DOE’S CURRENT TEST PROCEDURE AND AHRI STANDARD
1360–2022
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
Test parameter
Affected equipment
categories
Return air dry-bulb temperature (RAT).
Upflow ducted and
downflow.
Entering water temperature
(EWT).
Water-cooled ..........
ESP (varies with NSCC) ..........
Upflow ducted ........
Adder for heat rejection fan
and pump power (add to
total power consumption).
Water-cooled and
glycol-cooled.
9 ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 includes
efficiency levels for horizontal-flow and ceiling-
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:01 Jun 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
Current DOE test procedure (referencing
ANSI/ASHRAE 127–2007)
AHRI 1360–2022
75 °F dry-bulb temperature
85 °F dry-bulb temperature.
86 °F
83 °F
<20 kW ...................
0.8 in H2O ..............
<80 kBtu/h ..............
0.3 in H2O.
≥20 kW ...................
1.0 in H2O ..............
≥80 kBtu/h and
<295 kBtu/h.
0.4 in H2O.
≥295 kBtu/h and
<760 kBtu/h.
0.5 in H2O.
No added power consumption for heat rejection fan and pump
mounted classes of CRACs. DOE does not currently
prescribe standards for horizontal-flow or ceiling-
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
5 percent of NSCC for water-cooled
CRACs.
mounted classes, so these classes were not included
in the crosswalk analysis.
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
36406
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE III–2—DIFFERENCES IN RATING CONDITIONS BETWEEN DOE’S CURRENT TEST PROCEDURE AND AHRI STANDARD
1360–2022
Test parameter
Affected equipment
categories
Current DOE test procedure (referencing
ANSI/ASHRAE 127–2007)
AHRI 1360–2022
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
7.5 percent of NSCC for glycol-cooled
CRACs.
The differences between these
specified rating conditions impact the
capacity boundaries for CRAC
equipment classes. The capacity values
that bound the CRAC equipment classes
are in terms of NSCC. For certain
equipment classes, NSCC values
determined according to AHRI 1360–
2022’s different rating conditions are
higher than the NSCC values
determined according to ANSI/ASHRAE
127–2007. Therefore, the test conditions
in AHRI 1360–2022 result in an
increased NSCC value for certain
equipment classes, as compared to the
NSCC measured in accordance with the
current Federal test procedure
requirement. This means that some
CRACs would switch classes (i.e., move
into a higher capacity equipment class)
if the test conditions in AHRI 1360–
2022 are used without shifting current
equipment class boundaries to match
the impact of the changes in rating
conditions.
Class switching would subject some
CRAC models to an efficiency level
under ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019
that is less stringent than the standard
level that is applicable to that model
under the current Federal requirements.
Lowering the stringency of the
efficiency level in the Federal
requirements is impermissible under
EPCA’s anti-backsliding provision at 42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(iii)(I).
Therefore, a capacity crosswalk was
conducted to translate the NSCC
boundaries that separate equipment
classes in the Federal efficiency
standards to account for the expected
increase in measured NSCC values for
affected equipment classes (i.e.,
equipment classes with test procedure
changes that increase NSCC). DOE’s
capacity crosswalk calculated the
increases in the capacity boundaries of
affected equipment classes from the
Federal efficiency standards if ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2019 were adopted, to
evaluate this equipment class switching
issue and to avoid backsliding that
would occur from class switching.
Updated SCOP levels and NSCC
equipment class boundaries were
calculated for each class (as applicable)
by combining the percentage changes
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:01 Jun 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
for every test procedure change
applicable to that class.
Both efficiency and capacity
crosswalk analyses have similar
structure, and the data for both were
gathered across numerous sources
including DOE testing, manufacturer
performance data gathered through nondisclosure agreements (NDAs), and
public manufacturer literature, among
others. DOE conducted analysis across
each test procedure change
independently and determined an
aggregated percentage by which that
change impacted efficiency and/or
NSCC.
The following sub-sections describe
the approaches used to analyze the
impacts on the measured efficiency and
capacity of each difference in rating
conditions between DOE’s current test
procedure and AHRI 1360–2022. As
discussed, the crosswalk analysis
methodology described in the following
sub-sections is the same as presented in
the March 2022 ECS NOPR. 87 FR
12802, 12817–12822 (March 7, 2022).
No additional data sources were added
to the analysis for this final rule.
1. Increase in Return Air Dry-Bulb
Temperature From 75 °F to 85 °F
ANSI/ASHRAE 127–2007, which is
referenced by DOE’s current test
procedure, specifies a return air drybulb temperature (RAT) of 75 °F for
testing all CRACs. AHRI 1360–2022
specifies a RAT of 85 °F for upflow
ducted and downflow CRACs, but
specifies a RAT for upflow non-ducted
units of 75 °F.
SCOP and NSCC both increase with
increasing RAT for two reasons. First, a
higher RAT increases the cooling that
must be done for the air to approach its
dew point temperature (i.e., the
temperature at which water vapor will
condense if there is any additional
cooling). Second, a higher RAT will
tend to raise the evaporating
temperature of the refrigerant, which in
turn raises the temperature of fin and
tube surfaces in contact with the air—
the resulting reduction in the portion of
the heat exchanger surface that is below
the air’s dew point temperature reduces
the potential for water vapor to
condense on these surfaces. This is seen
in product specifications which show
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
that the sensible heat ratio 10 is
consistently higher at a RAT of 85 °F
than at 75 °F. Because increasing RAT
increases the fraction of total cooling
capacity that is sensible cooling (rather
than latent cooling), the NSCC
increases. Further, because SCOP is
calculated with NSCC in the numerator
of the calculation, an increase in NSCC
also inherently increases SCOP.
To analyze the magnitude of the
impacts of increasing RAT for upflow
ducted and downflow CRACs on SCOP
and NSCC, DOE gathered data from
three separate sources and aggregated
the results for each crosswalk analysis.
First, DOE used product specifications
for several CRAC models that provide
SCOP and NSCC ratings for RATs
ranging from 75 °F to 95 °F. Second,
DOE analyzed manufacturer
performance data obtained under NDAs
that showed the performance impact of
individual test condition changes,
including the increase in RAT. Third,
DOE used results from testing two
CRAC units: one air-cooled upflow
ducted and one air-cooled downflow
unit. DOE combined the results of these
sources to find the aggregated increases
in SCOP and NSCC due to the increase
in RAT. The increase in SCOP due to
the change in RAT was found to be
approximately 19 percent, and the
increase in NSCC was found to be
approximately 22 percent.
2. Decrease in Entering Water
Temperature for Water-Cooled CRACs
ANSI/ASHRAE 127–2007, which is
referenced by DOE’s current test
procedure, specifies an entering water
temperature (EWT) of 86 °F for watercooled CRACs, while AHRI 1360–2022
specifies an entering water temperature
of 83 °F. A decrease in the EWT for
water-cooled CRACs increases the
temperature difference between the
water and hot refrigerant in the
condenser coil, thus increasing cooling
capacity and decreasing compressor
power. To analyze the impact of this
decrease in EWT on SCOP and NSCC,
10 ‘‘Sensible heat ratio’’ is the ratio of sensible
cooling capacity to the total cooling capacity. The
total cooling capacity includes both sensible
cooling capacity (cooling associated with reduction
in temperature) and latent cooling capacity (cooling
associated with dehumidification).
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
36407
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
DOE analyzed manufacturer data
obtained through NDAs and a publiclyavailable presentation from a major
CRAC manufacturer and calculated a
SCOP increase of approximately 2
percent and an NSCC increase of
approximately 1 percent.
3. Changes in External Static Pressure
Requirements for Upflow Ducted CRACs
For upflow ducted CRACs, AHRI
1360–2022 specifies lower ESP
requirements than ANSI/ASHRAE 127–
2007, which is referenced in DOE’s
current test procedure. The ESP
requirements in all CRAC industry test
standards vary with NSCC; however, the
capacity bins (i.e., capacity ranges over
which each ESP requirement applies) in
ANSI/ASHRAE 127–2007 are different
from those in AHRI 1360–2022. Testing
with a lower ESP decreases the indoor
fan power input without a
corresponding decrease in NSCC, thus
increasing the measured SCOP.
Additionally, the reduction in fan heat
entering the indoor air stream that
results from lower fan power also
slightly increases NSCC, further
increasing SCOP.
To analyze the impacts on measured
SCOP and NSCC of the changes in ESP
requirements between DOE’s current
test procedure and AHRI 1360–2022,
DOE aggregated data from its analysis of
fan power consumption changes,
manufacturer data obtained through
NDAs, and results from DOE testing.
Notably, the impact of changes in ESP
requirements on SCOP and NSCC was
calculated separately in DOE’s analysis
for each capacity range specified in
AHRI 1360–2022 (i.e., <80 kBtu/h, ≥80
and <295 kBtu/h, and ≥295 kBtu/h). As
discussed in section III.C of this
document, NSCC values determined
according to ANSI/ASHRAE 127–2007
are lower than NSCC values determined
according to AHRI 1360–2022 for
certain CRAC classes, including upflowducted classes. The increase in NSCC in
AHRI 1360–2022 also impacts the ESP
requirements in AHRI 1360–2022 for
upflow-ducted units, because the ESP
requirements are specified based on
NSCC. Different ESP requirements
impact the stringency of the test—as
discussed, testing with a lower ESP
increases the measured SCOP. AHRI
1360–2022 addresses this issue by
updating the NSCC capacity bin
boundaries associated with the
applicable ESP. For the purposes of the
efficiency and capacity crosswalk
analyses in this final rule, DOE used the
adjusted capacity boundaries in AHRI
1360–2022 for upflow ducted classes
presented in Table III–4 (as discussed in
section III.C.5 of this document) to
specify the applicable ESP requirement.
DOE conducted an analysis to
estimate the change in fan power
consumption due to the changes in ESP
requirements using performance data
and product specifications for 77
upflow CRAC models with certified
SCOP ratings at or near the current
applicable SCOP standard level in
DOE’s Compliance Certification
Database.11 Using the certified SCOP
and NSCC values, DOE determined each
model’s total power consumption for
operation at the rating conditions
specified in DOE’s current test
procedure. DOE then used fan
performance data for each model to
estimate the change in indoor fan power
that would result from the lower ESP
requirements in AHRI 1360–2022 and
modified the total power consumption
for each model by the calculated value.
For several models, detailed fan
performance data were not available, so
DOE used fan performance data for
comparable air conditioning units with
similar cooling capacity, fan drive, and
fan motor horsepower.
DOE also received manufacturer data
(obtained through NDAs) showing the
impact on efficiency and NSCC of the
change in ESP requirements.
Additionally, DOE conducted tests on
an upflow-ducted CRAC at ESPs of 1 in.
H2O and 0.4 in. H2O (the applicable ESP
requirements specified in ANSI/
ASHRAE 127–2007 and AHRI 1360–
2022, respectively), and included the
results of those tests in this analysis.
For each of the three capacity ranges
for which ESP requirements are
specified in AHRI 1360–2022, Table III–
3 shows the approximate aggregated
percentage increases in SCOP and NSCC
associated with the decreased ESP
requirements specified in AHRI 1360–
2022 for upflow ducted units.
TABLE III–3—PERCENTAGE INCREASE IN SCOP AND NSCC FROM DECREASES IN EXTERNAL STATIC PRESSURE
REQUIREMENTS FOR UPFLOW DUCTED UNITS BETWEEN DOE’S CURRENT TEST PROCEDURE AND AHRI 1360–2022
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
Net sensible cooling capacity range
(kBtu/h) *
ESP
requirements
in DOE’s
current test
procedure
(referencing
ANSI/ASHRAE
127–2007)
(in H2O)
ESP
requirements
in AHRI
1360–2022
(in H2O)
Approx.
average
percentage
increase in
SCOP
Approx.
average
percentage
increase in
NSCC
<65 ...................................................................................................................
0.8
0.3
7
2
≥65 to <240 .......................................
≥65 to <68.2 ** ..................................
≥68.2 to <240 ** ................................
0.8
1
0.4
*** 8
*** 2
≥240 to <760 ....................................................................................................
1
0.5
6
2
* These boundaries are consistent with the boundaries in ANSI/ASHRAE 127–2007 and differ from the boundaries in AHRI 1360–2022, which
reflect the expected capacity increases for upflow-ducted and downflow equipment classes at the AHRI 1360–2022 return air temperature test
conditions.
** 68.2 kBtu/h is equivalent to 20 kW, which is the capacity value that separates ESP requirements in ANSI/ASHRAE 127–2007, which is referenced in DOE’s current test procedure.
*** This average percentage increase is an average across upflow ducted CRACs with net sensible cooling capacity ≥65 and <240 kBtu/h, including models with capacity <20 kW and ≥20 kW. DOE’s Compliance Certification Database shows that most of the upflow CRACs with a net
sensible cooling capacity ≥65 kBtu/h and <240 kBtu/h have a net sensible cooling capacity ≥20 kW.
11 DOE’s Compliance Certification Database can
be accessed at: www.regulations.doe.gov/ccms (Last
accessed Jan. 3, 2023).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:01 Jun 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
these components (i.e., water/glycol
pump, dry cooler/cooling tower fan(s))
are not considered to be part of the
CRAC unit. ANSI/ASHRAE 127–2007,
which is referenced in DOE’s current
test procedure, does not include any
factor in the calculation of SCOP to
account for the power consumption of
heat rejection components for watercooled and glycol-cooled CRACs.
In contrast, AHRI 1360–2022 specifies
to increase the measured total power
input for CRACs to account for the
power consumption of fluid pumps and
heat rejection fans. Specifically, sections
6.3.3 and 6.3.4 of AHRI 1360–2022
specify to add a percentage of the
measured NSCC (5 percent for watercooled CRACs and 7.5 percent for
glycol-cooled CRACs) in kW to the total
power input used to calculate
NSenCOP. DOE calculated the impact of
these additions on SCOP using Equation
1:
Where, χ is equal to 5 percent for
water-cooled CRACs and 7.5 percent for
glycol-cooled CRACs, and SCOP1 is the
SCOP value adjusted for the energy
consumption of heat rejection pumps
and fans.
calculated the crosswalked NSenCOP
levels and translated NSCC boundaries
as detailed in the following sections.
These adjustment factors are equal to
100 percent (which represents SCOP
measured per the current Federal test
procedure) plus the calculated
percentage change in measured
efficiency.
To account for the impact of the adder
for heat rejection pump and fan power
for water-cooled and glycol-cooled
units, DOE used Equation 3. Hence,
DOE determined crosswalked NSenCOP
levels corresponding to the current
Federal SCOP standards for each CRAC
equipment class using the following two
equations.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
5. Calculating Overall Changes in
Measured Efficiency and Capacity From
Test Procedure Changes
Different CRAC equipment classes are
subject to different combinations of the
test procedure changes between DOE’s
current test procedure and AHRI 1360–
2022 analyzed in the crosswalk
analyses. To combine the impact of the
changes in rating conditions, DOE
In these equations, NSenCOP1 refers
to a partially-crosswalked NSenCOP
level that incorporates the impacts of
changes in RAT, condenser EWT, and
indoor fan ESP (as applicable), but not
the impact of adding the heat rejection
pump and fan power; x1, x2, x3, and
represent the percentage change in
SCOP due to changes in RAT, condenser
EWT, and indoor fan ESP requirements,
respectively; and is equal to 5 percent
for water-cooled equipment classes and
7.5 percent for glycol-cooled equipment
classes. For air-cooled classes, x4 is
equal to 0 percent; therefore, for these
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jun 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
a. Calculation of Crosswalked NSenCOP
Levels
To combine the impact on SCOP of
the changes to rating conditions (i.e.,
increase in RAT, decrease in condenser
EWT for water-cooled units, and
decrease of the ESP requirements for
upflow ducted units), DOE multiplied
together the calculated adjustment
factors representing the measurement
changes corresponding to each
individual rating condition change, as
applicable, as shown in Equation 2.
classes, NSenCOP is equal to
NSenCOP1.
b. Calculation of Translated NSCC
Boundaries
To combine the impact on NSCC of
the changes to rating conditions, DOE
used a methodology similar to that used
for determining the impact on SCOP. To
determine adjusted NSCC equipment
class boundaries, DOE multiplied
together the calculated adjustment
factors representing the measurement
changes corresponding to each
individual rating condition change, as
applicable, as shown in Equation 4.
These adjustment factors are equal to
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
100 percent (which represents NSCC
measured per the current Federal test
procedure) plus the calculated
percentage change in measured NSCC.
In this equation, Boundary refers to the
original NSCC boundaries (i.e., 65,000
Btu/h, 240,000 Btu/h, or 760,000 Btu/h
as determined according to ANSI/
ASHRAE 127–2007), Boundary1 refers
to the updated NSCC boundaries as
determined according to AHRI 1360–
2022, and y1, y2, and y3 represent the
percentage changes in NSCC due to
changes in RAT, condenser EWT, and
indoor fan ESP requirements,
respectively.
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
ER02JN23.001</GPH>
4. Power Adder To Account for Pump
and Heat Rejection Fan Power in
NSenCOP Calculation for Water-Cooled
and Glycol-Cooled CRACs
Energy consumption for heat rejection
components for air-cooled CRACs (i.e.,
condenser fan motor(s)) is measured in
the current DOE test procedure for
CRACs; however, for water-cooled and
glycol-cooled CRACs, energy
consumption for heat rejection
components is not measured because
ER02JN23.002</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
ER02JN23.000</GPH>
36408
As mentioned, ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2019 and AHRI 1360–2022 include
updated equipment class capacity
boundaries for only upflow-ducted and
downflow equipment classes. The
updated class ranges for these categories
are <80,000 Btu/h, ≥80,000 Btu/h and
<295,000 Btu/h, and ≥295,000 Btu/h. In
previous versions of ASHRAE Standard
90.1, these ranges are <65,000 Btu/h,
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h, and
≥240,000 Btu/h. The capacity range
boundaries for upflow non-ducted
classes were left unchanged at 65,000
Btu/h and 240,000 Btu/h in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2019.
DOE’s capacity crosswalk analysis
indicates that the primary driver for
increasing NSCC is increasing RAT. The
increases in RAT in AHRI 1360–2022, as
compared to ANSI/ASHRAE 127–2007,
only apply to upflow ducted and
downflow equipment classes. Based on
the analysis performed for this
document, DOE found that all the
equipment class boundaries in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2019, which are in
increments of 5,000 Btu/h, vary by no
more than 1.4 percent of the boundary
translations calculated from DOE’s
capacity crosswalk. DOE considers this
1.4 percent variance to be de minimis
because the only difference appears to
be rounding. When rounded to
increments of 5,000 Btu/h, DOE’s
crosswalk boundary translations are
equivalent to the equipment class
boundaries in ASHRAE Standard 90.1–
2019. As such, to align DOE’s analysis
more closely with ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2019, DOE has used the equipment
class boundaries in ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2019 as the translated boundaries
for the crosswalk analysis. Use of the
equipment class boundaries from
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 allows for
an appropriate comparison between the
energy efficiency levels and equipment
classes specified in ASHRAE Standard
90.1 and those in the current DOE
standards, while addressing the
backsliding potential from class
switching discussed previously.
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 does
not include an upper capacity limit for
coverage of CRACs. DOE’s current
standards are applicable only to CRACs
with an NSCC less than 760,000 Btu/h,
which is the upper boundary for very
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jun 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
large commercial package air
conditioning and heating equipment,
the statutory limits on DOE’s
authority.12 10 CFR 431.97(e). However,
the change in the ratings conditions in
AHRI 1360–2022 means this boundary
(calculated according to the current
Federal test procedure, which references
ANSI/ASHRAE 127–2007) must be
expressed in its calculated equivalent
for AHRI 1360–20222 under the
crosswalk analysis. Otherwise,
equipment currently covered and
subject to the Federal standards may be
removed from coverage, thereby
violating EPCA’s anti-backsliding
provision.
In order to account for all equipment
currently subject to the Federal
standards, DOE calculated the AHRI
1360–2022 equivalent of the 760,000
Btu/h equipment class boundary for
certain equipment classes as part of its
capacity crosswalk analysis. This
translation of the upper boundary of the
equipment classes applies only for
downflow and upflow-ducted classes
(the classes for which the RAT increase
applies). Consistent with the
adjustments made in ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2019, DOE averaged the
crosswalked capacity results across the
affected equipment classes, and
rounded to the nearest 5,000 Btu/h.
Following this approach, DOE has
derived 930,000 Btu/h as the translated
upper capacity limit for downflow and
upflow-ducted CRACs in the analysis
presented in this document. The
930,000 Btu/h upper capacity limit (as
measured per AHRI 1360–2022) used in
the crosswalk analysis is equivalent to
the 760,000 Btu/h upper capacity limit
12 At the time EPCA was amended to include the
definition for ‘‘very large commercial package air
conditioning and heating equipment,’’ equipment
covered by ASHRAE that met the statutory
definition of ‘‘commercial package air conditioning
and heating equipment’’ was generally comfort
cooling equipment, which was rated according to
the corresponding test procedures at 80 °F/67 °F
indoor air. The upper boundary of 760,000 Btu/h
specified by EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6311(8)(D)) reflects a
capacity rating at 80 °F/67 °F indoor air. As
discussed, DOE has translated the 760,000 Btu/h
limit to an equivalent rating that is based on testing
according to the conditions specified in the updated
industry test procedure for CRACs. Consequently,
DOE does not have authority to set standards for
models with a capacity beyond the 760,000 Btu/h
limit specified by EPCA, as translated to a rating
measured per AHRI 1360–2022.
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
36409
(as measured per ANSI/ASHRAE 127–
2007) established in the current DOE
standards.
As discussed, in the March 2023 TP
final rule, DOE amended its test
procedures for CRACs to: (1) relocate
the current test procedure for measuring
SCOP to appendix E to subpart F of 10
CFR part 431; and (2) adopt an amended
test procedure for measuring NSenCOP
in appendix E1 to subpart F of 10 CFR
part 431. See EERE–2021–BT–TP–0017.
As amended, the scope of the CRAC test
procedures at appendices E and E1 are
limited to CRACs with cooling capacity
below 760,000 Btu/h. However, to
reflect the translation of 760,000 Btu/h
to 930,000 Btu/h as the upper capacity
limit for downflow and upflow-ducted
CRACs (as measured per AHRI 1360–
2022 and discussed previously in this
subsection), DOE is correspondingly
amending the upper capacity limit for
the scope of Appendix E1. Specifically,
DOE is amending Table 1 to paragraph
(b) at 10 CFR 431.96 to specify the
following: for upflow ducted and
downflow floor-mounted computer
room air conditioners, the test
procedure in appendix E1 of this
subpart applies to equipment with net
sensible cooling capacity less than
930,000 Btu/h. For all other
configurations of computer room air
conditioners, the test procedure in
appendix E1 applies to equipment with
net sensible cooling capacity less than
760,000 Btu/h.
6. Crosswalk Results
The ‘‘crosswalked’’ DOE efficiency
levels (expressed in terms of NSenCOP)
and equipment class capacity
boundaries (adjusted to account for
changes in rating conditions) were
compared with the NSenCOP efficiency
levels and capacity boundaries specified
in ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 to
determine the stringency of ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2019 requirements
relative to current Federal standards.
Table III–4 presents the results for the
crosswalk analyses. The last column in
the table, labeled ‘‘Crosswalk
Comparison,’’ indicates whether the
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 levels are
less stringent, equivalent to, or more
stringent than the current Federal
standards, based on DOE’s analysis.
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
ER02JN23.003</GPH>
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jun 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
2.15
2.10
2.45
2.10
≥65 and <240 ......................
≥240 and <760 ....................
<65 .......................................
≥65 and <240 ......................
Downflow .............................
Downflow .............................
Downflow .............................
Downflow .............................
2.09
1.99
1.79
2.09
1.99
1.79
2.49
2.39
2.29
2.44
2.34
2.24
2.39
2.04
≥240 and <760 ....................
<65 .......................................
≥65 and <240 ......................
≥240 and <760 ....................
<65 .......................................
≥65 and <240 ......................
≥240 and <760 ....................
<65 .......................................
≥65 and <240 ......................
≥240 and <760 ....................
<65 .......................................
≥65 and <240 ......................
≥240 and <760 ....................
<65 .......................................
≥65 and <240 ......................
Downflow .............................
Upflow Ducted .....................
Upflow Ducted .....................
Upflow Ducted .....................
Upflow Ducted .....................
Upflow Ducted .....................
Upflow Ducted .....................
Upflow Ducted .....................
Upflow Ducted .....................
Upflow Ducted .....................
Upflow Ducted .....................
Upflow Ducted .....................
Upflow Ducted .....................
Upflow Ducted .....................
Air-cooled .......................
Air-cooled .......................
Air-cooled with fluid
economizer.
Air-cooled with fluid
economizer.
Air-cooled with fluid
economizer.
Water-cooled ..................
Water-cooled ..................
Water-cooled ..................
Water-cooled with fluid
economizer.
Water-cooled with fluid
economizer.
Water-cooled with fluid
economizer.
Glycol-cooled .................
Glycol-cooled .................
2.05
2.50
2.35
<65 .......................................
Downflow .............................
Downflow .............................
Downflow .............................
≥240 and <760 ....................
2.50
2.40
2.55
≥65 and <240 ......................
≥240 and <760 ....................
<65 .......................................
2.45
2.60
<65 .......................................
Downflow .............................
≥65 and <240 ......................
1.90
≥240 and <760 ....................
Downflow .............................
Downflow .............................
Downflow .............................
Downflow .............................
2.10
≥65 and <240 ......................
Downflow .............................
Upflow Ducted .....................
Glycol-cooled .................
Glycol-cooled .................
Glycol-cooled with fluid
economizer.
Glycol-cooled with fluid
economizer.
Glycol-cooled with fluid
economizer.
Air-cooled .......................
Water-cooled with fluid
economizer.
Glycol-cooled .................
Water-cooled ..................
Water-cooled ..................
Water-cooled with fluid
economizer.
Water-cooled with fluid
economizer.
2.10
1.90
2.20
≥65 and <240 ......................
≥240 and <760 ....................
<65 .......................................
Downflow .............................
Downflow .............................
Downflow .............................
Air-cooled .......................
Air-cooled .......................
Air-cooled with fluid
economizer.
Air-cooled with fluid
economizer.
Air-cooled with fluid
economizer.
Water-cooled ..................
2.20
Current NSCC range
(kBtu/h)
Current
federal
standard
(SCOP)
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
Return air dry-bulb temperature.
Add allowance for heat
rejection components
to total power input.
Condenser entering
water temperature.
ESP requirements .........
Return air dry-bulb temperature.
ESP requirements .........
Return air dry-bulb temperature.
Add allowance for heat
rejection components
to total power input.
Condenser entering
water temperature.
Add allowance for heat
rejection components
to total power input.
Return air dry-bulb temperature.
Return air dry-bulb temperature.
Test procedure changes
affecting efficiency *
Cross-walked
NSCC range
(kBtu/h)
≥80 and <295 ......................
<80 .......................................
≥295 and <930 ....................
≥80 and <295 ......................
<80 .......................................
≥80 and <295 ......................
≥295 and <930 ....................
<80 .......................................
≥295 and <930 ....................
≥80 and <295 ......................
≥80 and <295 ......................
≥295 and <930 ....................
<80 .......................................
<80 .......................................
≥295 and <930 ....................
≥80 and <295 ......................
≥80 and <295 ......................
≥295 and <930 ....................
<80 .......................................
<80 .......................................
≥295 and <930 ....................
≥80 and <295 ......................
≥80 and <295 ......................
≥295 and <930 ....................
<80 .......................................
<80 .......................................
≥295 and <930 ....................
≥80 and <295 ......................
≥80 and <295 ......................
≥295 and <930 ....................
<80 .......................................
<80 .......................................
TABLE III–4—CROSSWALK RESULTS
<65 .......................................
Downflow .............................
Airflow configuration
Air-cooled .......................
Condenser system type
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
2.19
2.47
2.51
2.65
2.72
2.70
2.56
2.77
2.26
2.55
2.55
2.26
2.65
2.65
2.06
2.11
2.15
2.11
2.39
2.43
2.50
2.59
2.63
2.54
2.68
2.73
2.26
2.50
2.50
2.26
2.62
2.62
Crosswalked
current
federal
standard
(NSenCOP)
2.21
2.53
2.58
2.65
2.74
2.70
2.64
2.79
2.33
2.55
2.55
2.33
2.67
2.67
2.15
2.19
2.24
2.21
2.51
2.56
2.61
2.68
2.73
2.67
2.77
2.82
2.36
2.58
2.58
2.36
2.70
2.70
ASHRAE
standard
90.1–2019
NSenCOP
level
More Stringent
More Stringent
More Stringent
Equivalent
More Stringent
Equivalent
More Stringent
More Stringent
More Stringent
Equivalent
Equivalent
More Stringent
More Stringent
More Stringent
More Stringent
More Stringent
More Stringent
More Stringent
More Stringent
More Stringent
More Stringent
More Stringent
More Stringent
More Stringent
More Stringent
More Stringent
More Stringent
More Stringent
More Stringent
More Stringent
More Stringent
More Stringent
Crosswalk
comparison
36410
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jun 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
2.09
1.99
1.79
2.09
1.99
1.79
<65 .......................................
≥65 and <240 ......................
≥240 and <760 ....................
<65 .......................................
≥65 and <240 ......................
≥240 and <760 ....................
<65 .......................................
.............
.............
.............
.............
Upflow
Upflow
Upflow
Upflow
Upflow Non-Ducted .............
Upflow Non-Ducted .............
Upflow Non-Ducted .............
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Glycol-cooled with fluid
economizer.
Glycol-cooled with fluid
economizer.
Glycol-cooled with fluid
economizer.
Water-cooled with fluid
economizer.
Water-cooled with fluid
economizer.
Glycol-cooled .................
Glycol-cooled .................
Glycol-cooled .................
Water-cooled ..................
Water-cooled ..................
Water-cooled with fluid
economizer.
2.34
1.99
1.94
<65 .......................................
≥65 and <240 ......................
≥240 and <760 ....................
Upflow Non-Ducted .............
Upflow Non-Ducted .............
2.39
2.04
1.99
Upflow Non-Ducted .............
<65 .......................................
≥65 and <240 ......................
≥240 and <760 ....................
2.24
≥240 and <760 ....................
Upflow Non-Ducted .............
Upflow Non-Ducted .............
Upflow Non-Ducted .............
Upflow Non-Ducted .............
2.34
≥65 and <240 ......................
2.39
2.29
2.44
Upflow Non-Ducted .............
Upflow Non-Ducted .............
Upflow Non-Ducted .............
Upflow Non-Ducted .............
Non-Ducted
Non-Ducted
Non-Ducted
Non-Ducted
≥65 and <240 ......................
≥240 and <760 ....................
<65 .......................................
1.94
≥240 and <760 ....................
Upflow Ducted .....................
2.49
1.99
≥65 and <240 ......................
Upflow Ducted .....................
Glycol-cooled with fluid
economizer.
Glycol-cooled with fluid
economizer.
Air-cooled .......................
Air-cooled .......................
Air-cooled .......................
Air-cooled with fluid
economizer.
Air-cooled with fluid
economizer.
Air-cooled with fluid
economizer.
Water-cooled ..................
1.99
2.34
≥240 and <760 ....................
<65 .......................................
Upflow Ducted .....................
Upflow Ducted .....................
Glycol-cooled .................
Glycol-cooled with fluid
economizer.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
Add allowance for heat
rejection components
to total power input.
Add allowance for heat
rejection components
to total power input.
Condenser entering
water temperature.
No changes ...................
ESP requirements .........
Add allowance for heat
rejection components
to total power input.
Sfmt 4700
≥240 and <760 ....................
≥65 and <240 ......................
<65 .......................................
<65 .......................................
≥65 and <240 ......................
≥240 and <760 ....................
≥240 and <760 ....................
≥65 and <240 ......................
≥65 and <240 ......................
≥240 and <760 ....................
<65 .......................................
<65 .......................................
≥240 and <760 ....................
≥65 and <240 ......................
<65 .......................................
≥65 and <240 ......................
≥240 and <760 ....................
<65 .......................................
≥295 and <930 ....................
≥80 and <295 ......................
≥295 and <930 ....................
<80 .......................................
1.69
1.73
1.99
2.03
1.77
1.73
2.05
2.13
2.17
2.09
2.21
2.25
1.79
1.99
2.09
1.99
1.79
2.09
2.07
2.14
2.11
2.43
1.73
1.82
2.00
2.08
1.90
1.81
2.12
2.24
2.32
2.20
2.35
2.43
1.81
1.99
2.16
2.04
1.89
2.09
2.12
2.16
2.18
2.48
More Stringent
More Stringent
More Stringent
More Stringent
More Stringent
More Stringent
More Stringent
More Stringent
More Stringent
More Stringent
More Stringent
More Stringent
More Stringent
Equivalent
More Stringent
More Stringent
More Stringent
Equivalent
More Stringent
More Stringent
More Stringent
More Stringent
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
36411
36412
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
As indicated by the crosswalk, the
standard levels established for CRACs in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 are
equivalent to the current Federal
standards for six equipment classes and
are more stringent than the current
Federal standards for 48 equipment
classes of CRACs. ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2019 also added 66 equipment
classes of ceiling-mounted and
horizontal-flow CRACs that did not
require a crosswalk because there are
currently no Federal standards for those
classes. As discussed in section III.A of
this final rule, DOE is adopting
standards for horizontal-flow CRACs
and ceiling-mounted CRACs. ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2019 also incorporates
shifted capacity bin boundaries for
upflow ducted and downflow CRAC
equipment classes. DOE’s crosswalk
analysis indicates that these updated
boundaries appropriately reflect the
increase in NSCC that results from the
changes in test procedure adopted
under ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 and
are equivalent to the capacity
boundaries in the current Federal
standards once those changes are
accounted for (as discussed in previous
sections of this document).
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
7. Comments Received Regarding DOE’s
Crosswalk
AHRI agreed with DOE’s crosswalk
methodology and noted that AHRI
members, DOE staff, and consultants
met extensively in 2018 to develop the
crosswalk analysis in order to ensure
that new NSenCOP values developed for
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 addressed
all of the shortcomings from the
previous edition’s efficiency levels.
(AHRI, No. 12 at p. 1) AHRI expressed
support for the direct adoption of all
NSenCOP values, and associated
capacities in ASHRAE Standard 90.1
and agreed that the efficiencies
proposed in the NOPR will save energy.
Id.
DOE did not receive any other
comments regarding its crosswalk
methodology. Therefore, for this final
rule, DOE relies on the crosswalk
analysis and results as originally
presented in the September 2020
NODA/RFI, in which DOE identifies 48
equipment classes for which the
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 efficiency
levels are more stringent than current
DOE efficiency levels (expressed in
NSenCOP), six equipment classes for
which the ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019
efficiency levels are equal to the current
DOE efficiency levels, and 66 classes of
CRACs that are not currently subject to
DOE’s standards but for which
standards are specified in ASHRAE
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jun 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
Standard 90.1–2019 (i.e., horizontalflow and ceiling-mounted classes).
IV. Methodology for Estimates of
Potential Energy Savings From
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 Levels
In the September 2020 NODA/RFI,
DOE performed an analysis to determine
the energy-savings potential of
amending Federal standards to the
amended ASHRAE levels for CRACs for
which ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019
specifies amended energy efficiency
levels more stringent than the
corresponding Federal energy
conservation standards, as required
under 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A). 85 FR
60642, 60663 (Sept. 25, 2020). DOE’s
energy savings analysis was limited to
equipment classes for which a market
exists and for which sufficient data were
available.
For the equipment classes where
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 specifies
more-stringent levels than the
corresponding Federal energy
conservation standard, DOE calculated
the potential energy savings to the
Nation associated with adopting
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 as the
difference between a no-new-standards
case projection (i.e., without amended
standards) and the ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2019 standards-case projection
(i.e., with adoption of ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2019 levels).
The national energy savings (NES)
refers to cumulative lifetime energy
savings for equipment purchased in a
30-year period that differs by equipment
(i.e., the compliance date differs by
equipment class (i.e., capacity)
depending upon whether DOE is acting
under the ASHRAE trigger or the 6-yearlookback (see 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(D)).
In the standards case, equipment that is
more efficient gradually replaces lessefficient equipment over time. This
affects the calculation of the potential
energy savings, which are a function of
the total number of units in use and
their efficiencies. Savings depend on
annual shipments and equipment
lifetime. Inputs to the energy savings
analysis are presented in the following
sections.
A. Annual Energy Use
The purpose of the energy use
analysis is to assess the energy savings
potential of different equipment
efficiencies in the building types that
utilize the equipment. The Federal
standard and ASHRAE Standard 90.1–
2019 levels are expressed in terms of an
efficiency metric. For each equipment
class, the description of how DOE
developed estimates of annual energy
consumption at the Federal baseline
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
efficiency level and the ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2019 level can be found
in section III.A.1 of the September 2020
NODA/RFI. 85 FR 60642, 60664–60666
(Sept. 25, 2020). In the March 2022 ECS
NOPR, DOE briefly summarized that
analysis and responded to stakeholder
comments. 87 FR 12802, 12827–12830
(March 7, 2022). However, DOE did not
change its analysis in response to those
comments. DOE did not receive any
comments specific to this analysis in
response to the March 2022 ECS NOPR,
and continues to rely on the analysis
from the September 2020 NODA/RFI in
this final rule. The annual unit energy
consumption (UEC) estimates are
displayed in Table IV–1 and form the
basis of the national energy savings
estimates discussed in section IV.E of
this document.
1. Equipment Classes and Analytical
Scope
In the September 2020 NODA/RFI,
DOE conducted an energy savings
analysis for the 42 CRAC classes that
currently have both DOE standards and
more-stringent standards under
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019. 85 FR
60642, 60664 (Sept. 25, 2020). DOE was
unable to identify market data that
would allow for disaggregating results
for the six equipment classes of aircooled CRACs with fluid economizers
that have ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019
levels more stringent than current
Federal standards. Furthermore,
although ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019
included levels for the 66 horizontal
flow and ceiling-mounted equipment
classes which currently are not subject
to Federal standards, DOE was unable to
identify market data that could be used
to establish a market baseline for these
classes in order to estimate energy
savings at the time the September 2020
NODA/RFI was published. 85 FR 60642,
60663–60664 (Sept. 25, 2020). DOE did
not receive any efficiency data in
response to the March 2022 ECS NOPR
and is unaware of any publicly available
data. Therefore, DOE was unable to
develop a market baseline and estimate
energy savings for the horizontal-flow
and ceiling-mounted equipment classes
for this final rule. The UEC estimates
(provided in Table IV–1 of this
document) were only developed for
equipment classes for which DOE could
develop a market baseline; therefore,
they do not include the horizontal-flow
and ceiling-mounted classes.
2. Efficiency Levels
DOE analyzed the energy savings
potential of adopting ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2019 levels for CRAC equipment
classes that currently have a Federal
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
36413
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
standard and have an ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2019 efficiency level
more stringent than the current Federal
standard. For each equipment class,
energy savings are measured relative to
the baseline (i.e., the current Federal
standard for that class). 85 FR 60642,
60664 (Sept. 25, 2020).
3. Analysis Method and Annual Energy
Use Results
In the September 2020 NODA/RFI, to
derive UECs for the equipment classes
analyzed in this document, DOE started
with the UECs based on the current DOE
standards for downflow equipment
classes as analyzed in the May 2012
final rule. DOE assumed that these UECs
correspond to the NSenCOP that was
derived through the crosswalk analysis
(i.e., ‘‘Cross-walked Current Federal
Standard’’ column in Table III–4). DOE
determined the UEC for the ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2019 level by dividing
the baseline NSenCOP level by the
NSenCOP for the ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2019 level and multiplied the
resulting percentage by the baseline
UEC. 85 FR 60642, 60664 (Sept. 25,
2020).
In the May 2012 final rule, DOE
assumed that energy savings estimates
derived for downflow equipment classes
would be representative of upflow
equipment classes, which differed by a
fixed 0.11 SCOP. 77 FR 28928, 28954
(May 16, 2012). Because of the fixed
0.11 SCOP difference between upflow
and downflow CRAC units in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2013, DOE determined
that the per-unit energy savings benefits
for corresponding CRACs at higher
efficiency levels could be represented
using the 15 downflow equipment
classes. Id. However, in this analysis,
the efficiency levels for the upflow nonducted equipment classes do not differ
from the downflow equipment class by
a fixed amount. For the September 2020
NODA/RFI, DOE assumed that the
fractional increase/decrease in
NSenCOP between upflow and
downflow units corresponds to a
proportional decrease/increase in the
baseline UEC within a given equipment
class grouping of condenser system and
capacity. 85 FR 60642, 60665 (Sept. 25,
2020).
Table IV–1 shows UEC estimates for
the equipment classes triggered by
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 (i.e.,
equipment classes for which the
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 energy
efficiency level is more stringent than
the currently applicable Federal
standard).
TABLE IV–1—NATIONAL UEC ESTIMATES (kWh/YEAR) FOR CRAC SYSTEMS 1
Current federal standard
Condenser system type
Airflow configuration
Current net sensible cooling capacity
UEC
(kwh)
NSenCOP
Air-cooled ................................
Downflow ........................
Upflow, ducted ................
Upflow, non-ducted ........
Water-cooled ...........................
Downflow ........................
Upflow, ducted ................
Upflow, non-ducted ........
Water-cooled with fluid economizer.
Downflow ........................
Upflow, ducted ................
Upflow, non-ducted ........
Glycol-cooled ..........................
Downflow ........................
Upflow, ducted ................
Upflow, non-ducted ........
Glycol-cooled with fluid economizer.
Downflow ........................
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
Upflow, ducted ................
Upflow, non-ducted ........
ASHRAE
standard 90.1–2019
NSenCOP
UEC
(kwh)
<65,000 Btu/h .................................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h ................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............
<65,000 Btu/h .................................................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............
<65,000 Btu/h .................................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h ................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............
<65,000 Btu/h .................................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h ................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............
<65,000 Btu/h .................................................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............
<65,000 Btu/h .................................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h ................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............
<65,000 Btu/h .................................................
2.62
2.50
2.26
2.65
2.26
2.09
1.99
1.79
2.73
2.63
2.54
2.77
2.56
2.25
2.17
2.09
2.68
27,411
102,762
246,011
27,100
247,104
34,362
129,097
310,606
24,726
92,123
208,727
24,280
207,096
29,891
112,169
254,888
15,443
2.70
2.58
2.36
2.67
2.33
2.16
2.04
1.89
2.82
2.73
2.67
2.79
2.64
2.43
2.32
2.20
2.77
26,599
99,575
235,587
26,897
238,620
33,248
125,933
294,172
23,850
88,749
198,564
24,106
200,821
27,677
104,433
240,985
14,885
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h ................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............
<65,000 Btu/h .................................................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............
<65,000 Btu/h .................................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h ................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............
<65,000 Btu/h .................................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h ................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............
<65,000 Btu/h .................................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h ................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............
<65,000 Btu/h .................................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h ................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............
<65,000 Btu/h .................................................
2.59
2.50
2.72
2.51
2.21
2.13
2.05
2.43
2.15
2.11
2.47
2.19
2.11
2.03
1.77
1.73
2.39
57,537
129,787
15,159
128,753
18,657
70,022
158,416
24,671
101,844
227,098
24,272
99,975
226,021
29,679
123,833
275,668
19,813
2.68
2.61
2.74
2.58
2.35
2.24
2.12
2.56
2.24
2.21
2.53
2.21
2.18
2.08
1.90
1.81
2.51
55,390
123,819
15,048
125,259
17,546
66,271
152,438
23,419
97,297
215,794
23,696
98,618
218,764
28,823
114,708
263,483
18,866
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h ................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............
<65,000 Btu/h .................................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h ................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............
<65,000 Btu/h .................................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h ................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............
2.11
2.06
2.43
2.14
2.07
1.99
1.73
1.69
81,668
182,034
19,567
80,142
182,034
23,796
99,135
221,888
2.19
2.15
2.48
2.16
2.12
2.00
1.82
1.73
78,312
174,414
19,094
79,400
176,882
23,677
94,232
216,757
1 The air-cooled, upflow ducted, >65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h; water-cooled, upflow ducted, >65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h; and water-cooled with fluid
economizer, upflow ducted, >65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h equipment classes are not included in the table, as the ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 levels for these
classes are equivalent to the current Federal standard.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jun 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
36414
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
B. Shipments Analysis
DOE uses shipment projections by
equipment class to calculate the
national impacts of standards on energy
consumption, as well as net present
value and future manufacturer cash
flows. DOE shipments projections
typically are based on available
historical data broken out by equipment
classes. Current sales estimates allow for
a more accurate model that captures
recent trends in the market.
In the analysis conducted in the
September 2020 NODA/RFI, DOE used
confidential shipments data provided by
AHRI to calibrate its shipment model to
produce a breakdown by equipment
class. DOE then used a stock turnover
model to project shipments over the 30year shipments analysis period. The
stock turnover model was broken into
three cooling capacities (<65,000 Btu/h,
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h, and
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h),
and stock projections for each cooling
capacity grew at a constant rate through
the 30-year analysis period. 85 FR
60642, 60668–60669 (Sept. 25, 2020).
Total shipments are projected to grow
slightly over the analysis period, as
shown in Table IV–2 of this document.
The analysis in the September 2020
NODA/RFI relied in part on the 2012
Commercial Buildings Energy
Consumption Survey (CBECS 2012).13
In response to the September 2020
NODA/RFI, AHRI stated that DOE
should rely on CBECS 2018 when it was
published. (AHRI No. 2 at p. 3) 14 In the
March 2022 ECS NOPR, DOE stated that
the full dataset from CBECS 2018 was
not available at the time of the NOPR.
87 FR 12802, 12830–12831 (March 7,
2022). DOE added that CBECS 2012 was
used to develop a stock of CRACs that
would match the shipments provided by
AHRI in 2012, so the main driver of
shipments analysis was the shipments
time series and not CBECS 2012. Id.
However, DOE stated that to the extent
that updated CBECS data become
available, DOE will consider such data
in the evaluation of a final rule. Id.
CBECS 2018 data is now available; 15
however as stated previously, using
CBECS 2018 would not be expected to
significantly change the shipments
analysis, as it would be calibrated to
confidential shipments data provided by
AHRI, just as is done with the CBECS
2012 data. For this reason, and because
DOE is not making other analytical
updates in this final rule, DOE
continues to rely on the shipments data
and methodology from the September
2020 NODA/RFI and March 2022 ECS
NOPR.
TABLE IV–2—PROJECTED SHIPMENTS
<65,000 Btu/h
2020 Shipments .......................................................................
2052 Shipments .......................................................................
C. No-New-Standards-Case Efficiency
Distribution
The no-new-standards case efficiency
distribution is used to establish the
market share of each efficiency level in
the case where there is no new or
amended standard. DOE is unaware of
available market data that reports CRAC
≥65,000 Btu/h
and <240,000 Btu/h
3,208
2,634
≥240,000 Btu/h
and <760,000 Btu/h
2,132
3,650
efficiency in terms of NSenCOP that can
be used to determine the no-newstandards case efficiency distribution.
DOE estimated the no-new-standards
case efficiency distribution for each
CRAC equipment class using model
counts from DOE’s Compliance
Certification Database. DOE calculated
the fraction of models that are above the
Total
shipments
3,190
3,178
8,530
9,462
current Federal baseline and below the
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 level and
assigned this to the Federal baseline. All
models that are at or above that
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 level are
assigned to the ASHRAE level. The nonew-standard case distribution for
CRACs are presented in Table IV–3.
TABLE IV–3—NO-NEW-STANDARDS CASE EFFICIENCY DISTRIBUTION FOR CRACS 1
Airflow configuration
Current net sensible cooling capacity
Air-cooled ........................
Downflow ........................
<65,000 Btu/h ..........................................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h .........................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h .......................
<65,000 Btu/h ..........................................................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h .......................
<65,000 Btu/h ..........................................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h .........................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h .......................
<65,000 Btu/h ..........................................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h .........................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h .......................
<65,000 Btu/h ..........................................................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h .......................
<65,000 Btu/h ..........................................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h .........................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h .......................
Upflow, ducted ...............
Upflow, non-ducted ........
Water-cooled ...................
Downflow ........................
Upflow, ducted ...............
Upflow, non-ducted ........
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
Federal
baseline
market share
(%)
Condenser system type
13 U.S. Department of Energy—Energy
Information Administration, 2012 CBECS Survey
Data (Available at: www.eia.gov/consumption/
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jun 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
commercial/data/2012/) (Last accessed March 9,
2020).
14 Comment received in response to September
2020 NODA/RFI (Available at: https://
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
ASHRAE standard
90.1–2019 level
market share
(%)
2
22
20
0
4
4
11
23
11
15
24
0
13
11
21
27
www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2020-BTSTD-0008-0001).
15 Available at: www.eia.gov/consumption/
commercial/data/2018/.
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
98
78
80
100
96
96
89
77
89
85
76
100
87
89
79
73
36415
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE IV–3—NO-NEW-STANDARDS CASE EFFICIENCY DISTRIBUTION FOR CRACS 1—Continued
Condenser system type
Water-cooled with fluid
economizer.
Current net sensible cooling capacity
Downflow ........................
<65,000 Btu/h ..........................................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h .........................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h .......................
<65,000 Btu/h ..........................................................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h .......................
<65,000 Btu/h ..........................................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h .........................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h .......................
<65,000 Btu/h ..........................................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h .........................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h .......................
<65,000 Btu/h ..........................................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h .........................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h .......................
<65,000 Btu/h ..........................................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h .........................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h .......................
<65,000 Btu/h ..........................................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h .........................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h .......................
<65,000 Btu/h ..........................................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h .........................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h .......................
<65,000 Btu/h ..........................................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h .........................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h .......................
Upflow, ducted ...............
Upflow, non-ducted ........
Glycol-cooled ...................
Downflow ........................
Upflow, ducted ...............
Upflow, non-ducted ........
Glycol-cooled with fluid
economizer.
Federal
baseline
market share
(%)
Airflow configuration
Downflow ........................
Upflow, ducted ...............
Upflow, non-ducted ........
ASHRAE standard
90.1–2019 level
market share
(%)
2
13
38
2
13
8
16
20
57
31
36
20
6
30
20
38
30
57
31
31
10
8
33
2
30
27
98
87
62
98
87
92
84
80
43
69
64
80
94
70
80
62
70
43
69
69
90
92
67
98
70
73
1 The air-cooled, upflow ducted, >65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h; water-cooled, upflow ducted, >65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h; and
water-cooled with fluid economizer, upflow ducted, >65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h equipment classes are not included in the table, as the
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 levels for these equipment classes are equivalent to the current Federal standards.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
D. Compliance Dates and Analysis
Period
If DOE were to prescribe energy
conservation standards at the efficiency
levels contained in ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2019, EPCA provides that the
compliance date shall be on or after a
date that is two or three years
(depending on the equipment type or
size) after the effective date of the
applicable minimum energy efficiency
requirement in the amended ASHRAE
standard. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(D)). If
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 does not specify
an effective date, then the compliance
date specified by statute would be
dependent upon the publication date of
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019.
In this case, ASHRAE Standard 90.1–
2019 does not specify an effective date
for CRAC levels, so, therefore, the
publication date of October 23, 2019,
was used to determine the compliance
dates for estimating the energy savings
potential of adopting ASHRAE Standard
90.1-levels.
For equipment classes for which the
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 levels are more
stringent than the current Federal
standards (i.e., classes for which DOE is
triggered), if DOE were to prescribe
standards more stringent than the
efficiency levels contained in ASHRAE
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jun 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
Standard 90.1–2019, EPCA dictates that
the compliance date must be on or after
a date which is four years after the date
of publication of a final rule in the
Federal Register. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(D)) For equipment classes for
which DOE is acting under its 6-year
lookback authority, if DOE were to
adopt more-stringent standards, EPCA
states that the compliance date for any
such standard shall be after a date that
is the later of the date three years after
publication of the final rule establishing
a new standard or the date six years
after the effective date for the current
standard. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C)(iv))
As discussed in Section V of this
document, DOE is not establishing
standards for CRACs that are more
stringent than the levels contained in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019. For
purposes of calculating the NES for the
equipment in this evaluation, DOE used
a 30-year analysis period starting with
the assumed year of compliance listed
in Table IV–4 for equipment analyzed in
the September 2020 NODA/RFI. This is
the standard analysis period of 30 years
that DOE typically uses in its NES
analysis. For equipment classes with a
compliance date in the last six months
of the year, DOE starts its analysis
period in the first full year after
compliance. For example, if CRACs less
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
than 65,000 Btu/h were to have a
compliance date of October 23, 2021,
the analysis period for calculating NES
would begin in 2022 and extend to
2051.
TABLE IV–4—ANALYZED COMPLIANCE
DATES OF AMENDED ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS FOR TRIGGERED EQUIPMENT CLASSES
Equipment class
Analyzed
compliance
dates for
efficiency
levels in
ASHRAE
standard
90.1–2019
Computer Room Air Conditioners
Equipment with current
NSCC <65,000 Btu/h.
Equipment with current
NSCC ≥65,000 and
<240,000 Btu/h.
Equipment with current
NSCC ≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h.
10/23/2021
10/23/2022
10/23/2022
The analysis presented in this final
rule relies on the minimum compliance
dates provided under EPCA for the
energy conservation standards. In the
March 2022 ECS NOPR and in this final
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
36416
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
rule, DOE considered the various
applicable lead times required by EPCA
and has determined that the compliance
date for amended standards for all
CRAC equipment classes will be 360
days after the publication date of the
final rule adopting amended energy
conservation standards. 87 FR 12802,
12834 (March 7, 2022). Comments
received on the compliance date are
discussed in section V.D of this
document.
E. Estimates of Potential Energy Savings
DOE estimated the potential site,
primary, and FFC energy savings in
quads (i.e., 1015 Btu) for adopting
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 efficiency
levels for CRACs within each equipment
class analyzed. The potential energy
savings of adopting ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2019 levels are measured relative
to the current Federal standards. Table
IV–5 shows the potential energy savings
resulting from the analyses conducted
for CRACs. The reported energy savings
are cumulative over the period in which
equipment shipped in the 30-year
analysis continues to operate. The
national energy savings estimates are
identical to those provided in the
September 2020 NODA/RFI. See 85 FR
60642, 60672 (Sep. 25, 2020).
TABLE IV–5—POTENTIAL ENERGY SAVINGS OF ADOPTING ASHRAE STANDARD 90.1–2019 FOR CRACS 1
Condenser system type
Air-cooled .....................
Airflow configuration
Downflow .....................
Upflow, ducted ............
Upflow, non-ducted .....
Water-cooled ................
Downflow .....................
Upflow, ducted ............
Upflow, non-ducted .....
Water-cooled with fluid
economizer.
Downflow .....................
Upflow, ducted ............
Upflow, non-ducted .....
Glycol-cooled ................
Downflow .....................
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
Upflow, ducted ............
Upflow, non-ducted .....
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jun 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Current net sensible
cooling capacity
ASHRAE
efficiency level
Site savings
Primary
savings
FFC savings
NSenCOP
Quads
Quads
Quads
<65,000 Btu/h ..............
≥65,000 Btu/h and
<240,000 Btu/h.
≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h.
<65,000 Btu/h ..............
≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h.
<65,000 Btu/h ..............
≥65,000 Btu/h and
<240,000 Btu/h.
≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h.
<65,000 Btu/h ..............
≥65,000 Btu/h and
<240,000 Btu/h.
≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h.
<65,000 Btu/h ..............
≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h.
<65,000 Btu/h ..............
≥65,000 Btu/h and
<240,000 Btu/h.
≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h.
<65,000 Btu/h ..............
≥65,000 Btu/h and
<240,000 Btu/h.
≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h.
<65,000 Btu/h ..............
≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h.
<65,000 Btu/h ..............
≥65,000 Btu/h and
<240,000 Btu/h.
≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h.
<65,000 Btu/h ..............
≥65,000 Btu/h and
<240,000 Btu/h.
≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h.
<65,000 Btu/h ..............
≥65,000 Btu/h and
<240,000 Btu/h.
≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h.
<65,000 Btu/h ..............
≥65,000 Btu/h and
<240,000 Btu/h.
≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h.
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
2.70
2.58
0.0000
0.0011
0.0000
0.0029
0.0000
0.0030
2.36
0.0071
0.0185
0.0193
2.67
2.33
0.0000
0.0001
0.0000
0.0003
0.0000
0.0003
2.16
2.04
0.0000
0.0003
0.0001
0.0007
0.0001
0.0008
1.89
0.0014
0.0037
0.0039
2.82
2.73
0.0000
0.0001
0.0000
0.0003
0.0000
0.0003
2.67
0.0003
0.0007
0.0008
2.79
2.64
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0001
0.0000
0.0001
2.43
2.32
0.0001
0.0002
0.0004
0.0005
0.0004
0.0006
2.20
0.0001
0.0003
0.0003
2.77
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
2.68
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
2.61
0.0001
0.0002
0.0002
2.74
2.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
2.35
2.24
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
2.12
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
2.56
2.24
0.0000
0.0001
0.0000
0.0002
0.0000
0.0002
2.21
0.0001
0.0003
0.0003
2.53
2.21
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
2.18
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
2.08
1.90
0.0000
0.0001
0.0000
0.0003
0.0000
0.0003
1.81
0.0000
0.0001
0.0001
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
36417
TABLE IV–5—POTENTIAL ENERGY SAVINGS OF ADOPTING ASHRAE STANDARD 90.1–2019 FOR CRACS 1—Continued
Condenser system type
Glycol-cooled with fluid
economizer.
Current net sensible
cooling capacity
Airflow configuration
Downflow .....................
Upflow, ducted ............
Upflow, non-ducted .....
ASHRAE
efficiency level
Site savings
Primary
savings
FFC savings
NSenCOP
Quads
Quads
Quads
<65,000 Btu/h ..............
2.51
0.0000
0.0001
0.0001
≥65,000 Btu/h and
<240,000 Btu/h.
≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h.
<65,000 Btu/h ..............
≥65,000 Btu/h and
<240,000 Btu/h.
≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h.
<65,000 Btu/h ..............
≥65,000 Btu/h and
<240,000 Btu/h.
≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h.
2.19
0.0003
0.0007
0.0007
2.15
0.0009
0.0022
0.0023
2.48
2.16
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
2.12
0.0002
0.0004
0.0004
2.00
1.82
0.0000
0.0003
0.0000
0.0007
0.0000
0.0008
1.73
0.0001
0.0003
0.0003
1 The air-cooled, upflow ducted, >65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h; water-cooled, upflow ducted, >65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h; and
water-cooled with fluid economizer, upflow ducted, >65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h equipment classes are not included in the table, as the
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 levels for these equipment classes are equivalent to the current Federal standard.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
V. Conclusions
A. Consideration of More-Stringent
Efficiency Levels
EPCA requires DOE to establish an
amended uniform national standard for
equipment classes at the minimum level
specified in the amended ASHRAE
Standard 90.1 unless DOE determines,
by rule published in the Federal
Register, and supported by clear and
convincing evidence, that adoption of a
uniform national standard more
stringent than the amended ASHRAE
Standard 90.1 for the equipment class
would result in significant additional
conservation of energy and is
technologically feasible and
economically justified. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(I)–(II))
In the March 2022 ECS NOPR, DOE
tentatively determined that due to the
lack of market data in terms of the
NSenCOP metric and the test metric
change, DOE was unable to determine
via clear and convincing evidence that
a more-stringent CRAC standard level
than that contained in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2019 would result in
significant additional conservation of
energy and is technologically feasible
and economically justified. 87 FR
12802, 12837–12838 (March 7, 2022).
DOE noted that to obtain NSenCOP
market data for purposes of analysis of
standard levels more stringent than
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019, DOE
would be required to translate the
individual SCOP ratings to NSenCOP
ratings for all CRAC models certified in
DOE’s CCMS Database. As the range of
model efficiencies increases, so does the
number of different technologies used to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jun 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
achieve such efficiencies. With this
increase in variation, there is an
increase in the potential for variation in
the crosswalk results from the actual
performance under the new metric of
the analyzed models. DOE decided not
to conduct further analysis for this
particular rulemaking because DOE
lacked the data to assess potential
energy conservation. Id.
AHRI stated that it supports the direct
adoption of all NSenCOP values and
associated capacities in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1, and the commenter
agreed that the efficiencies proposed in
the NOPR will save energy. (AHRI,
No.12 at p. 1)
NYSERDA recognized that the new
NSenCOP metric presented difficulty in
obtaining accurate market data but
commented that changing ASHRAE
metrics does not preclude DOE from its
obligations to conduct a thorough
analysis of the market to determine if
there is clear and convincing evidence
to set standards above the ASHRAE
levels. (NYSERDA, No. 14 at p. 2)
NYSERDA urged DOE to conduct
further analysis and reassess this
determination as more manufacturers
adhere to the NSenCOP standards and
demonstrate their equipment
performance. Id. NYSERDA further
asserted that, based on their
observations of CRAC equipment on the
DOE CCMS database, some equipment
already have efficiency levels higher
than required in ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2019 indicating a potential for
more-stringent energy conservation
standards, and recommended that DOE
re-evaluate CRAC standards sooner than
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
mandated by the six-year-lookback
requirement. Id.
The CA IOUs encouraged DOE to
adopt higher minimum efficiencies than
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 for three
CRAC classes: (1) Air-cooled Downflow
≥295 kBtu/h and <930 kBtu/h; (2) Aircooled Upflow Ducted ≥295 kBtu/h and
<930 kBtu/h, and (3) Air-cooled Upflow
Non-Ducted ≥295 kBtu/h and <930
kBtu/h. (CA IOUs, No. 13 at p. 2) The
CA IOUs asserted that based on their
analysis, all CRACs sold in the U.S. in
these classes are already more efficient
than the efficiency levels in ASHRAE
90.1–2019. Id. The CA IOUs stated that
there are also several CRAC classes
where most of the CRACs exceed
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019 minimum
efficiency levels, and the commenter
suggested that those classes should be
considered for higher levels. Id. The CA
IOUs added that based on their findings,
they would suggest more-stringent
standards for this equipment to the
governing body of ASHRAE Standard
90.1, and they encouraged DOE
participation in the ASHRAE Standard
90.1 process. Id.
In response to NYSERDA, DOE notes
that it makes determinations pursuant to
the ASHRAE trigger (and the six-year
look back review) by evaluating the
information and data available specific
to the equipment under review that is
present at that time. DOE is not making
a general determination that the clear
and convincing evidence threshold
cannot be met in all instances in which
there is a metric change. Nonetheless, as
acknowledged by NYSERDA, the lack of
market data in terms of the new metric
prevents DOE from comprehensively
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
36418
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
assessing the potential for energy
conservation at the current time.
However, in a future rulemaking when
more market data are available in terms
of the NSenCOP metric, DOE may be in
a better position to conduct a full
economic analysis.
In response to NYSERDA’s and the
CA IOU’s comment regarding
equipment classes with rated equipment
efficiencies that are already higher than
the minimum efficiency levels in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019, DOE
notes that it cannot make such a
determination without a significant
number of manufacturers certifying with
the NSenCOP metric. DOE identified
NSenCOP market data for less than
three percent of the CRAC models
certified in DOE’s Certification
Compliance Database. Even if the
analysis presented by the CA IOUs is
deemed accurate, DOE does not have
enough information to evaluate what an
appropriate more-stringent standard
would be for the equipment classes
which the CA IOUs have identified. In
response to the CA IOUs’ request that
DOE participate in the ASHRAE
Standard 90.1 process, the Department
notes that as of the time of this final
rule, it is an active participant in the
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 process.
After considering these stakeholder
comments, and the lack of sufficient
NSenCOP market data available
following the March 2022 ECS NOPR,
DOE maintains its preliminary decision
not to conduct additional analysis of
more-stringent CRAC standards as part
of this rulemaking. The lack of market
and performance data in terms of the
new metric limits the analysis of energy
savings that would result from
efficiency levels more stringent than the
amended ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019
levels for this equipment. Accordingly,
given the limits of any energy use
analysis resulting from the lack of data,
DOE has concluded that it lacks clear
and convincing evidence that morestringent standards for CRACs would
result in a significant additional amount
of energy savings as required for DOE to
establish such more-stringent standards.
B. Review Under Six-Year Lookback
Provision
As discussed, DOE is required to
conduct an evaluation of each class of
covered equipment in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1 every six years. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(C)(i)) DOE may only adopt
more-stringent standards pursuant to
the six-year-lookback review if the
Secretary determines, supported by
clear and convincing evidence, that the
adoption of more-stringent standards
would result in significant additional
conservation of energy and is
technologically feasible and
economically justified. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(C)(i); 42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(II)) The analysis under
the six-year-lookback provision
incorporates the same standards and
factors as the analysis for whether DOE
should adopt a standard more stringent
than an amended ASHRAE Standard
90.1 standard. Id. Accordingly, DOE is
evaluating the six CRAC equipment
classes for which ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2019 did not increase the
stringency of the standards.
Similar to the triggered classes
discussed in section V.A of this
document, there are limited NSenCOP
data for CRACs within each of these six
classes, and there is not a comparable
industry analysis (i.e., translating
ratings to the updated metric for all
models on the market) for comparison.
While the crosswalk analysis required
only that DOE translate the efficiency
levels at the baseline levels, the analysis
needed to evaluate whether amended
standards more stringent than ASHRAE
Standard 90.1–2019 would result in
significant energy savings and be
technologically feasible and
economically justified under the clear
and convincing threshold would require
more than baseline data—it would
require NSenCOP data across all
efficiency levels on the market.
Therefore, in line with the same
initial reasoning presented in DOE’s
evaluation of more-stringent standards
for those classes of CRAC for which
ASHRAE updated the industry
standards, DOE determines that the
clear and convincing evidence threshold
is not met for these six classes. As such,
DOE did not conduct an energy savings
analysis of standard levels more
stringent than the current Federal
standard levels for the classes of CRACs
not triggered by ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2019 (i.e., the six classes of CRAC
for which ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2019
does not specify more-stringent
minimum efficiency levels).
C. Definition for Ducted Condenser
As indicated, ASHRAE Standard
90.1–2019 includes separate equipment
classes for ceiling-mounted CRACs with
ducted condensers. The current
definitions at 10 CFR 431.92 do not
include a definition of ‘‘ducted
condenser.’’ In the March 2022 ECS
NOPR, DOE proposed the following
definition of ‘‘ducted condenser’’ at 10
CFR 431.92, consistent with the
definition specified in section 3.2.11.1
of AHRI 1360–2022. 87 FR 12802, 12839
(March 7, 2022).
Ducted Condenser means a
configuration of computer room air
conditioner for which the condenser or
condensing unit that manufacturer’s
installation instructions indicate is
intended to exhaust condenser air
through a duct(s).
DOE did not receive any comments on
this definition, and for the reasons
previously explained, the Department is
finalizing it as proposed.
D. Amended Energy Conservation
Standards
DOE is amending the energy
conservation standards for CRACs by
adopting the efficiency levels specified
for CRACs in ASHRAE Standard 90.1–
2019. The standards, which are
expressed in terms of NSenCOP, are
shown in Table V–1 and Table V–2 of
this document. These standards apply to
all CRACs listed in Table V–1 and Table
V–2 of this document manufactured in,
or imported into, the United States
starting on the compliance date as
discussed in the following paragraphs.
TABLE V–1—AMENDED STANDARDS FOR FLOOR-MOUNTED CRACS
Minimum NSenCOP efficiency
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
Equipment type
Air-Cooled .....................
Air-Cooled with Fluid
Economizer.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Net sensible cooling
capacity 16
Downflow
<80,000 Btu/h ..............
≥80,000 Btu/h and
<295,000 Btu/h.
≥295,000 Btu/h and
<930,000 Btu/h.
<80,000 Btu/h ..............
18:22 Jun 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Minimum NSenCOP efficiency
Upflow ducted
2.70
2.58
2.67
2.55
2.36
2.33
2.70
2.67
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Net sensible cooling
capacity
<65,000 Btu/h ..............
≥65,000 Btu/h and
<240,000 Btu/h.
≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h.
<65,000 Btu/h ..............
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
Upflow
non-ducted
Horizontal flow
2.16
2.04
2.65
2.55
1.89
2.47
2.09
2.65
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
36419
TABLE V–1—AMENDED STANDARDS FOR FLOOR-MOUNTED CRACS—Continued
Minimum NSenCOP efficiency
Equipment type
Water-Cooled ...............
Water-Cooled with Fluid
Economizer.
Glycol-Cooled ...............
Glycol-Cooled with Fluid
Economizer.
Net sensible cooling
capacity 16
Downflow
Minimum NSenCOP efficiency
Upflow ducted
≥80,000 Btu/h and
<295,000 Btu/h.
≥295,000 Btu/h and
<930,000 Btu/h.
<80,000 Btu/h ..............
≥80,000 Btu/h and
<295,000 Btu/h.
≥295,000 Btu/h and
<930,000 Btu/h.
<80,000 Btu/h ..............
2.58
2.55
2.36
2.33
2.82
2.73
2.79
2.70
2.67
2.64
2.77
2.74
≥80,000 Btu/h and
<295,000 Btu/h.
≥295,000 Btu/h and
<930,000 Btu/h.
<80,000 Btu/h ..............
≥80,000 Btu/h and
<295,000 Btu/h.
≥295,000 Btu/h and
<930,000 Btu/h.
<80,000 Btu/h ..............
2.68
2.65
2.61
2.58
2.56
2.24
2.53
2.21
2.21
2.18
2.51
2.48
≥80,000 Btu/h and
<295,000 Btu/h.
≥295,000 Btu/h and
<930,000 Btu/h.
2.19
2.16
2.15
2.12
Net sensible cooling
capacity
Upflow
non-ducted
Horizontal flow
≥65,000 Btu/h and
<240,000 Btu/h.
≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h.
<65,000 Btu/h ..............
≥65,000 Btu/h and
<240,000 Btu/h.
≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h.
<65,000 Btu/h ..............
1.99
2.55
1.81
2.47
2.43
2.32
2.79
2.68
2.20
2.60
2.35
2.71
≥65,000 Btu/h and
<240,000 Btu/h.
≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h.
<65,000 Btu/h ..............
≥65,000 Btu/h and
<240,000 Btu/h.
≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h.
<65,000 Btu/h ..............
2.24
2.60
2.12
2.54
2.08
1.90
2.48
2.18
1.81
2.18
2.00
2.44
1.82
2.10
1.73
2.10
≥65,000 Btu/h and
<240,000 Btu/h.
≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h.
TABLE V–2—AMENDED STANDARDS FOR CEILING-MOUNTED CRACS
Minimum NSenCOP efficiency
Equipment type
Net sensible cooling capacity
Ducted
Air-Cooled with Free Air Discharge Condenser ...........
Air-Cooled with Free Air Discharge Condenser and
Fluid Economizer.
Air-Cooled with Ducted Condenser ..............................
Air-Cooled with Fluid Economizer and Ducted Condenser.
Water-Cooled ................................................................
Water-Cooled with Fluid Economizer ...........................
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
Glycol-Cooled ...............................................................
Glycol-Cooled with Fluid Economizer ..........................
16 DOE has used 930,000 Btu/h as the adjusted
upper capacity limit for downflow and upflow
ducted CRACs in its analysis (see section III.C of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jun 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
<29,000 Btu/h ...............................................................
≥29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h ................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............................
<29,000 Btu/h ...............................................................
2.05
2.02
1.92
2.01
2.08
2.05
1.94
2.04
≥29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h ................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............................
<29,000 Btu/h ...............................................................
≥29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h ................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............................
<29,000 Btu/h ...............................................................
1.97
1.87
1.86
1.83
1.73
1.82
2.00
1.89
1.89
1.86
1.75
1.85
≥29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h ................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............................
<29,000 Btu/h ...............................................................
≥29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h ................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............................
<29,000 Btu/h ...............................................................
≥29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h ................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............................
<29,000 Btu/h ...............................................................
≥29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h ................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............................
<29,000 Btu/h ...............................................................
≥29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h ................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............................
1.78
1.68
2.38
2.28
2.18
2.33
2.23
2.13
1.97
1.93
1.78
1.92
1.88
1.73
1.81
1.70
2.41
2.31
2.20
2.36
2.26
2.16
2.00
1.98
1.81
1.95
1.93
1.76
this document). The 930,000 Btu/h upper capacity
limit (as measured per AHRI 1360–2022) used in
the crosswalk analysis is equivalent to the 760,000
PO 00000
Non-ducted
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Btu/h upper capacity limit (as measured per ANSI/
ASHRAE 127–2007) established in the current DOE
standards.
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
36420
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
As noted, in instances in which DOE
is amending an energy conservation
standard for CRACs in response to
updates to ASHRAE Standard 90.1,
EPCA specifies certain compliance lead
times based on equipment capacity. If
DOE were to prescribe energy
conservation standards at the efficiency
levels contained in the updated
ASHRAE Standard 90.1, EPCA states
that any such standard shall become
effective on or after a date that is two
or three years (depending on the
equipment type or size) after the
effective date of the applicable
minimum energy efficiency requirement
in the amended ASHRAE standard. (42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(D)) In the present case,
were DOE to adopt amended standards
for ‘‘small’’ CRACs (i.e., CRACs with a
capacity of less than 65,000 Btu/h) at
the levels specified in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1, EPCA provides that the
compliance date must be on or after a
date which is two years after the
effective date of the level specified in
the updated ASHRAE Standard 90.1
(i.e., October 23, 2021). Were DOE to
adopt amended standards for ‘‘large’’
and ‘‘very large’’ CRACs (i.e., CRACs
with a capacity equal to or greater than
65,000 Btu/h) at the levels specified in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1, EPCA provides
that the compliance date must be on or
after a date which is three years after the
effective date of the level specified in
the updated ASHRAE Standard 90.1
(i.e., October 23, 2022).
If DOE were to prescribe standards
more stringent than the efficiency levels
contained in ASHRAE Standard 90.1–
2019, EPCA dictates that any such
standard will become effective for
equipment manufactured on or after a
date which is four years after the date
of publication of a final rule in the
Federal Register. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(D)) For equipment classes for
which DOE is acting under its 6-yearlookback authority, if DOE were to
adopt more-stringent standards, EPCA
states that any such standard shall apply
to equipment manufactured after a date
that is the latter of the date three years
after publication of the final rule
establishing such standard or six years
after the effective date for the current
standard. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C)(iv))
Moreover, the amended energy
conservation standards are based on a
new metric (i.e., NSenCOP), and DOE
has amended the test procedure to rely
on NSenCOP in the March 2023 TP final
rule. See EERE–2021–BT–TP–0017. As
adopted in the March 2023TP final rule,
the compliance date of the amended test
procedure for CRACs using the
NSenCOP metric will be the compliance
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jun 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
date of amended standards in terms of
NSenCOP.
In the March 2022 ECS NOPR, DOE
considered these various applicable lead
times relevant under EPCA to standards
(i.e., October 23, 2021, for ‘‘small’’
CRACs and October 23, 2022, for
‘‘large’’ and ‘‘very large’’ CRACs) and
the 360-day lead time relevant to a test
procedure update addressing NSenCOP.
87 FR 12802, 12843 (March 7, 2022). In
order to align the compliance dates
across equipment classes and account
for an updated test procedure, should
one be finalized, DOE proposed that the
compliance date for amended standards
for all CRAC equipment classes would
be 360 days after the publication date of
the final rule adopting amended energy
conservation standards. Id.
The CA IOUs supported DOE’s
proposal to align compliance dates
across equipment classes and noted that
this approach will reduce the
compliance burden for manufacturers
and streamline future rulemakings for
this equipment for all stakeholders. (CA
IOUs, No. 13 at p. 2)
AHRI agreed with DOE’s assessment
that proposed standards, if adopted,
would apply to all CRACs listed in
Table I–1 and Table I–2 manufactured
in, or imported into, the United States
on the same date. (AHRI, No. 12 at p.
3) However, AHRI commented that
given the proposed expansion of the
covered equipment, and the change in
Federal metric being considered, DOE
should cover all equipment classes
included in ASHRAE Standard 90.1–
2019 on one of the two compliance
dates options presented by EPCA rather
than the ‘‘arbitrary’’ 360-day compliance
period proposed. Id.
In response, DOE notes that both the
compliance date options presented by
EPCA (and suggested by AHRI) are dates
certain tied to the effective date of the
amended ASHRAE Standard 90.1 which
have already passed (i.e., October 23,
2021 and October 23, 2022). Following
the statutory scheme, an argument could
be made for requiring immediate
compliance with the amended
standards, since the adopted ASHRAE
Standard 90.1 levels were promulgated
and known in late 2019. However, DOE
nevertheless concludes that some
reasonable lead time would be needed
for all CRAC manufacturers to come into
compliance with the amended Federal
standards. Therefore, given that EPCA’s
specified timelines are no longer
feasible, and that DOE has now finalized
a test procedure adopting NSenCOP as
the metric, DOE has decided to adopt a
compliance date for the amended
standards for all CRAC equipment
classes that is 360 days after the
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
publication date in the Federal Register
of this final rule adopting amended
energy conservation standards. DOE has
determined that lead time of 360 days
would be adequate for manufacturers to
come into compliance with the
amended CRAC standards.
1. Impact of Any Lessening of
Competition
EPCA directs DOE to consider the
impact of any lessening of competition,
as determined in writing by the
Attorney General, that is likely to result
from a standard. (See 42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(B)(ii)(V)) To assist the
Department of Justice (DOJ) in making
such a determination, DOE transmitted
copies of its proposed rule to the
Attorney General for review, with a
request that the DOJ provide its
determination on this issue. In its
assessment letter responding to DOE,
DOJ concluded that the proposed energy
conservation standards for CRACs are
unlikely to have a significant adverse
impact on competition. DOE is
publishing the Attorney General’s
assessment at the end of this final rule.
DOE did not receive any public
comments on this issue.
VI. Procedural Issues and Regulatory
Review
A. Review Under Executive Orders
12866 and 13563
Executive Order (E.O.) 12866,
‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review,’’ 58
FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993), as
supplemented and reaffirmed by E.O.
13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review,’’ 76 FR 3821 (Jan.
21, 2011), requires agencies, to the
extent permitted by law, to: (1) propose
or adopt a regulation only upon a
reasoned determination that its benefits
justify its costs (recognizing that some
benefits and costs are difficult to
quantify); (2) tailor regulations to
impose the least burden on society,
consistent with obtaining regulatory
objectives, taking into account, among
other things, and to the extent
practicable, the costs of cumulative
regulations; (3) select, in choosing
among alternative regulatory
approaches, those approaches that
maximize net benefits (including
potential economic, environmental,
public health and safety, and other
advantages; distributive impacts; and
equity); (4) to the extent feasible, specify
performance objectives, rather than
specifying the behavior or manner of
compliance that regulated entities must
adopt; and (5) identify and assess
available alternatives to direct
regulation, including providing
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
economic incentives to encourage the
desired behavior, such as user fees or
marketable permits, or providing
information upon which choices can be
made by the public. DOE emphasizes as
well that E.O. 13563 requires agencies to
use the best available techniques to
quantify anticipated present and future
benefits and costs as accurately as
possible. In its guidance, the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs
(OIRA) in the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has emphasized that such
techniques may include identifying
changing future compliance costs that
might result from technological
innovation or anticipated behavioral
changes. For the reasons stated in the
preamble, this regulatory action is
consistent with these principles.
Section 6(a) of E.O. 12866 also
requires agencies to submit ‘‘significant
regulatory actions’’ to OIRA for review.
OIRA has determined that this final rule
does not constitute a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ under section 3(f) of
E.O. 12866. Accordingly, this action was
not submitted to OIRA for review under
E.O. 12866.
B. Review Under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires preparation
of an initial regulatory flexibility
analysis (IRFA) and a final regulatory
flexibility analysis (FRFA) for any rule
that by law must be proposed for public
comment, unless the agency certifies
that the rule, if promulgated, will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
As required by E.O. 13272, ‘‘Proper
Consideration of Small Entities in
Agency Rulemaking,’’ 67 FR 53461
(August 16, 2002), DOE published
procedures and policies on February 19,
2003, to ensure that the potential
impacts of its rules on small entities are
properly considered during the
rulemaking process. 68 FR 7990. DOE
has made its procedures and policies
available on the Office of the General
Counsel’s website (www.energy.gov/gc/
office-general-counsel). DOE reviewed
this final rule under the provisions of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act and the
policies and procedures published on
February 19, 2003.
DOE has prepared the following FRFA
for the equipment that is the subject of
this energy conservation standards
rulemaking.
1. Description of Reasons Why Action Is
Being Considered
DOE is amending the existing DOE
minimum efficiency standards for
CRACs as is required under EPCA’s
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jun 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
ASHRAE trigger requirement and the
six-year-lookback provision. DOE must
update the Federal minimum efficiency
standards to be consistent with levels
published in ASHRAE Standard 90.1,
unless DOE determines, supported by
clear and convincing evidence, that
adoption of a more-stringent level
would produce significant additional
conservation of energy and would be
technologically feasible and
economically justified. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)) DOE must also review
and determine whether to amend
standards of each class of covered
equipment in ASHRAE Standard 90.1
every six years. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(C)(i))
2. Objectives of, and Legal Basis for,
Rule
EPCA directs that if ASHRAE amends
ASHRAE Standard 90.1, DOE must
adopt amended standards at the new
ASHRAE efficiency level, unless DOE
determines, supported by clear and
convincing evidence, that adoption of a
more-stringent level would produce
significant additional conservation of
energy and would be technologically
feasible and economically justified. (42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)) Under a
separate provision of EPCA, DOE must
also review energy efficiency standards
for CRACs every six years and either: (1)
issue a notice of determination that the
standards do not need to be amended as
adoption of a more-stringent level is not
supported by clear and convincing
evidence; or (2) issue a notice of
proposed rulemaking including new
proposed standards based on certain
criteria and procedures in subparagraph
(B). (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C))
3. Description on Estimated Number of
Small Entities Regulated
For manufacturers of CRACs, 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 size
standards are listed by North American
Industry Classification System (NAICS)
code and industry description and are
available at: www.sba.gov/document/
support--table-size-standards.
Manufacturing of CRACs is classified
under NAICS 333415, ‘‘AirConditioning and Warm Air Heating
Equipment and Commercial and
Industrial Refrigeration Equipment
Manufacturing.’’ In 13 CFR 121.201, the
SBA sets a threshold of 1,250 employees
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
36421
or fewer for an entity to be considered
as a small business for this category.
DOE used publicly-available
information to identify potential small
businesses that manufacture equipment
covered this this final rule. DOE
identified ten manufacturers of
equipment covered by this final rule. Of
the ten, nine manufacturers are original
equipment manufacturers (OEM). DOE
screened out companies that do not
meet the definition of a ‘‘small
business’’ or are foreign-owned and
operated. DOE used subscription-based
business information tools to determine
head count and revenue of the small
businesses. Of these nine OEMs, DOE
identified three companies that are
small, domestic OEMs.
In the March 2022 ECS NOPR, DOE
requested comment on the number of
small manufacturers producing covered
CRACs, DOE’s understanding of the
current market, and DOE’s assessment
of the efficiency of the equipment
offered by the identified small
manufacturers. 87 FR 12802, 12844
(March 7, 2022).
AHRI commented that it represents
the following single package vertical
units (SPVU) companies that likely meet
the criteria of small businesses that
could be disproportionally impacted by
amended energy conservation
standards: Bard Manufacturing
Company, Marvair, Systemair, Temspec,
and United CoolAir. (AHRI, No. 12 at p.
5) AHRI commented that it was not
aware of any traditional CRAC
manufacturers that would be considered
by DOE as a small business, but that if
DOE adopts AHRI 1360–202X Draft,
SPVU and RTU 17 manufacturers would
be impacted. Id.
In response, DOE notes that the
manufacturers highlighted by AHRI do
not manufacture floor-mounted or
ceiling-mounted CRACs, which are the
equipment for which DOE is adopting
amended standards in this rulemaking.
While these manufacturers primarily
manufacture SPVUs, which are not the
subject of this rulemaking, DOE’s review
found that two of these manufacturers
also offer products that meet the
definition of wall-mounted CRAC. One
of the two manufacturers qualifies as a
small business under the applicable
NAICS code (NAICS code 333415).
However, DOE notes that there are
currently no energy conservation
standards for wall-mounted CRACs, and
DOE is not adopting standards for wallmounted or roof-mounted CRACs in this
final rule. Therefore, there is no
associated impact to these
17 DOE understand RTU to mean ‘‘roof-top units’’
and a reference to roof-mounted CRACs.
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
36422
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
manufacturers from this rulemaking.
Consequently, DOE has retained its
count of small manufacturers from the
March 2022 ECS NOPR.
4. Description and Estimate of
Compliance Requirements Including
Differences in Cost, if Any, for Different
Groups of Small Entities
As noted in the section 2 of the
Review under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act, DOE must adopt amended
standards at the new ASHRAE
efficiency level unless DOE determines,
supported by clear and convincing
evidence, that adoption of a morestringent standard would produce
significant additional conservation of
energy and would be technologically
feasible and economically justified. (42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)) Because DOE
had made no such determination, this
final rule adopts amended standards at
the new ASHRAE efficiency level rather
than impose more-stringent standards.
This is required by EPCA, but is also
less burdensome for small
manufacturers than a more-stringent
standard.
In reviewing all commerciallyavailable models in DOE’s Compliance
Certification Database, the three small
manufacturers account for 13 percent of
industry model offerings. For each of
the three small manufacturers,
approximately 90 percent of current
models would meet the adopted levels.
The small manufacturers will need to
either discontinue or redesign noncompliant models. DOE recognizes that
small manufacturers may need to spread
redesign costs over lower shipment
volumes than the industry-at-large.
However, adoption of standards at least
as stringent as the ASHRAE levels is
required under EPCA; furthermore,
adopting standards above ASHRAE
levels (DOE’s only other option under
42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)) would lead
to an even greater portion of models
requiring redesign.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
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 this rule.
6. Significant Alternatives to the Rule
As EPCA requires DOE to either adopt
the ASHRAE Standard 90.1 levels or to
adopt higher standards, DOE lacks
discretion to mitigate impacts to small
businesses from the ASHRAE Standard
90.1 levels. In this rulemaking, DOE is
adopting the ASHRAE Standard 90.1–
2019 levels.
Additional compliance flexibilities
may be available through other means.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jun 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
Section 504 of the Department of Energy
Organization Act, 42 U.S.C. 7194,
provides authority for the Secretary to
adjust a rule issued under EPCA in
order to prevent ‘‘special hardship,
inequity, or unfair distribution of
burdens’’ that may be imposed on that
manufacturer as a result of such rule.
Manufacturers should refer to 10 CFR
part 1003 for additional detail.
C. Review Under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995
Manufacturers of CRACs must certify
to DOE that their equipment complies
with any applicable energy conservation
standards. In certifying compliance,
manufacturers must test their
equipment according to the DOE test
procedures for CRACs, 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
CRACs. (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 amending the certification
or reporting requirements for CRACs in
this final rule. Instead, DOE may
consider proposals to amend the
certification requirements and reporting
for CRACs under a separate rulemaking
regarding appliance and equipment
certification. DOE will address changes
to OMB Control Number 1910–1400 at
that time, as necessary.
Notwithstanding any other provision
of the law, no person is required to
respond to, nor shall any person be
subject to a penalty for failure to comply
with, a collection of information subject
to the requirements of the PRA, unless
that collection of information displays a
currently valid OMB Control Number.
D. Review Under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
Pursuant to the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA), DOE has analyzed this final
rule in accordance with NEPA and
DOE’s NEPA implementing regulations
(10 CFR part 1021). DOE has determined
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
that this rule qualifies for categorical
exclusion under 10 CFR part 1021,
subpart D, appendix B5.1 because it is
a rulemaking that establishes energy
conservation standards for consumer
products or industrial equipment, none
of the exceptions identified in
categorical exclusion B5.1(b) apply, no
extraordinary circumstances exist that
require further environmental analysis,
and it otherwise meets the requirements
for application of a categorical
exclusion. See 10 CFR 1021.410.
Therefore, DOE has determined that
promulgation of this final rule is not a
major Federal action significantly
affecting the quality of the human
environment within the meaning of
NEPA, and does not require an
environmental assessment or an
environmental impact statement.
E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
E.O. 13132, ‘‘Federalism,’’ 64 FR
43255 (August 10, 1999), imposes
certain requirements on Federal
agencies formulating and implementing
policies or regulations that preempt
State law or that have federalism
implications. The Executive order
requires agencies to examine the
constitutional and statutory authority
supporting any action that would limit
the policymaking discretion of the
States and to carefully assess the
necessity for such actions. The
Executive order also requires agencies to
have an accountable process to ensure
meaningful and timely input by State
and local officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have federalism
implications. On March 14, 2000, DOE
published a statement of policy
describing the intergovernmental
consultation process it will follow in the
development of such regulations. 65 FR
13735. DOE has examined this final rule
and has determined that it would not
have a substantial direct effect on the
States, on the relationship between the
national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. EPCA governs and
prescribes Federal preemption of State
regulations as to energy conservation for
the equipment that are the subject of
this final rule. States can petition DOE
for exemption from such preemption to
the extent, and based on criteria, set
forth in EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6316(a) and
(b); 42 U.S.C. 6297) Therefore, no
further action is required by Executive
Order 13132.
F. Review Under Executive Order 12988
With respect to the review of existing
regulations and the promulgation of
new regulations, section 3(a) of E.O.
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
12988, ‘‘Civil Justice Reform,’’ imposes
on Federal agencies the general duty to
adhere to the following requirements:
(1) eliminate drafting errors and
ambiguity; (2) write regulations to
minimize litigation; (3) provide a clear
legal standard for affected conduct
rather than a general standard, and (4)
promote simplification and burden
reduction. 61 FR 4729 (Feb. 7, 1996).
Regarding the review required by
section 3(a), section 3(b) of E.O. 12988
specifically requires that Executive
agencies make every reasonable effort to
ensure that the regulation: (1) clearly
specifies the preemptive effect, if any;
(2) clearly specifies any effect on
existing Federal law or regulation; (3)
provides a clear legal standard for
affected conduct while promoting
simplification and burden reduction; (4)
specifies the retroactive effect, if any; (5)
adequately defines key terms, and (6)
addresses other important issues
affecting clarity and general
draftsmanship under any guidelines
issued by the Attorney General. Section
3(c) of E.O. 12988 requires Executive
agencies to review regulations in light of
applicable standards in section 3(a) and
section 3(b) to determine whether they
are met or it is unreasonable to meet one
or more of them. DOE has completed the
required review and determined that, to
the extent permitted by law, this final
rule meets the relevant standards of E.O.
12988.
G. Review Under the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) requires
each Federal agency to assess the effects
of Federal regulatory actions on State,
local, and Tribal governments and the
private sector. Public Law 104–4, sec.
201 (codified at 2 U.S.C. 1531). For a
regulatory action likely to result in a
rule that may cause the expenditure by
State, local, and Tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of
$100 million or more in any one year
(adjusted annually for inflation), section
202 of UMRA requires a Federal agency
to publish a written statement that
estimates the resulting costs, benefits,
and other effects on the national
economy. (2 U.S.C. 1532(a), (b)) The
UMRA also requires a Federal agency to
develop an effective process to permit
timely input by elected officers of State,
local, and Tribal governments on a
‘‘significant intergovernmental
mandate,’’ and requires an agency plan
for giving notice and opportunity for
timely input to potentially affected
small governments before establishing
any requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect them. On
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jun 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
March 18, 1997, DOE published a
statement of policy on its process for
intergovernmental consultation under
UMRA. 62 FR 12820. DOE’s policy
statement is also available at:
www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/gcprod/
documents/umra_97.pdf.
DOE examined this final rule
according to UMRA and its statement of
policy and determined that this rule
does not contain a Federal
intergovernmental mandate, nor is it
expected to require expenditures of
$100 million or more in any one year by
State, local, and Tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector.
As a result, the analytical requirements
of UMRA do not apply.
H. Review Under the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations
Act, 1999
Section 654 of the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations
Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105–277) requires
Federal agencies to issue a Family
Policymaking Assessment for any rule
that may affect family well-being. This
final rule would not have any impact on
the autonomy or integrity of the family
as an institution. Accordingly, DOE has
concluded that it is not necessary to
prepare a Family Policymaking
Assessment.
I. Review Under Executive Order 12630
Pursuant to E.O. 12630,
‘‘Governmental Actions and Interference
with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights,’’ 53 FR 8859 (March 18, 1988),
DOE has determined that this rule
would not result in any takings that
might require compensation under the
Fifth Amendment to the U.S.
Constitution.
J. Review Under the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations
Act, 2001
Section 515 of the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations
Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C. 3516, note)
provides for Federal agencies to review
most disseminations of information to
the public under information quality
guidelines established by each agency
pursuant to general guidelines issued by
OMB. OMB’s guidelines were published
at 67 FR 8452 (Feb. 22, 2002), and
DOE’s guidelines were published at 67
FR 62446 (Oct. 7, 2002). Pursuant to
OMB Memorandum M–19–15,
‘‘Improving Implementation of the
Information Quality Act’’ (April 24,
2019), DOE published updated
guidelines which are available at:
www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/
12/f70/DOE%20Final%20Updated
%20IQA%20Guidelines%20Dec
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
36423
%202019.pdf. DOE has reviewed this
final rule under the OMB and DOE
guidelines and has concluded that it is
consistent with applicable policies in
those guidelines.
K. Review Under Executive Order 13211
E.O. 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,’’ 66
FR 28355 (May 22, 2001), requires
Federal agencies to prepare and submit
to OIRA at OMB, a Statement of Energy
Effects for any significant energy action.
A ‘‘significant energy action’’ is defined
as any action by an agency that
promulgates or is expected to lead to
promulgation of a final rule, and that:
(1) is a significant regulatory action
under Executive Order 12866, or any
successor order; and (2) is likely to have
a significant adverse effect on the
supply, distribution, or use of energy, or
(3) is designated by the Administrator of
OIRA as a significant energy action. For
any significant energy action, the agency
must give a detailed statement of any
adverse effects on energy supply,
distribution, or use should the proposal
be implemented, and of reasonable
alternatives to the action and their
expected benefits on energy supply,
distribution, and use.
DOE has concluded that this
regulatory action, which sets forth
amended and new energy conservation
standards for CRACs, is not a significant
energy action because it is not a
significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866. Moreover, the
standards are not likely to have a
significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy, nor has it
been designated as such by the
Administrator at OIRA. Accordingly,
DOE has not prepared a Statement of
Energy Effects.
L. Review Under the Information
Quality Bulletin for Peer Review
On December 16, 2004, OMB, in
consultation with the Office of Science
and Technology Policy (OSTP), issued
its Final Information Quality Bulletin
for Peer Review (the Bulletin). 70 FR
2664 (Jan. 14, 2005). The Bulletin
establishes that certain scientific
information shall be peer reviewed by
qualified specialists before it is
disseminated by the Federal
Government, including influential
scientific information related to agency
regulatory actions. The purpose of the
Bulletin is to enhance the quality and
credibility of the Government’s
scientific information. Under the
Bulletin, the energy conservation
standards rulemaking analyses are
‘‘influential scientific information,’’
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
36424
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
which the Bulletin defines as ‘‘scientific
information the agency reasonably can
determine will have, or does have, a
clear and substantial impact on
important public policies or private
sector decisions.’’ Id. at 70 FR 2667.
In response to OMB’s Bulletin, DOE
conducted formal peer reviews of the
energy conservation standards
development process and the analyses
that are typically used and has prepared
a Peer Review report pertaining to the
energy conservation standards
rulemaking analyses.18 Generation of
this report involved a rigorous, formal,
and documented evaluation using
objective criteria and qualified and
independent reviewers to make a
judgment as to the technical/scientific/
business merit, the actual or anticipated
results, and the productivity and
management effectiveness of programs
and/or projects. Because available data,
models, and technological
understanding have changed since 2007,
DOE has engaged with the National
Academy of Sciences to review DOE’s
analytical methodologies to ascertain
whether modifications are needed to
improve the Department’s analyses.
DOE is in the process of evaluating the
resulting December 2021 NAS report.19
The following standards were
previously approved for incorporation
by reference into the provisions where
they appear in this rulemaking and no
change to the standards are being made:
AHRI 210/240–2008, AHRI 340/360–
2007, and ISO Standard 13256–1.
M. Congressional Notification
As required by 5 U.S.C. 801, DOE will
report to Congress on the promulgation
of this rule prior to its effective date.
The report will state that it has been
determined that the rule is not a ‘‘major
rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
VII. Approval of the Office of the
Secretary
The Secretary of Energy has approved
publication of this final rule.
List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 431
Administrative practice and
procedure, Confidential business
information, Energy conservation,
Household appliances, Imports,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations,
Laboratories, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Small
businesses.
Signing Authority
Signed in Washington, DC, on May 17,
2023.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S.
Department of Energy.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, DOE amends part 431 of
chapter II, subchapter D, of title 10 of
the Code of Federal Regulations, as set
forth below:
PART 431—ENERGY EFFICIENCY
PROGRAM FOR CERTAIN
COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL
EQUIPMENT
1. The authority citation for part 431
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6317; 28 U.S.C.
2461 note.
2. Amend § 431.92 by adding in
alphabetical order a definition for
‘‘Ducted Condenser’’ to read as follows:
■
This document of the Department of
Energy was signed on March 30, 2023,
by Francisco Alejandro Moreno, Acting
Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency
and Renewable Energy, pursuant to
delegated authority from the Secretary
of Energy. That document with the
original signature and date is
maintained by DOE. For administrative
purposes only, and in compliance with
requirements of the Office of the Federal
Register, the undersigned DOE Federal
Register Liaison Officer has been
authorized to sign and submit the
document in electronic format for
publication, as an official document of
the Department of Energy. This
administrative process in no way alters
the legal effect of this document upon
publication in the Federal Register.
§ 431.92 Definitions concerning
commercial air conditioners and heat
pumps.
*
*
*
*
*
Ducted Condenser means a
configuration of computer room air
conditioner for which the condenser or
condensing unit that manufacturer’s
installation instructions indicate is
intended to exhaust condenser air
through a duct(s).
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3. Amend § 431.96 by revising table 1
to paragraph (b) to read as follows:
§ 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
Equipment type
Small Commercial Package
Air-Conditioning and Heating
Equipment.
Cooling capacity or
moisture removal
capacity 2
Category
Air-Cooled, 3-Phase,
AC and HP.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
Air-Cooled AC and HP
Water-Cooled and
Evaporatively-Cooled
AC.
18 The 2007 ‘‘Energy Conservation Standards
Rulemaking Peer Review Report’’ is available at:
energy.gov/eere/buildings/downloads/energy-
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jun 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
<65,000 Btu/h ..............
≥65,000 Btu/h and
<135,000 Btu/h.
<65,000 Btu/h ..............
Energy
efficiency
descriptor
SEER and
HSPF.
Appendix F to this subpart 3.
None.
SEER2 and
HSPF2.
EER, IEER,
and COP.
EER ................
Appendix F1 to this
subpart 3.
Appendix A of this subpart.
AHRI 210/240–2008
(omit section 6.5).
None.
conservation-standards-rulemaking-peer-reviewreport-0 (Last accessed Nov. 8, 2022).
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Use tests, conditions,
and
procedures 1 in
Additional test
procedure
provisions as
indicated in the
listed
paragraphs of
this section
None.
Paragraphs (c)
and (e).
19 The December 2021 NAS report is available at
www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/review-ofmethods-for-setting-building-and-equipmentperformance-standards.
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
36425
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (b)—TEST PROCEDURES FOR COMMERCIAL AIR CONDITIONERS AND HEAT PUMPS—Continued
Equipment type
Large Commercial Package
Air-Conditioning and Heating
Equipment.
Very Large Commercial Package Air-Conditioning and
Heating Equipment.
Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps.
Computer Room Air Conditioners.
Variable Refrigerant Flow Multisplit Systems.
Cooling capacity or
moisture removal
capacity 2
Energy
efficiency
descriptor
Use tests, conditions,
and
procedures 1 in
≥65,000 Btu/h and
<135,000 Btu/h.
<135,000 Btu/h ............
≥135,000 Btu/h and
<240,000 Btu/h.
EER ................
AHRI 340/360–2007
(omit section 6.3).
ISO Standard 13256–1
Appendix A to this subpart.
Paragraphs (c)
and (e).
Paragraph (e).
None.
Water-Cooled and
Evaporatively-Cooled
AC.
Air-Cooled AC and HP
≥135,000 Btu/h and
<240,000 Btu/h.
EER ................
AHRI 340/360–2007
(omit section 6.3).
Paragraphs (c)
and (e).
≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h.
EER, IEER and
COP.
Appendix A to this subpart.
None.
Water-Cooled and
Evaporatively-Cooled
AC.
AC and HP ..................
≥240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h.
EER ................
AHRI 340/360–2007
(omit section 6.3).
Paragraphs (c)
and (e).
<760,000 Btu/h ............
EER and COP
AC ...............................
<760,000 Btu/h ............
SCOP .............
Paragraphs (c),
(e), and (g).
None.
<760,000 Btu/h or
<930,000 Btu/h 4.
<65,000 Btu/h (3phase).
NSenCOP .......
Paragraph (g) of this
section.
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.
None.
Category
Water-Source HP ........
Air-Cooled AC and HP
AC ...............................
EER and COP
EER, IEER and
COP.
SEER ..............
SEER2 ............
Variable Refrigerant Flow Multisplit Systems, Air-cooled.
Variable Refrigerant Flow Multisplit Systems, Air-cooled.
Variable Refrigerant Flow Multisplit Systems, Water-source.
Single Package Vertical Air
Conditioners and Single
Package Vertical Heat
Pumps.
Direct Expansion-Dedicated
Outdoor Air Systems.
Additional test
procedure
provisions as
indicated in the
listed
paragraphs of
this section
HP ...............................
AC and HP ..................
HP ...............................
AC and HP ..................
All ................................
<65,000 Btu/h (3phase).
≥65,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h.
≥65,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h.
<760,000 Btu/h ............
SEER and
HSPF.
SEER2 and
HSPF2.
EER and COP
IEER and COP
EER and COP
<760,000 Btu/h ............
IEER and COP
<760,000 Btu/h ............
EER and COP
<324 lbs. of moisture
removal/hr.
EER, IEER,
and COP.
ISMRE2 and
ISCOP2.
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.
3 For equipment with multiple appendices listed in this table, consult the notes at the beginning of those appendices to determine the applicable appendix to use for testing.
4 For upflow ducted and downflow floor-mounted computer room air conditioners, the test procedure in appendix E1 of this subpart applies to
equipment with net sensible cooling capacity less than 930,000 Btu/h. For all other configurations of computer room air conditioners, the test procedure in appendix E1 applies to equipment with net sensible cooling capacity less than 760,000 Btu/h.
2 Moisture
*
*
*
*
*
4. Section 431.97 is amended by:
a. Removing the words ‘‘Tables 1
through 6 of this section’’ and adding in
their place the words ‘‘tables 1 through
6 to this paragraph (b)’’ in paragraph (b)
introductory text;
■ b. Revising the headings to tables 5
and 6 in paragraph (b);
■ c. Removing the words ‘‘Table 7 of
this section’’ and adding in their place
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
■
■
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jun 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
the words ‘‘tables 7 to this paragraph
(c)’’ and removing the words ‘‘Table 8
of this section’’ and adding in their
place the words ‘‘table 8 to this
paragraph (c)’’ in paragraph (c)
introductory text;
■ d. Revising the headings to tables 7
and 8 in paragraph (c);
■ e. Revising the headings to tables 9,
10, and 11 in paragraphs (d)(1), (2), and
(3), respectively;
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
f. Revising paragraph (e);
g. Removing the words ‘‘table 13 this
section’’ and adding in their place the
words ‘‘table 15 to this paragraph (f)(1)’’
in paragraph (f)(1) introductory text;
■ h. Redesignating table 13 to
§ 431.97(f)(1) as table 15 to
§ 431.97(f)(1);
■ i. Removing the words ‘‘table 14 of
this section’’ and adding in their place
the words ‘‘table 16 to this paragraph
■
■
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
36426
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
(f)(2)’’ in paragraph (f)(2) introductory
text;
■ j. Redesignating table 14 to Paragraph
(f)(2) to § 431.97 as table 16 and revising
the heading;
■ k. Removing the words ‘‘table 14 of
this section’’ and adding in their place
the words ‘‘table 17 to this paragraph
(g)’’ in paragraph (g) introductory text;
■ l. Redesignating table 15 as table 17 in
paragraph (g) and revising the heading;
■ m. Removing the words ‘‘tables 16 and
17 to this paragraph (h)’’ and adding in
their place the words ‘‘tables 18 and 19
to this paragraph (h)’’ in paragraph (h)
introductory text; and
■ n. Redesignating tables 16 and 17 as
tables 18 and 19 in paragraph (h).
The revisions read as follows:
Table 6 to § 431.97(b)—Minimum
Heating Efficiency Standards for
Double-Duct Air-Cooled Air
Conditioning and Heating Equipment
Table 10 to § 431.97(d)(2)—Minimum
Efficiency Standards for Single Package
Vertical Air Conditioners and Single
Package Vertical Heat Pumps
*
*
§ 431.97 Energy efficiency standards and
their compliance dates.
Table 9 to § 431.97(d)(1)—Minimum
Efficiency Standards for Single Package
Vertical Air Conditioners and Single
Package Vertical Heat Pumps
*
*
*
(b) * * *
*
*
Table 5 to § 431.97(b)—Minimum
Cooling Efficiency Standards for
Double-Duct Air-Conditioning and
Heating Equipment
*
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
*
*
Table 7 to § 431.97(c)—Minimum
Efficiency Standards for PTAC and
PTHP
*
*
*
*
*
Table 8 to § 431.97(c)—Updated
Minimum Efficiency Standards for
PTAC
*
*
*
*
(d)(1) * * *
*
*
(2) * * *
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
(3) * * *
*
*
Table 11 to § 431.97(d)(3)—Updated
Minimum Efficiency Standards for
Single Package Vertical Air
Conditioners and Single Package
Vertical Heat Pumps
*
*
*
*
*
(e)(1) Each computer room air
conditioner with a net sensible cooling
capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h
manufactured on or after October 29,
2012, and before May 28, 2024 and each
computer room air conditioner with a
net sensible cooling capacity greater
than or equal to 65,000 Btu/h and less
than 760,000 Btu/h manufactured on or
after October 29, 2013, and before May
28, 2024 must meet the applicable
minimum energy efficiency standard
level(s) set forth in table 12 to this
paragraph (e)(1).
TABLE 12 TO § 431.97(e)(1)—MINIMUM EFFICIENCY STANDARDS FOR COMPUTER ROOM AIR CONDITIONERS
Minimum SCOP efficiency
Equipment type
Net sensible cooling capacity
Downflow
Air-Cooled .........................................................
Water-Cooled ....................................................
Water-Cooled with Fluid Economizer ...............
Glycol-Cooled ....................................................
Glycol-Cooled with Fluid Economizer ...............
(2) Each computer room air
conditioner manufactured on or after
<65,000 Btu/h ...........................................................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h ..........................................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ........................................
<65,000 Btu/h ...........................................................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h ..........................................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ........................................
<65,000 Btu/h ...........................................................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h ..........................................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ........................................
<65,000 Btu/h ...........................................................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h ..........................................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ........................................
<65,000 Btu/h ...........................................................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h ..........................................
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ........................................
May 28, 2024 must meet the applicable
minimum energy efficiency standard
Upflow
2.20
2.10
1.90
2.60
2.50
2.40
2.55
2.45
2.35
2.50
2.15
2.10
2.45
2.10
2.05
2.09
1.99
1.79
2.49
2.39
2.29
2.44
2.34
2.24
2.39
2.04
1.99
2.34
1.99
1.94
level(s) set forth in tables 13 and 14 to
this paragraph (e)(2).
TABLE 13 TO § 431.97(e)(2)—UPDATED MINIMUM EFFICIENCY STANDARDS FOR FLOOR-MOUNTED COMPUTER ROOM AIR
CONDITIONERS
Downflow and upflow ducted
Upflow non-ducted and horizontal flow
Minimum NSenCOP efficiency
Equipment type
Net sensible cooling capacity
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
Downflow
Air-Cooled ......................
Air-Cooled with Fluid
Economizer.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
<80,000 Btu/h .............................
≥80,000 Btu/h and <295,000 Btu/
h.
≥295,000 Btu/h and <930,000
Btu/h.
<80,000 Btu/h .............................
18:22 Jun 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Minimum NSenCOP efficiency
Net sensible cooling capacity
Frm 00036
Upflow ducted
2.70
2.58
2.67
2.55
2.36
2.33
2.70
2.67
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
<65,000 Btu/h .............................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/
h.
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000
Btu/h.
<65,000 Btu/h .............................
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
Upflow nonducted
Horizontal flow
2.16
2.04
2.65
2.55
1.89
2.47
2.09
2.65
36427
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 13 TO § 431.97(e)(2)—UPDATED MINIMUM EFFICIENCY STANDARDS FOR FLOOR-MOUNTED COMPUTER ROOM AIR
CONDITIONERS—Continued
Downflow and upflow ducted
Upflow non-ducted and horizontal flow
Minimum NSenCOP efficiency
Equipment type
Net sensible cooling capacity
Downflow
Water-Cooled .................
Water-Cooled with Fluid
Economizer.
Glycol-Cooled .................
Glycol-Cooled with Fluid
Economizer.
Minimum NSenCOP efficiency
Net sensible cooling capacity
≥80,000 Btu/h and <295,000 Btu/
h.
≥295,000 Btu/h and <930,000
Btu/h.
<80,000 Btu/h .............................
≥80,000 Btu/h and <295,000 Btu/
h.
≥295,000 Btu/h and <930,000
Btu/h.
<80,000 Btu/h .............................
≥80,000 Btu/h and <295,000 Btu/
h.
≥295,000 Btu/h and <930,000
Btu/h.
<80,000 Btu/h .............................
≥80,000 Btu/h and <295,000 Btu/
h.
≥295,000 Btu/h and <930,000
Btu/h.
<80,000 Btu/h .............................
≥80,000 Btu/h and <295,000 Btu/
h.
≥295,000 Btu/h and <930,000
Btu/h.
Upflow nonducted
Upflow ducted
2.58
2.55
2.36
2.33
2.82
2.73
2.79
2.70
2.67
2.64
2.77
2.74
2.68
2.65
2.61
2.58
2.56
2.24
2.53
2.21
2.21
2.18
2.51
2.48
2.19
2.16
2.15
2.12
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/
h.
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000
Btu/h.
<65,000 Btu/h .............................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/
h.
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000
Btu/h.
<65,000 Btu/h .............................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/
h.
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000
Btu/h.
<65,000 Btu/h .............................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/
h.
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000
Btu/h.
<65,000 Btu/h .............................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/
h.
≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000
Btu/h.
Horizontal flow
1.99
2.55
1.81
2.47
2.43
2.32
2.79
2.68
2.20
2.60
2.35
2.71
2.24
2.60
2.12
2.54
2.08
1.90
2.48
2.18
1.81
2.18
2.00
2.44
1.82
2.10
1.73
2.10
TABLE 14 TO § 431.97(e)(2)—MINIMUM EFFICIENCY STANDARDS FOR CEILING-MOUNTED COMPUTER ROOM AIR
CONDITIONERS
Minimum NSenCOP efficiency
Equipment type
Net sensible cooling capacity
Ducted
Air-Cooled with Free Air Discharge Condenser ...........
Air-Cooled with Free Air Discharge Condenser and
Fluid Economizer.
Air-Cooled with Ducted Condenser ..............................
Air-Cooled with Fluid Economizer and Ducted Condenser.
Water-Cooled ................................................................
Water-Cooled with Fluid Economizer ...........................
Glycol-Cooled ...............................................................
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
Glycol-Cooled with Fluid Economizer ..........................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jun 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Non-ducted
<29,000 Btu/h ...............................................................
≥29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h ................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............................
<29,000 Btu/h ...............................................................
2.05
2.02
1.92
2.01
2.08
2.05
1.94
2.04
≥29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h ................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............................
<29,000 Btu/h ...............................................................
≥29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h ................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............................
<29,000 Btu/h ...............................................................
1.97
1.87
1.86
1.83
1.73
1.82
2
1.89
1.89
1.86
1.75
1.85
≥29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h ................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............................
<29,000 Btu/h ...............................................................
≥29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h ................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............................
<29,000 Btu/h ...............................................................
≥29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h ................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............................
<29,000 Btu/h ...............................................................
≥29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h ................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............................
<29,000 Btu/h ...............................................................
≥29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h ................................
≥65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h ..............................
1.78
1.68
2.38
2.28
2.18
2.33
2.23
2.13
1.97
1.93
1.78
1.92
1.88
1.73
1.81
1.7
2.41
2.31
2.2
2.36
2.26
2.16
2
1.98
1.81
1.95
1.93
1.76
Frm 00037
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
36428
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
(f) * * *
(2) * * *
Table 16 to § 497.31(f)(2)—Updated
Minimum Efficiency Standards for
Variable Refrigerant Flow Multi-Split
Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps
*
*
*
(g) * * *
*
*
Table 17 to § 497.31(g)—Minimum
Efficiency Standards for Direct
Expansion-Dedicated Outdoor Air
Systems
*
*
*
*
*
Note: The following letter will not appear
in the Code of Federal Regulations.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust
Division, Jonathan S. Kanter,
Assistant Attorney General, Main
Justice Building, 950 Pennsylvania
Avenue NW, Washington, DC
20530–0001, (202) 514–2401/(202)
616–2645 (Fax).
May 6, 2022
Ami Grace-Tardy, Assistant General
Counsel for Litigation, Regulation
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jun 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
and Energy Efficiency, U.S.
Department of Energy, Washington,
DC 20585.
Re: Amended standards for computer
room air conditioners (CRACs).
DOE Docket No. EERE–2018–BT–STD–
0008
Dear Assistant General Counsel GraceTardy: I am responding to your March
7, 2022, letter seeking the views of the
Attorney General about the potential
impact on competition of the DOE’s
proposed amended standards for
computer room air conditioners
(CRACs).
The Attorney General must determine
the impact, if any, of any lessening of
competition likely to result from a
proposed standard. (42 U.S.C.
6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(V); 42 U.S.C.
313(a)(6)(B)(ii)(V); 42 U.S.C. 6316(a)).
The Attorney General’s responsibility
for responding to requests from other
departments about the effect of a
program on competition has been
delegated to the Assistant Attorney
General for the Antitrust Division in 28
CFR 0.40(g).
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
In conducting its analysis, the
Antitrust Division examines whether a
proposed standard may lessen
competition, for example, by
substantially limiting consumer choice
or increasing industry concentration. A
lessening of competition could result in
higher prices to manufacturers and
consumers.
We have reviewed the proposed
standards contained in the Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (87 FR 12,802,
Mar. 7, 2022). We have also reviewed
information presented at the public
meeting held via webinar on
Wednesday, April 13, 2022.
While industry participants may still
be evaluating the impact of the new
standards, the Division has not
identified any issues to date that suggest
the standards are likely to lessen
competition.
Sincerely,
Jonathan S. Kanter
[FR Doc. 2023–10859 Filed 6–1–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
E:\FR\FM\02JNR3.SGM
02JNR3
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 106 (Friday, June 2, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 36392-36428]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-10859]
[[Page 36391]]
Vol. 88
Friday,
No. 106
June 2, 2023
Part III
Department of Energy
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
10 CFR Part 431
Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Computer
Room Air Conditioners; Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2023 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 36392]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 431
[EERE-2020-BT-STD-0008]
RIN 1904-AF01
Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for
Computer Room Air Conditioners
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended (EPCA),
prescribes energy conservation standards for various consumer products
and certain commercial and industrial equipment, including small,
large, and very large commercial package air conditioning and heating
equipment, of which computer room air conditioners (CRACs) are a
category. EPCA requires the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE or the
Department) to consider the need for amended standards each time
American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Air Conditioning
Engineers (ASHRAE) Standard 90.1 is amended with respect to the
standard levels or design requirements applicable to that equipment, or
periodically under a six-year-lookback review provision. In this final
rule, DOE is adopting amended energy conservation standards for CRACs
that rely on a new efficiency metric and are equivalent to those levels
specified in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019. DOE has determined that it
lacks the clear and convincing evidence required by the statute to
adopt standards more stringent than the levels specified in the
industry standard.
DATES: The effective date of this rule is August 1, 2023. Compliance
with the amended standards established for computer room air
conditioners in this final rule is required on and after May 28, 2024.
ADDRESSES: The docket for this rulemaking, which includes Federal
Register notices, public meeting attendee lists and transcripts,
comments, and other supporting documents/materials, is available for
review at www.regulations.gov. All documents in the docket are listed
in the www.regulations.gov index. However, not all documents listed in
the index may be publicly available, such as information that is exempt
from public disclosure.
The docket web page can be found at: www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2020-BT-STD-0008. The docket web page contains instructions on how
to access all documents, including public comments, in the docket.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ms. Catherine Rivest, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Office, EE-5B,
1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone:
(202) 586-7335. Email: [email protected].
Mr. Eric Stas, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General
Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121.
Telephone: (202) 586-5827. Email: [email protected].
For further information on how to review the docket, contact the
Appliance and Equipment Standards Program staff at (202) 287-1445 or by
email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Synopsis of the Final Rule
II. Introduction
A. Authority
B. Background
1. Current Standards
2. History of Standards Rulemaking for CRACs
III. General Discussion
A. Background
B. Test Procedure
C. Efficiency and Capacity Crosswalk Analyses
1. Increase in Return Air Dry-Bulb Temperature From 75 [deg]F to
85 [deg]F
2. Decrease in Entering Water Temperature for Water-Cooled CRACs
3. Changes in External Static Pressure Requirements for Upflow
Ducted CRACs
4. Power Adder To Account for Pump and Heat Rejection Fan Power
in NSenCOP Calculation for Water-Cooled and Glycol-Cooled CRACs
5. Calculating Overall Changes in Measured Efficiency and
Capacity From Test Procedure Changes
a. Calculation of Crosswalked NSenCOP Levels
b. Calculation of Translated NSCC Boundaries
6. Crosswalk Results
7. Comments Received Regarding DOE's Crosswalk
IV. Methodology for Estimates of Potential Energy Savings From
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 Levels
A. Annual Energy Use
1. Equipment Classes and Analytical Scope
2. Efficiency Levels
3. Analysis Method and Annual Energy Use Results
B. Shipments Analysis
C. No-New-Standards-Case Efficiency Distribution
D. Compliance Dates and Analysis Period
E. Estimates of Potential Energy Savings
V. Conclusions
A. Consideration of More-Stringent Efficiency Levels
B. Review Under Six-Year Lookback Provision
C. Definition for Ducted Condenser
D. Amended Energy Conservation Standards
1. Impact of Any Lessening of Competition
VI. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
F. Review Under Executive Order 12988
G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
H. Review Under the Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act, 1999
I. Review Under Executive Order 12630
J. Review Under the Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act, 2001
K. Review Under Executive Order 13211
L. Review Under the Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review
M. Congressional Notification
VII. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
I. Synopsis of the Final Rule
The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, Public Law 94-163 (42
U.S.C. 6291-6317, as codified), as amended (EPCA),\1\ authorizes DOE to
regulate the energy efficiency of a number of consumer products and
certain industrial equipment. Title III, Part C \2\ of EPCA established
the Energy Conservation Program for Certain Industrial Equipment. (42
U.S.C. 6311-6317) Such equipment includes CRACs, the subject of this
rulemaking. (42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(B)-(D))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ All references to EPCA in this document refer to the statute
as amended through the Energy Act of 2020, Public Law 116-260 (Dec.
27, 2020), which reflect the last statutory amendments that impact
Parts A and A-1 of EPCA.
\2\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code,
Part C was re-designated Part A-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to EPCA, DOE is triggered to consider amending the energy
conservation standards for certain types of commercial and industrial
equipment, including CRACs, whenever ASHRAE amends the standard levels
or design requirements prescribed in ASHRAE Standard 90.1, ``Energy
Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings'' (ASHRAE
Standard 90.1). Under a separate provision of EPCA, DOE is required to
review the existing energy conservation standards for those types of
covered equipment subject to ASHRAE Standard 90.1 every six years to
determine whether those standards need to be amended. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(A)-(C)) For each type of equipment, EPCA
[[Page 36393]]
directs that if ASHRAE Standard 90.1 is amended, DOE must adopt amended
energy conservation standards at the new efficiency level in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1, unless clear and convincing evidence supports a
determination that adoption of a more-stringent efficiency level would
produce significant additional energy savings and be technologically
feasible and economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)) If
DOE adopts as a uniform national standard the efficiency level
specified in the amended ASHRAE Standard 90.1, DOE must establish such
standard not later than 18 months after publication of the amended
industry standard. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(I)) If DOE determines
that a more-stringent standard is appropriate under the statutory
criteria, DOE must establish such more-stringent standard not later
than 30 months after publication of the revised ASHRAE Standard 90.1.
(42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(i)) ASHRAE updated ASHRAE Standard 90.1 on
October 24, 2019 (ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019), thereby triggering DOE's
previously referenced obligations pursuant to EPCA to determine for
CRACs, whether: (1) the amended industry standard should be adopted; or
(2) clear and convincing evidence exists to justify more-stringent
standard levels. An update to ASHRAE Standard 90.1, ASHRAE Standard
90.1-2022, published in January 2023 and retained the same standards
levels for CRACs as those in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019.
The current Federal energy conservation standards for CRACs are set
forth at title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 10 CFR
431.97 and, as specified in 10 CFR 431.96, those standards are
denominated in terms of Sensible Coefficient of Performance (SCOP) and
based on the rating conditions in American National Standards Institute
(ANSI)/ASHRAE 127-2007, ``Method of Testing for Rating Computer and
Data Processing Room Unitary Air Conditioners'' (ANSI/ASHRAE 127-2007).
However, the efficiency levels for CRACs set forth in ASHRAE Standard
90.1-2019 are specified in terms of Net Sensible Coefficient of
Performance (NSenCOP) and based on rating conditions in Air-
Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) Standard
1360-2017, ``Performance Rating of Computer and Data Processing Room
Air Conditioners'' (AHRI 1360-2017), which differ from the rating
conditions specified in ANSI/ASHRAE 127-2007 for most configurations of
CRACs. Therefore, while SCOP and NSenCOP are both ratios of the net
sensible cooling capacity (NSCC) to the power consumed by the unit,
they are measured at different rating conditions for most
configurations of CRACs \3\ and correspondingly provide different
representations of efficiency. DOE has compared the stringency of
standards in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 (in terms of NSenCOP) to the
corresponding current Federal energy conservation standards (in terms
of SCOP) by conducting a crosswalk analysis. Based on the results of
that analysis, DOE has concluded that the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019
levels are equivalent in stringency to the current Federal standards
for six equipment classes and are more stringent than the current
Federal standards for the remaining 46 equipment classes of CRACs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Additionally, for water-cooled and glycol-cooled CRACs,
NSenCOP includes power adders to account for power that would be
consumed in field installations by pumps and heat rejection
component (e.g., cooling tower or dry cooler) fans. See section
III.C of this final rule for further discussion of the evaluation of
differences between SCOP and NSenCOP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For all CRAC equipment classes, DOE has determined that there is
not clear and convincing evidence of significant additional energy
savings to justify amended standards for CRACs that are more stringent
than the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 levels. Clear and convincing
evidence would exist only where the specific facts and data made
available to DOE regarding a particular ASHRAE amendment demonstrate
that there is no substantial doubt that a standard more stringent than
that contained in the ASHRAE Standard 90.1 amendment is permitted
because it would result in a significant additional amount of energy
savings, and it is technologically feasible and economically justified.
DOE normally performs multiple in-depth analyses to determine
whether there is clear and convincing evidence to support more-
stringent energy conservation standards (i.e., whether more-stringent
standards would produce significant additional conservation of energy
and be technologically feasible and economically justified). However,
as discussed in section V.A of this document, due to the lack of
available market and performance data, DOE is unable to conduct the
analysis necessary to evaluate the potential energy savings or evaluate
whether more-stringent standards would be technologically feasible or
economically justified, with sufficient certainty. Therefore, in
accordance with the statutory provisions discussed in this section and
elsewhere in this document, DOE is amending the energy conservation
standards for CRACs so as to correspond to the efficiency levels
specified for CRACs in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019. The amended
standards, which are expressed in terms of NSenCOP, are presented in
Table I-1 and Table I-2. These standards will apply to all CRACs listed
in Table I-1 and Table I-2 manufactured in, or imported into, the
United States starting on the compliance date 360 days after the
publication date of this final rule. See section IV.D of this final
rule for a discussion on the applicable lead times considered to
determine this compliance date.
Table I-1--Amended Energy Conservation Standards for Floor-Mounted CRACs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minimum NSenCOP Minimum NSenCOP
efficiency efficiency
Equipment type Net sensible cooling capacity -------------------------- Net sensible cooling capacity -------------------------
\1\ Upflow Upflow non- Horizontal
Downflow ducted ducted flow
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air-Cooled............................ <80,000 Btu/h \2\............ 2.70 2.67 <65,000 Btu/h................ 2.16 2.65
>=80,000 Btu/h and <295,000 2.58 \3\ 2.55 >=65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 2.04 2.55
Btu/h. Btu/h.
>=295,000 Btu/h and <930,000 2.36 2.33 >=240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 1.89 2.47
Btu/h. Btu/h.
Air-Cooled with Fluid Economizer...... <80,000 Btu/h................ 2.70 2.67 <65,000 Btu/h................ \3\ 2.09 2.65
>=80,000 Btu/h and <295,000 2.58 \3\ 2.55 >=65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 \3\ 1.99 2.55
Btu/h. Btu/h.
>=295,000 Btu/h and <930,000 2.36 2.33 >=240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 1.81 2.47
Btu/h. Btu/h.
Water-Cooled.......................... <80,000 Btu/h................ 2.82 2.79 <65,000 Btu/h................ 2.43 2.79
>=80,000 Btu/h and <295,000 2.73 \3\ 2.70 >=65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 2.32 2.68
Btu/h. Btu/h.
>=295,000 Btu/h and <930,000 2.67 2.64 >=240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 2.20 2.60
Btu/h. Btu/h.
Water-Cooled with Fluid Economizer.... <80,000 Btu/h................ 2.77 2.74 <65,000 Btu/h................ 2.35 2.71
>=80,000 Btu/h and <295,000 2.68 \3\ 2.65 >=65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 2.24 2.60
Btu/h. Btu/h.
[[Page 36394]]
>=295,000 Btu/h and <930,000 2.61 2.58 >=240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 2.12 2.54
Btu/h. Btu/h.
Glycol-Cooled......................... <80,000 Btu/h................ 2.56 2.53 <65,000 Btu/h................ 2.08 2.48
>=80,000 Btu/h and <295,000 2.24 2.21 >=65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 1.90 2.18
Btu/h. Btu/h.
>=295,000 Btu/h and <930,000 2.21 2.18 >=240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 1.81 2.18
Btu/h. Btu/h.
Glycol-Cooled with Fluid Economizer... <80,000 Btu/h................ 2.51 2.48 <65,000 Btu/h................ 2.00 2.44
>=80,000 Btu/h and <295,000 2.19 2.16 >=65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 1.82 2.10
Btu/h. Btu/h.
>=295,000 Btu/h and <930,000 2.15 2.12 >=240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 1.73 2.10
Btu/h. Btu/h.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For downflow and upflow-ducted CRACs, the NSCC measured per AHRI 1360-2017 and the latest update to the standard, AHRI 1360-2022, is higher than the
NSCC measured per the current Federal test procedure (which references ANSI/ASHRAE 127-2007). Therefore, to ensure equipment currently covered by
Federal standards is not removed from coverage, DOE translated the currently applicable upper capacity limit for these classes (760,000 Btu/h) to NSCC
as measured per AHRI 1360-2017 and AHRI 1360-2022, resulting in a crosswalked upper capacity boundary of 930,000 Btu/h. Consequently, DOE has used
930,000 Btu/h as the translated upper capacity limit for downflow and upflow-ducted CRACs in the analysis presented in this notice. For up-flow non-
ducted CRACs, because there is no change in return air temperature conditions between ANSI/ASHRAE 127-2007 and AHRI 1360-2022, the capacity boundaries
in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 remain the same as those specified in the current Federal standards, and DOE correspondingly retains the current capacity
boundaries. For horizontal-flow CRACs, DOE does not currently prescribe standards; therefore, a crosswalk of current capacity boundaries is not
applicable. See section III.C.5 of this final rule for further discussion of DOE's crosswalk analysis of capacity boundaries for CRACs.
\2\ Btu/h refers to ``British thermal units per hour.''
\3\ The amended standard for this equipment class is of equivalent stringency to the currently applicable Federal standard--the adopted level is a
translation from the current metric (SCOP) to the adopted metric (NSenCOP) and aligns with the corresponding level in ASHRAE Standard 90.1.
Table I-2--Amended Energy Conservation Standards for Ceiling-Mounted CRACs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minimum NSenCOP efficiency
Equipment type Net sensible cooling capacity -------------------------------
Ducted Non-ducted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air-Cooled with Free Air Discharge <29,000 Btu/h...................... 2.05 2.08
Condenser. >=29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h... 2.02 2.05
>=65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h.. 1.92 1.94
Air-Cooled with Free Air Discharge <29,000 Btu/h...................... 2.01 2.04
Condenser and Fluid Economizer. >=29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h... 1.97 2.00
>=65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h.. 1.87 1.89
Air-Cooled with Ducted Condenser........... <29,000 Btu/h...................... 1.86 1.89
>=29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h... 1.83 1.86
>=65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h.. 1.73 1.75
Air-Cooled with Ducted Condenser and Fluid <29,000 Btu/h...................... 1.82 1.85
Economizer. >=29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h... 1.78 1.81
>=65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h.. 1.68 1.70
Water-Cooled............................... <29,000 Btu/h...................... 2.38 2.41
>=29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h... 2.28 2.31
>=65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h.. 2.18 2.20
Water-Cooled with Fluid Economizer......... <29,000 Btu/h...................... 2.33 2.36
>=29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h... 2.23 2.26
>=65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h.. 2.13 2.16
Glycol-Cooled.............................. <29,000 Btu/h...................... 1.97 2.00
>=29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h... 1.93 1.98
>=65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h.. 1.78 1.81
Glycol-Cooled with Fluid Economizer........ <29,000 Btu/h...................... 1.92 1.95
>=29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h... 1.88 1.93
>=65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h.. 1.73 1.76
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Introduction
The following section briefly discusses the statutory authority
underlying this final rule, as well as some of the relevant historical
background related to the establishment of standards for CRACs.
A. Authority
EPCA, Public Law 94-163 (42 U.S.C. 6291-6317, as codified), among
other things, authorizes DOE to regulate the energy efficiency of a
number of consumer products and certain industrial equipment. Title
III, Part C of EPCA, added by Public Law 95-619, Title IV, section
441(a), (42 U.S.C. 6311-6317, as codified), established the Energy
Conservation Program for Certain Industrial Equipment, which sets forth
a variety of provisions designed to improve energy efficiency. This
equipment includes small, large, and very large commercial package air
conditioning and heating equipment, which includes CRACs, the subject
of this rulemaking. (42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(B)-(D)) Pursuant to EPCA, DOE is
required to consider amending the energy conservation standards for
certain types of commercial and industrial equipment, including the
equipment at issue in this document, whenever ASHRAE amends the
standard levels or design requirements prescribed in ASHRAE/IES
Standard 90.1, and under a separate statutory provision, DOE must
consider amendments to the standards for such equipment, at a minimum,
every six years, regardless of ASHRAE action. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)-
(C))
Under EPCA, the energy conservation program consists essentially of
four parts: (1) testing, (2) labeling, (3) the establishment of Federal
energy conservation standards, and (4) certification and enforcement
[[Page 36395]]
procedures. Relevant provisions of EPCA specifically include
definitions (42 U.S.C. 6311), energy conservation standards (42 U.S.C.
6313), test procedures (42 U.S.C. 6314), labeling provisions (42 U.S.C.
6315), and the authority to require information and reports from
manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6316).
Federal energy efficiency requirements for covered equipment
established under EPCA generally supersede State laws and regulations
concerning energy conservation testing, labeling, and standards. (42
U.S.C. 6316(a) and 42 U.S.C. 6316(b); 42 U.S.C. 6297) DOE may, however,
grant waivers of Federal preemption in limited circumstances for
particular State laws or regulations, in accordance with the procedures
and other provisions set forth under EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6297(d); 42
U.S.C. 6316(a); 42 U.S.C. 6316(b)(2)(D))
Subject to certain criteria and conditions, DOE is required to
develop test procedures to measure the energy efficiency, energy use,
or estimated annual operating cost of each covered equipment during a
representative average use cycle and that are not unduly burdensome to
conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2)) Manufacturers of covered equipment must
use the Federal test procedures as the basis for: (1) certifying to DOE
that their equipment complies with the applicable energy conservation
standards adopted pursuant to EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6316(b); 42 U.S.C. 6296),
and (2) making representations about the energy use or efficiency of
that equipment (42 U.S.C. 6314(d)). Similarly, DOE uses these test
procedures to determine whether the equipment complies with relevant
standards promulgated under EPCA. The DOE test procedures for CRACs
appear at 10 CFR part 431, subpart F.
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 sets industry energy efficiency levels for
small, large, and very large commercial package air-conditioning and
heating equipment, packaged terminal air conditioners, packaged
terminal heat pumps, warm air furnaces, packaged boilers, storage water
heaters, instantaneous water heaters, and unfired hot water storage
tanks (collectively referred to as ``ASHRAE equipment''). For each type
of listed equipment, EPCA directs that if ASHRAE amends ASHRAE Standard
90.1 with respect to the standard levels or design requirements
applicable under that standard, DOE must adopt amended standards at the
new ASHRAE efficiency level, unless DOE determines, supported by clear
and convincing evidence,\4\ that adoption of a more-stringent level
would produce significant additional conservation of energy and would
be technologically feasible and economically justified. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)) If DOE makes such a determination, it must publish a
final rule to establish the more-stringent standards. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(B)(i))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The clear and convincing threshold is a heightened standard,
and would only be met where the Secretary has an abiding conviction,
based on available facts, data, and DOE's own analyses, that it is
highly probable an amended standard would result in a significant
additional amount of energy savings, and is technologically feasible
and economically justified. American Public Gas Association v. U.S.
Dep't of Energy, No. 20-1068, 2022 WL 151923, at *4 (D.C. Cir.
January 18, 2022) (citing Colorado v. New Mexico, 467 U.S. 310, 316,
104 S.Ct. 2433, 81 L.Ed.2d 247 (1984)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although EPCA does not explicitly define the term ``amended'' in
the context of what type of revision to ASHRAE Standard 90.1 would
trigger DOE's obligation, DOE's longstanding interpretation has been
that the statutory trigger is an amendment to the standard applicable
to that equipment under ASHRAE Standard 90.1 that increases the energy
efficiency level for that equipment. See 72 FR 10038, 10042 (March 7,
2007). If the revised ASHRAE Standard 90.1 leaves the energy efficiency
level unchanged (or lowers the energy efficiency level) as compared to
the energy efficiency level specified by the uniform national standard
adopted pursuant to EPCA, regardless of the other amendments made to
the ASHRAE Standard 90.1 requirement (e.g., the inclusion of an
additional metric), DOE has stated that it does not have authority to
conduct a rulemaking pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A) to consider a
higher standard for that equipment, although this does not limit DOE's
authority to consider higher standards as part of a six-year-lookback
rulemaking analysis (pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C); see
discussion in the following paragraphs). See 74 FR 36312, 36313 (July
22, 2009) and 77 FR 28928, 28937 (May 16, 2012). If an amendment to
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 changes the metric for the standard on which the
Federal requirement was based, DOE performs a crosswalk analysis to
determine whether the amended metric under ASHRAE Standard 90.1 results
in an energy efficiency level more stringent than the current DOE
standard.
Under EPCA, DOE must also review its energy conservation standards
for CRACs every six years and either: (1) issue a notice of
determination that the standards do not need to be amended, as adoption
of a more stringent level is not supported by clear and convincing
evidence; or (2) issue a notice of proposed rulemaking including new
proposed standards based on certain criteria and procedures in
subparagraph (B).\5\ (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ In relevant part, subparagraph (B) specifies that: (1) in
making a determination of economic justification, DOE must consider,
to the maximum extent practicable, the benefits and burdens of an
amended standard based on the seven criteria described in EPCA; (2)
DOE may not prescribe any standard that increases the energy use or
decreases the energy efficiency of covered equipment; and (3) DOE
may not prescribe any standard that interested persons have
established by a preponderance of evidence is likely to result in
the unavailability in the United States of any product type (or
class) of performance characteristics (including reliability,
features, sizes, capacities, and volumes) that are substantially the
same as those generally available in the United States. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(B)(ii)-(iii))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In deciding whether a more-stringent standard is economically
justified, under either the provisions of 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A) or 42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C), DOE must determine whether the benefits of the
standard exceed its burdens. DOE must make this determination after
receiving comments on the proposed standard, and by considering, to the
maximum extent practicable, the following seven factors:
(1) The economic impact of the standard on manufacturers and
consumers of products subject to the standard;
(2) The savings in operating costs throughout the estimated average
life of the covered equipment in the type (or class) compared to any
increase in the price, initial charges, or maintenance expenses for the
covered equipment that are likely to result from the standard;
(3) The total projected amount of energy savings likely to result
directly from the standard;
(4) Any lessening of the utility or the performance of the covered
equipment likely to result from the standard;
(5) The impact of any lessening of competition, as determined in
writing by the Attorney General, that is likely to result from the
standard;
(6) The need for national energy conservation; and
(7) Other factors the Secretary of Energy considers relevant.
(42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(ii)(I)-(VII))
Further, EPCA establishes a rebuttable presumption that an energy
conservation standard is economically justified if the Secretary finds
that the additional cost to the consumer of purchasing a product that
complies with the standard will be less than three times the value of
the energy (and, as applicable, water) savings during the first year
that the consumer will receive as a result of the standard, as
calculated under the applicable test procedure. (42
[[Page 36396]]
U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(iii)) However, while this rebuttable presumption
analysis applies to most commercial and industrial equipment (42 U.S.C.
6316(a)), it is not a required analysis for ASHRAE equipment (42 U.S.C.
6316(b)(1)).
EPCA, as codified, also contains what is known as an ``anti-
backsliding'' provision, which prevents the Secretary from prescribing
any amended standard that either increases the maximum allowable energy
use or decreases the minimum required energy efficiency of a covered
product. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(iii)(I)) Also, the Secretary may not
prescribe an amended or new standard if interested persons have
established by a preponderance of the evidence that the standard is
likely to result in the unavailability in the United States in any
covered equipment type (or class) of performance characteristics
(including reliability), features, sizes, capacities, and volumes that
are substantially the same as those generally available in the United
States. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(iii)(II)(aa))
B. Background
1. Current Standards
EPCA defines ``commercial package air conditioning and heating
equipment'' as air-cooled, water-cooled, evaporatively-cooled, or
water-source (not including ground-water-source) electrically operated,
unitary central air conditioners and central air conditioning heat
pumps for commercial application. (42 U.S.C. 6311(8)(A); 10 CFR 431.92)
EPCA further classifies ``commercial package air conditioning and
heating equipment'' into categories based on cooling capacity (i.e.,
small, large, and very large categories). (42 U.S.C. 6311(8)(B)-(D); 10
CFR 431.92) ``Small commercial package air conditioning and heating
equipment'' means equipment rated below 135,000 Btu/h (cooling
capacity). (42 U.S.C. 6311(8)(B); 10 CFR 431.92) ``Large commercial
package air conditioning and heating equipment'' means equipment rated:
(i) At or above 135,000 Btu/h; and (ii) below 240,000 Btu/h (cooling
capacity). (42 U.S.C. 6311(8)(C); 10 CFR 431.92) ``Very large
commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment'' means
equipment rated: (i) At or above 240,000 Btu/h; and (ii) below 760,000
Btu/h (cooling capacity). (42 U.S.C. 6311(8)(D); 10 CFR 431.92)
Pursuant to its authority under EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)) and
in response to updates to ASHRAE Standard 90.1, DOE has established the
category of CRAC, which meets the EPCA definition of ``commercial
package air conditioning and heating equipment,'' but which EPCA did
not expressly identify. See 10 CFR 431.92 and 10 CFR 431.97. Within
this equipment category, further distinctions are made at the equipment
class level based on capacity and other equipment attributes.
DOE has recently amended the definition of CRAC in a test procedure
final rule issued in March 2023 (March 2023 TP final rule). See EERE-
2021-BT-TP-0017. Specifically, DOE has revised the definition to
include how the manufacturer markets a model for use, consistent with
the definition in the industry standard, AHRI 1360-2022, which also
defines CRACs based on marketing. Id. The amended definition notes that
CRACs include, but are not limited to, the following configurations as
defined in 10 CFR 431.92: down-flow, horizontal-flow, up-flow ducted,
up-flow non-ducted, ceiling-mounted ducted, ceiling mounted non-ducted,
roof-mounted, and wall-mounted. Id.
In a final rule published in the Federal Register on May 16, 2012
(May 2012 final rule), DOE established energy conservation standards
for CRACs. Compliance with standards was required for units
manufactured: (1) on and after October 29, 2012, for equipment classes
with NSCC less than 65,000 Btu/h and (2) on or after October 29, 2013,
for equipment classes with NSCC greater than or equal to 65,000 Btu/h
and less than 760,000 Btu/h. 77 FR 28929, 28995. These standards are
set forth in DOE's regulations at 10 CFR 431.97 and are repeated in
Table II-1.
Table II-1--Current Federal Energy Conservation Standards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minimum SCOP efficiency
Equipment type Net sensible cooling capacity -------------------------------
Downflow Upflow
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air-Cooled................................. <65,000 Btu/h...................... 2.20 2.09
>=65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h.. 2.10 1.99
>=240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h. 1.90 1.79
Water-Cooled............................... <65,000 Btu/h...................... 2.60 2.49
>=65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h.. 2.50 2.39
>=240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h. 2.40 2.29
Water-Cooled with a Fluid Economizer....... <65,000 Btu/h...................... 2.55 2.44
>=65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h.. 2.45 2.34
>=240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h. 2.35 2.24
Glycol-Cooled.............................. <65,000 Btu/h...................... 2.50 2.39
>=65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h.. 2.15 2.04
>=240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h. 2.10 1.99
Glycol-Cooled with a Fluid Economizer...... <65,000 Btu/h...................... 2.45 2.34
>=65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h.. 2.10 1.99
>=240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h. 2.05 1.94
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE's current equipment classes for CRACs are differentiated by
condenser heat rejection medium (air-cooled, water-cooled, water-cooled
with fluid economizer, glycol-cooled, or glycol-cooled with fluid
economizer), NSCC (less than 65,000 Btu/h, greater than or equal to
65,000 Btu/h and less than 240,000 Btu/h, or greater than or equal to
240,000 Btu/h and less than 760,000 Btu/h), and direction of
conditioned air over the cooling coil (upflow or downflow). 10 CFR
431.97.
As noted previously, DOE's test procedure for CRACs was last
amended in the March 2023 TP final rule, and is set forth at appendix
E1 to Subpart F of 10 CFR part 431. See EERE-2021-BT-TP-0017. The
amended test procedure incorporates by reference AHRI Standard 1360-
2022, ``Performance Rating of Computer and Data Processing Room Air
Conditioners'' (AHRI 1360-2022) and uses the energy efficiency metric,
NSenCOP, for all CRAC equipment classes. Id. Testing in accordance with
the amended test
[[Page 36397]]
procedure is not required until such time as compliance is required
with amended energy conservation standards for CRACs that rely on
NSenCOP. Id. In parallel, DOE also established appendix E, which
continues to reference ANSI/ASHRAE 127-2007 and provide instructions
for determining SCOP. Id. CRACs are required to be tested according to
appendix E until such time as compliance is required with amended
energy conservation standards that rely on the NSenCOP metric. Id.
2. History of Standards Rulemaking for CRACs
As discussed, the energy conservation standards for CRACs were most
recently amended in the May 2012 final rule. 77 FR 28928 (May 16,
2012). The May 2012 final rule established equipment classes for CRACs
and adopted energy conservation standards that correspond to the levels
in the 2010 revision of ASHRAE Standard 90.1 (ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2010).
ASHRAE released the 2016 version of ASHRAE Standard 90.1 (ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2016) on October 26, 2016, which updated its test
procedure reference for CRACs from ANSI/ASHRAE 127-2007 to AHRI
Standard 1360-2016, ``Performance Rating of Computer and Data
Processing Room Air Conditioners'' (AHRI 1360-2016), which in turn
references ANSI/ASHRAE 127-2012, ``Method of Testing for Rating
Computer and Data Processing Room Unitary Air Conditioners'' (ANSI/
ASHRAE 127-2012). The energy efficiency metric for CRACs in AHRI 1360-
2016 is NSenCOP. ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 established new equipment
classes and added efficiency levels for horizontal-flow CRACs,
disaggregated the upflow CRAC equipment classes into upflow ducted and
upflow non-ducted equipment classes, and established different sets of
efficiency levels for upflow ducted and upflow non-ducted equipment
classes based on the corresponding rating conditions specified in AHRI
1360-2016.
DOE published a notice of data availability and request for
information (NODA/RFI) in response to the amendments to the industry
consensus standard contained in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 in the
Federal Register on September 11, 2019 (September 2019 NODA/RFI). 84 FR
48006. In the September 2019 NODA/RFI, DOE explained its methodology
and assumptions to compare the current Federal standards for CRACs (in
terms of SCOP as measured per ANSI/ASHRAE 127-2007) to the levels in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 (in terms of NSenCOP and measured per AHRI
1360-2016) and requested comment on its methodology and results. 84 FR
48006, 48014-48019 (Sept. 11, 2019).
On October 24, 2019, ASHRAE officially released for distribution
and made public ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019. ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019
updated its test procedure reference for CRACs from AHRI 1360-2016 to
AHRI 1360-2017, which also references ANSI/ASHRAE 127-2012. ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2019 maintained the equipment class structure for floor-
mounted CRACs as established in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 and updated
the efficiency levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 for all but three of
those equipment classes. ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 also added classes
for air-cooled CRACs with fluid economizers and a new table with new
efficiency levels for ceiling-mounted CRAC equipment classes. The
equipment in the horizontal-flow and ceiling-mounted classes is
currently not subject to Federal standards set forth in 10 CFR
431.97.\6\ In contrast, upflow and downflow air-cooled CRACs with fluid
economizers are currently subject to the Federal standards in 10 CFR
431.97 for air-cooled equipment classes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ DOE issued a draft guidance document on October 7, 2015, to
clarify that horizontal-flow and ceiling-mounted CRACs are covered
equipment and are required to be tested under the current DOE test
procedure for purposes of making representations of energy
consumption. (Docket No. EERE-2014-BT-GUID-0022, No. 3, pp. 1-2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE also published a NODA/RFI in response to the amendments in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 and the comments received in response to the
September 2019 NODA/RFI, in the Federal Register on September 25, 2020
(September 2020 NODA/RFI). 85 FR 60642. In the September 2020 NODA/RFI,
DOE conducted a crosswalk analysis (similar to the September 2019 NODA/
RFI) to compare the current Federal standards for CRACs (in terms of
SCOP as measured per ANSI/ASHRAE 127-2007) to the levels in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2019 (in terms of NSenCOP as measured per AHRI 1360-2017)
and requested comment on its methodology and results. 85 FR 60642,
60653-60660 (Sept. 25, 2020).
Subsequently, on March 7, 2022, DOE published in the Federal
Register a NOPR proposing amended CRAC standards in alignment with
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 (March 2022 ECS NOPR). 87 FR 12802. In the
March 2022 ECS NOPR, DOE outlined the plan to crosswalk the existing
CRAC energy conservation standards (denominated in terms of SCOP) to
the standards in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 (denominated in terms of
NSenCOP) and requested comment. DOE received comments in response to
the March 2022 ECS NOPR from the interested parties listed in Table II-
2.
Table II-2--March 2022 ECS NOPR Written Comments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment number
Commenter(s) Abbreviation in the docket Commenter type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air-Conditioning, Heating & AHRI...................... 0012 Industry Trade
Refrigeration Institute. Association.
New York State Energy Research and NYSERDA \7\............... 0014 State Agency.
Development Authority.
Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San CA IOUs................... 0013 Utilities.
Diego Gas & Electric, Southern
California Edison (collectively
referred to as the California Investor-
owned Utilities or CA IOUs).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A parenthetical reference at the end of a comment quotation or
paraphrase provides the location of the item in the public record.\8\
To the extent that interested parties have provided written comments
that are substantively consistent with any oral comments provided
during the April 13, 2022, public meeting webinar for the CRACs ECS
NOPR, DOE cites the written comments throughout this final rule. In
this case, there were no relevant
[[Page 36398]]
webinar comments that were not reflected in written comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ NYSERDA's comment was received three days after the comment
deadline.
\8\ The parenthetical reference provides a reference for
information located in the docket of DOE's rulemaking to develop
energy conservation standards for CRACs. (Docket No. EERE-2020-BT-
STD-0008, which is maintained at www.regulations.gov). The
references are arranged as follows: (commenter name, comment docket
ID number, page of that document).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, on February 7, 2022, DOE published in the Federal
Register a test procedure NOPR (February 2022 TP NOPR), in which DOE
proposed an amended test procedure for CRACs that would incorporate by
reference the substance of a draft version of AHRI 1360 standard, AHRI
Standard 1360-202X, Performance Rating of Computer and Data Processing
Room Air Conditioners (AHRI 1360-202X Draft) and adopts NSenCOP as the
test metric for CRACs. 87 FR 6948. At the time of the publication of
the February 2022 TP NOPR, AHRI Standard 1360-202X Draft was in draft
form, and its text was provided to the Department for the purposes of
review. As stated in the February 2022 TP NOPR, DOE intended to update
the reference to the final published version of AHRI 1360-202X Draft.
87 FR 6948, 6951 (Feb. 7, 2022). In November 2022, AHRI finalized AHRI
1360-202X Draft by publishing AHRI 1360-2022. AHRI 1360-2022 did not
include any substantial changes from the AHRI-1360-202X Draft that was
referenced in the February 2022 TP NOPR.
Subsequently, in March 2023, DOE issued the March 2023 TP final
rule updating the reference to AHRI 1360-2022. See EERE-2021-BT-TP-
0017.
III. General Discussion
DOE developed this final rule after considering oral and written
comments, data, and information from interested parties that represent
a variety of interests. The following discussion addresses issues
raised by these commenters.
This final rule covers commercial equipment that meet the
definition of CRACs, as codified at 10 CFR 431.92.
A. Background
As mentioned, DOE presented an efficiency crosswalk analysis in the
September 2020 NODA/RFI to compare the stringency of the current
Federal standards (represented in terms of SCOP based on the current
DOE test procedure) for CRACs to the stringency of the efficiency
levels for this equipment in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 (represented in
terms of NSenCOP and based on AHRI 1360-2017). 85 FR 60642, 60648
(Sept. 25, 2020). In the February 2022 TP NOPR, DOE proposed to
incorporate by reference the then latest draft version of AHRI Standard
1360, AHRI 1360-202X Draft, and to adopt NSenCOP as the test metric in
the DOE test procedure for CRACs. 87 FR 6948 (Feb. 7, 2022). In the
March 2022 ECS NOPR, DOE noted that because the rating conditions
specified in AHRI 1360-2017 and AHRI 1360-202X Draft are the same for
the classes covered by DOE's crosswalk analysis (upflow ducted, upflow
non-ducted, and downflow), the same crosswalk as described in the
September 2020 NODA/RFI can be used to compare DOE's current SCOP-based
CRAC standards to relevant NSenCOP values determined according to AHRI
1360-202X Draft. 87 FR 12802, 12808 (March 7, 2022).
In November 2022, AHRI finalized AHRI 1360-202X Draft and published
AHRI 1360-2022. Subsequently, in the March 2023 TP final rule, DOE
adopted AHRI 1360-2022. See EERE-2021-BT-TP-0017. The rating conditions
specified in AHRI 1360-2022 and AHRI 1360-202X Draft are unchanged for
the classes covered by DOE's crosswalk analysis, so accordingly, DOE
has concluded that the crosswalk as described in the September 2020
NODA/RFI can be used to compare DOE's current SCOP-based CRAC standards
to relevant NSenCOP values determined according to AHRI 1360-2022.
In the September 2020 NODA/RFI, DOE's analysis focused on whether
DOE had been triggered by ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 updates to minimum
efficiency levels for CRACs and whether more-stringent standards were
warranted. As discussed in detail in section III.C of this final rule,
DOE conducted a crosswalk analysis of the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019
standard levels (in terms of NSenCOP) and the corresponding current
Federal energy conservation standards (in terms of SCOP) to compare the
stringencies. DOE has determined that the updates in ASHRAE Standard
90.1-2019 increased the stringency of efficiency levels for 48
equipment classes and maintained equivalent levels for 6 equipment
classes of CRACs relative to the current Federal standard. In addition,
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 includes efficiency levels for 18 classes of
horizontal-flow CRACs and 48 classes of ceiling-mounted CRACs which are
not currently subject to Federal standards and, therefore, require no
crosswalk. As discussed in section V of this document, DOE is adopting
standards for horizontal-flow CRACs and ceiling-mounted CRACs.
Table III-1 shows the equipment classes and efficiency levels for
CRACs provided in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 alongside the current
Federal energy conservation standards. Table III-1 also displays the
corresponding existing Federal equipment classes for clarity and
indicates whether the updated levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019
trigger DOE's evaluation pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A) (i.e.,
whether the update results in a standard level more stringent than the
current Federal level).
Table III-1--Energy Efficiency Levels for CRACs in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 and the Corresponding Federal
Energy Conservation Standards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Energy
efficiency Federal energy DOE triggered by ASHRAE
ASHRAE standard 90.1-2019 Current federal levels in conservation standard 90.1-2019
equipment class \1\ equipment class \1\ ASHRAE standard standards \2\ amendment?
90.1-2019 \2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air-Cooled, <80,000 Btu/h, Air-Cooled, <65,000 2.70 NSenCOP... 2.20 SCOP...... Yes
Downflow. Btu/h, Downflow.
Air-Cooled, <65,000 Btu/h, N/A................. 2.65 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \3\
Horizontal-flow.
Air-Cooled, <80,000 Btu/h, Air-Cooled, <65,000 2.67 NSenCOP... 2.09 SCOP...... Yes
Upflow Ducted. Btu/h, Upflow.
Air-Cooled, <65,000 Btu/h, Air-Cooled, <65,000 2.16 NSenCOP... 2.09 SCOP...... Yes
Upflow Non-Ducted. Btu/h, Upflow.
Air-Cooled, >=80,000 and Air-Cooled, >=65,000 2.58 NSenCOP... 2.10 SCOP...... Yes
<295,000 Btu/h, Downflow. and <240,000 Btu/h,
Downflow.
Air-Cooled, >=65,000 and N/A................. 2.55 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \3\
<240,000 Btu/h, Horizontal-
flow.
Air-Cooled, >=80,000 and Air-Cooled, >=65,000 2.55 NSenCOP... 1.99 SCOP...... No \4\
<295,000 Btu/h, Upflow and <240,000 Btu/h,
Ducted. Upflow.
[[Page 36399]]
Air-Cooled, >=65,000 and Air-Cooled, >=65,000 2.04 NSenCOP... 1.99 SCOP...... Yes
<240,000 Btu/h, Upflow Non- and <240,000 Btu/h,
Ducted. Upflow.
Air-Cooled, >=295,000 Btu/h, Air-Cooled, 2.36 NSenCOP... 1.90 SCOP...... Yes
Downflow. >=240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h,
Downflow.
Air-Cooled, >=240,000 Btu/h, N/A................. 2.47 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \3\
Horizontal-flow.
Air-Cooled, >=295,000 Btu/h, Air-Cooled, 2.33 NSenCOP... 1.79 SCOP...... Yes
Upflow Ducted. >=240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h,
Upflow.
Air-Cooled, >=240,000 Btu/h, Air-Cooled, 1.89 NSenCOP... 1.79 SCOP...... Yes
Upflow Non-ducted. >=240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h,
Upflow.
Air-Cooled with fluid Air-Cooled, <65,000 2.70 NSenCOP... 2.20 SCOP...... Yes \5\
economizer, <80,000 Btu/h, Btu/h, Downflow.
Downflow.
Air-Cooled with fluid N/A................. 2.65 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \3\
economizer, <65,000 Btu/h,
Horizontal-flow.
Air-Cooled with fluid Air-Cooled, <65,000 2.67 NSenCOP... 2.09 SCOP...... Yes \5\
economizer, <80,000 Btu/h, Btu/h, Upflow.
Upflow Ducted.
Air-Cooled with fluid Air-Cooled, <65,000 2.09 NSenCOP... 2.09 SCOP...... No \4\
economizer, <65,000 Btu/h, Btu/h, Upflow.
Upflow Non-Ducted.
Air-Cooled with fluid Air-Cooled, >=65,000 2.58 NSenCOP... 2.10 SCOP...... Yes \5\
economizer, >=80,000 and and <240,000 Btu/h,
<295,000 Btu/h, Downflow. Downflow.
Air-Cooled with fluid N/A................. 2.55 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \3\
economizer, >=65,000 and
<240,000 Btu/h, Horizontal-
flow.
Air-Cooled with fluid Air-Cooled, >=65,000 2.55 NSenCOP... 1.99 SCOP...... No \4\
economizer, >=80,000 and and <240,000 Btu/h,
<295,000 Btu/h, Upflow Upflow.
Ducted.
Air-Cooled with fluid Air-Cooled, >=65,000 1.99 NSenCOP... 1.99 SCOP...... No \4\
economizer, >=65,000 and and <240,000 Btu/h,
<240,000 Btu/h, Upflow Non- Upflow.
Ducted.
Air-Cooled with fluid Air-Cooled, 2.36 NSenCOP... 1.90 SCOP...... Yes \5\
economizer, >=295,000 Btu/h, >=240,000 Btu/h and
Downflow. <760,000 Btu/h,
Downflow.
Air-Cooled with fluid N/A................. 2.47 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \3\
economizer, >=240,000 Btu/h,
Horizontal-flow.
Air-Cooled with fluid Air-Cooled, 2.33 NSenCOP... 1.79 SCOP...... Yes \5\
economizer, >=295,000 Btu/h, >=240,000 Btu/h and
Upflow Ducted. <760,000 Btu/h,
Upflow.
Air-Cooled with fluid Air-Cooled, 1.81 NSenCOP... 1.79 SCOP...... Yes \5\
economizer, >=240,000 Btu/h, >=240,000 Btu/h and
Upflow Non-ducted. <760,000 Btu/h,
Upflow.
Water-Cooled, <80,000 Btu/h, Water-Cooled, 2.82 NSenCOP... 2.60 SCOP...... Yes
Downflow. <65,000 Btu/h,
Downflow.
Water-Cooled, <65,000 Btu/h, N/A................. 2.79 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \3\
Horizontal-flow.
Water-Cooled, <80,000 Btu/h, Water-Cooled, 2.79 NSenCOP... 2.49 SCOP...... Yes
Upflow Ducted. <65,000 Btu/h,
Upflow.
Water-Cooled, <65,000 Btu/h, Water-Cooled, 2.43 NSenCOP... 2.49 SCOP...... Yes
Upflow Non-ducted. <65,000 Btu/h,
Upflow.
Water-Cooled, >=80,000 and Water-Cooled, 2.73 NSenCOP... 2.50 SCOP...... Yes
<295,000 Btu/h, Downflow. >=65,000 and
<240,000 Btu/h,
Downflow.
Water-Cooled, >=65,000 and N/A................. 2.68 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \3\
<240,000 Btu/h, Horizontal-
flow.
Water-Cooled, >=80,000 and Water-Cooled, 2.70 NSenCOP... 2.39 SCOP...... No \4\
<295,000 Btu/h, Upflow >=65,000 and
Ducted. <240,000 Btu/h,
Upflow.
Water-Cooled, >=65,000 and Water-Cooled, 2.32 NSenCOP... 2.39 SCOP...... Yes
<240,000 Btu/h, Upflow Non- >=65,000 and
ducted. <240,000 Btu/h,
Upflow.
Water-Cooled, >=295,000 Btu/ Water-Cooled, 2.67 NSenCOP... 2.40 SCOP...... Yes
h, Downflow. >=240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h,
Downflow.
Water-Cooled, >=240,000 Btu/ N/A................. 2.60 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \3\
h, Horizontal-flow.
Water-Cooled, >=295,000 Btu/ Water-Cooled, 2.64 NSenCOP... 2.29 SCOP...... Yes
h, Upflow Ducted. >=240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h,
Upflow.
Water-Cooled, >=240,000 Btu/ Water-Cooled, 2.20 NSenCOP... 2.29 SCOP...... Yes
h, Upflow Non-ducted. >=240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h,
Upflow.
Water-Cooled with fluid Water-Cooled with 2.77 NSenCOP... 2.55 SCOP...... Yes
economizer, <80,000 Btu/h, fluid economizer,
Downflow. <65,000 Btu/h,
Downflow.
Water-Cooled with fluid N/A................. 2.71 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \3\
economizer, <65,000 Btu/h,
Horizontal-flow.
Water-Cooled with fluid Water-Cooled with 2.74 NSenCOP... 2.44 SCOP...... Yes
economizer, <80,000 Btu/h, fluid economizer,
Upflow Ducted. <65,000 Btu/h,
Upflow.
[[Page 36400]]
Water-Cooled with fluid Water-Cooled with 2.35 NSenCOP... 2.44 SCOP...... Yes
economizer, <65,000 Btu/h, fluid economizer,
Upflow Non-ducted. <65,000 Btu/h,
Upflow.
Water-Cooled with fluid Water-Cooled with 2.68 NSenCOP... 2.45 SCOP...... Yes
economizer, >=80,000 and fluid economizer,
<295,000 Btu/h, Downflow. >=65,000 and
<240,000 Btu/h,
Downflow.
Water-Cooled with fluid N/A................. 2.60 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \3\
economizer, >=65,000 and
<240,000 Btu/h, Horizontal-
flow.
Water-Cooled with fluid Water-Cooled with 2.65 NSenCOP... 2.34 SCOP...... No \4\
economizer, >=80,000 and fluid economizer,
<295,000 Btu/h, Upflow >=65,000 and
Ducted. <240,000 Btu/h,
Upflow.
Water-Cooled with fluid Water-Cooled with 2.24 NSenCOP... 2.34 SCOP...... Yes
economizer, >=65,000 and fluid economizer,
<240,000 Btu/h, Upflow Non- >=65,000 and
ducted. <240,000 Btu/h,
Upflow.
Water-Cooled with fluid Water-Cooled with 2.61 NSenCOP... 2.35 SCOP...... Yes
economizer, >=295,000 Btu/h, fluid economizer,
Downflow. >=240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h,
Downflow.
Water-Cooled with fluid N/A................. 2.54 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \3\
economizer, >=240,000 Btu/h,
Horizontal-flow.
Water-Cooled with fluid Water-Cooled with 2.58 NSenCOP... 2.24 SCOP...... Yes
economizer, >=295,000 Btu/h, fluid economizer,
Upflow Ducted. >=240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h,
Upflow.
Water-Cooled with fluid Water-Cooled with 2.12 NSenCOP... 2.24 SCOP...... Yes
economizer, >=240,000 Btu/h, fluid economizer,
Upflow Non-ducted. >=240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h,
Upflow.
Glycol-Cooled, <80,000 Btu/h, Glycol-Cooled, 2.56 NSenCOP... 2.50 SCOP...... Yes
Downflow. <65,000 Btu/h,
Downflow.
Glycol-Cooled, <65,000 Btu/h, N/A................. 2.48 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \3\
Horizontal-flow.
Glycol-Cooled, <80,000 Btu/h, Glycol-Cooled, 2.53 NSenCOP... 2.39 SCOP...... Yes
Upflow Ducted. <65,000 Btu/h,
Upflow Ducted.
Glycol-Cooled, <65,000 Btu/h, Glycol-Cooled, 2.08 NSenCOP... 2.39 SCOP...... Yes
Upflow Non-ducted. <65,000 Btu/h,
Upflow Non-ducted.
Glycol-Cooled, >=80,000 and Glycol-Cooled, 2.24 NSenCOP... 2.15 SCOP...... Yes
<295,000 Btu/h, Downflow. >=65,000 and
<240,000 Btu/h,
Downflow.
Glycol-Cooled, >=65,000 and N/A................. 2.18 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \3\
<240,000 Btu/h, Horizontal-
flow.
Glycol-Cooled, >=80,000 and Glycol-Cooled, 2.21 NSenCOP... 2.04 SCOP...... Yes
<295,000 Btu/h, Upflow >=65,000 and
Ducted. <240,000 Btu/h,
Upflow.
Glycol-Cooled, >=65,000 and Glycol-Cooled, 1.90 NSenCOP... 2.04 SCOP...... Yes
<240,000 Btu/h, Upflow Non- >=65,000 and
ducted. <240,000 Btu/h,
Upflow.
Glycol-Cooled, >=295,000 Btu/ Glycol-Cooled, 2.21 NSenCOP... 2.10 SCOP...... Yes
h, Downflow. >=240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h,
Downflow.
Glycol-Cooled, >=240,000 Btu/ N/A................. 2.18 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \3\
h, Horizontal-flow.
Glycol-Cooled, >=295,000 Btu/ Glycol-Cooled, 2.18 NSenCOP... 1.99 SCOP...... Yes
h, Upflow Ducted. >=240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h,
Upflow Ducted.
Glycol-Cooled, >=240,000 Btu/ Glycol-Cooled, 1.81 NSenCOP... 1.99 SCOP...... Yes
h, Upflow Non-ducted. >=240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h,
Upflow Non-ducted.
Glycol-Cooled with fluid Glycol-Cooled with 2.51 NSenCOP... 2.45 SCOP...... Yes
economizer, <80,000 Btu/h, fluid economizer,
Downflow. <65,000 Btu/h,
Downflow.
Glycol-Cooled with fluid N/A................. 2.44 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \3\
economizer, <65,000 Btu/h,
Horizontal-flow.
Glycol-Cooled with fluid Glycol-Cooled with 2.48 NSenCOP... 2.34 SCOP...... Yes
economizer, <80,000 Btu/h, fluid economizer,
Upflow Ducted. <65,000 Btu/h,
Upflow Ducted.
Glycol-Cooled with fluid Glycol-Cooled with 2.00 NSenCOP... 2.34 SCOP...... Yes
economizer, <65,000 Btu/h, fluid economizer,
Upflow Non-ducted. <65,000 Btu/h,
Upflow Non-ducted.
Glycol-Cooled with fluid Glycol-Cooled with 2.19 NSenCOP... 2.10 SCOP...... Yes
economizer, >=80,000 and fluid economizer,
<295,000 Btu/h, Downflow. >=65,000 and
<240,000 Btu/h,
Downflow.
Glycol-Cooled with fluid N/A................. 2.10 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \3\
economizer, >=65,000 and
<240,000 Btu/h, Horizontal-
flow.
Glycol-Cooled with fluid Glycol-Cooled with 2.16 NSenCOP... 1.99 SCOP...... Yes
economizer, >=80,000 and fluid economizer,
<295,000 Btu/h, Upflow >=65,000 and
Ducted. <240,000 Btu/h,
Upflow.
[[Page 36401]]
Glycol-Cooled with fluid Glycol-Cooled with 1.82 NSenCOP... 1.99 SCOP...... Yes
economizer, >=65,000 and fluid economizer,
<240,000 Btu/h, Upflow Non- >=65,000 and
ducted. <240,000 Btu/h,
Upflow.
Glycol-Cooled with fluid Glycol-Cooled with 2.15 NSenCOP... 2.05 SCOP...... Yes
economizer, >=295,000 Btu/h, fluid economizer,
Downflow. >=240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h,
Downflow.
Glycol-Cooled with fluid N/A................. 2.10 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \3\
economizer, >=240,000 Btu/h,
Horizontal-flow.
Glycol-Cooled with fluid Glycol-Cooled with 2.12 NSenCOP... 1.94 SCOP...... Yes
economizer, >=295,000 Btu/h, fluid economizer,
Upflow Ducted. >=240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h,
Upflow Ducted.
Glycol-Cooled with fluid Glycol-Cooled with 1.73 NSenCOP... 1.94 SCOP...... Yes
economizer, >=240,000 Btu/h, fluid economizer,
Upflow Non-ducted. >=240,000 Btu/h and
<760,000 Btu/h,
Upflow Non-ducted.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled N/A................. 2.05 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
with free air discharge
condenser, Ducted, <29,000
Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled N/A................. 2.02 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
with free air discharge
condenser, Ducted, >=29,000
Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled N/A................. 1.92 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
with free air discharge
condenser, Ducted, >=65,000
Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled N/A................. 2.08 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
with free air discharge
condenser, Non-ducted,
<29,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled N/A................. 2.05 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
with free air discharge
condenser, Non-ducted,
>=29,000 Btu/h and <65,000
Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled N/A................. 1.94 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
with free air discharge
condenser, Non-ducted,
>=65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled N/A................. 2.01 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
with free air discharge
condenser with fluid
economizer, Ducted, <29,000
Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled N/A................. 1.97 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
with free air discharge
condenser with fluid
economizer, Ducted, >=29,000
Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled N/A................. 1.87 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
with free air discharge
condenser with fluid
economizer, Ducted, >=65,000
Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled N/A................. 2.04 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
with free air discharge
condenser with fluid
economizer, Non-ducted,
<29,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled N/A................. 2.00 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
with free air discharge
condenser with fluid
economizer, Non-ducted,
>=29,000 Btu/h and <65,000
Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled N/A................. 1.89 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
with free air discharge
condenser with fluid
economizer, Non-ducted,
>=65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled N/A................. 1.86 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
with ducted condenser,
Ducted, <29,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled N/A................. 1.83 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
with ducted condenser,
Ducted, >=29,000 Btu/h and
<65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled N/A................. 1.73 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
with ducted condenser,
Ducted, >=65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled N/A................. 1.89 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
with ducted condenser, Non-
ducted, <29,000 Btu/h.
[[Page 36402]]
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled N/A................. 1.86 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
with ducted condenser, Non-
ducted, >=29,000 Btu/h and
<65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled N/A................. 1.75 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
with ducted condenser, Non-
ducted, >=65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled N/A................. 1.82 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
with ducted condenser with
fluid economizer, Ducted,
<29,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled N/A................. 1.78 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
with ducted condenser with
fluid economizer, Ducted,
>=29,000 Btu/h and <65,000
Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled N/A................. 1.68 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
with ducted condenser with
fluid economizer, Ducted,
>=65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled N/A................. 1.85 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
with ducted condenser with
fluid economizer, Non-
ducted, <29,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled N/A................. 1.81 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
with ducted condenser with
fluid economizer, Non-
ducted, >=29,000 Btu/h and
<65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Air-cooled N/A................. 1.70 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
with ducted condenser with
fluid economizer, Non-
ducted, >=65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Water- N/A................. 2.38 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
cooled, Ducted, <29,000 Btu/
h.
Ceiling-mounted, Water- N/A................. 2.28 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
cooled, Ducted, >=29,000 Btu/
h and <65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Water- N/A................. 2.18 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
cooled, Ducted, >=65,000 Btu/
h.
Ceiling-mounted, Water- N/A................. 2.41 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
cooled, Non-ducted, <29,000
Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Water- N/A................. 2.31 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
cooled, Non-ducted, >=29,000
Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Water- N/A................. 2.20 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
cooled, Non-ducted, >=65,000
Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Water-cooled N/A................. 2.33 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
with fluid economizer,
Ducted, <29,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Water-cooled N/A................. 2.23 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
with fluid economizer,
Ducted, >=29,000 Btu/h and
<65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Water-cooled N/A................. 2.13 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
with fluid economizer,
Ducted, >=65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Water-cooled N/A................. 2.36 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
with fluid economizer, Non-
ducted, <29,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Water-cooled N/A................. 2.26 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
with fluid economizer, Non-
ducted, >=29,000 Btu/h and
<65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Water-cooled N/A................. 2.16 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
with fluid economizer, Non-
ducted, >=65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Glycol- N/A................. 1.97 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
cooled, Ducted, <29,000 Btu/
h.
Ceiling-mounted, Glycol- N/A................. 1.93 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
cooled, Ducted, >=29,000 Btu/
h and <65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Glycol- N/A................. 1.78 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
cooled, Ducted, >=65,000 Btu/
h.
Ceiling-mounted, Glycol- N/A................. 2.00 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
cooled, Non-ducted, <29,000
Btu/h.
[[Page 36403]]
Ceiling-mounted, Glycol- N/A................. 1.98 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
cooled, Non-ducted, >=29,000
Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Glycol- N/A................. 1.81 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
cooled, Non-ducted, >=65,000
Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Glycol- N/A................. 1.92 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
cooled with fluid
economizer, Ducted, <29,000
Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Glycol- N/A................. 1.88 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
cooled with fluid
economizer, Ducted, >=29,000
Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Glycol- N/A................. 1.73 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
cooled with fluid
economizer, Ducted, >=65,000
Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Glycol- N/A................. 1.95 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
cooled with fluid
economizer, Non-ducted,
<29,000 Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Glycol- N/A................. 1.93 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
cooled with fluid
economizer, Non-ducted,
>=29,000 Btu/h and <65,000
Btu/h.
Ceiling-mounted, Glycol- N/A................. 1.76 NSenCOP... N/A............ Yes \6\
cooled with fluid
economizer, Non-ducted,
>=65,000 Btu/h.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Note that equipment classes specified in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 do not necessarily correspond to the
equipment classes defined in DOE's regulations. Capacity ranges in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 are specified in
terms of NSCC, as measured according to AHRI 1360-2017 (which, as discussed, would produce the same results
for the crosswalked classes as AHRI 1360-2022). Capacity ranges in current Federal equipment classes are
specified in terms of NSCC, as measured according to ANSI/ASHRAE 127-2007. As discussed in section III.C of
this document, for certain equipment classes AHRI 1360-2017 (and AHRI 1360-2022) results in increased NSCC
measurements as compared to the NSCC measured in accordance with ANSI/ASHRAE 127-2007. Therefore, some CRACs
would switch classes (i.e., move into a higher capacity equipment class) if the equipment class boundaries are
not changed accordingly. Consequently, DOE performed a ``capacity crosswalk'' analysis to translate the
capacity boundaries for certain equipment classes.
\2\ For CRACs, ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 adopted efficiency levels in terms of NSenCOP based on test procedures
in AHRI 1360-2017, while DOE's current standards are in terms of SCOP based on the test procedures in ANSI/
ASHRAE 127-2007. DOE performed a crosswalk analysis to compare the stringency of the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019
efficiency levels with the current Federal standards. See section III.C of this final rule for further
discussion on the crosswalk analysis performed for CRACs.
\3\ Horizontal-flow CRACs are new equipment classes included in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 and ASHRAE Standard
90.1-2019 (and not subject to current Federal standards), but DOE does not have any data to indicate the
market share of horizontal-flow units. In the absence of data regarding market share and efficiency
distribution, DOE is unable to estimate potential savings for horizontal-flow equipment classes.
\4\ The crosswalk analysis indicates that there is no difference in stringency of efficiency levels for this
class between ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 and the current Federal standard.
\5\ Air-cooled CRACs with fluid economizers are new equipment classes included in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 and
are currently subject to the Federal standard for air-cooled CRACs. DOE does not have data regarding market
share for air-cooled CRACs with fluid economizers. Although DOE is unable to disaggregate the estimated
potential savings for these equipment classes, energy savings for these equipment classes are included in the
savings presented for air-cooled CRACs.
\6\ Ceiling-mounted CRACs are new equipment classes in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 (and not subject to current
Federal standards), and DOE does not have any data to indicate the market share of ceiling-mounted units. In
the absence of data regarding market share and efficiency distribution, DOE is unable to estimate potential
savings for ceiling-mounted equipment classes.
The remainder of this section explains DOE's methodology for
evaluating the updated levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 and
addresses comments received regarding CRAC efficiency levels and
associated analyses discussed in the March 2022 ECS NOPR.
B. Test Procedure
As noted in section III.A of this document, ASHRAE adopted
efficiency levels for all CRAC equipment classes denominated in terms
of NSenCOP in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 (measured per AHRI 1360-2017),
whereas DOE's current standards are denominated in terms of SCOP
(measured per ANSI/ASHRAE 127-2007). ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019
incorporates by references AHRI 1360-2017. In the February 2022 TP
NOPR, DOE proposed to adopt an amended test procedure for CRACs that
incorporates by reference the substance of the updated draft version of
the AHRI 1360 Standard, AHRI 1360-202X Draft. 87 FR 6948 (Feb. 7,
2022). DOE has since adopted the finalized version of that standard,
AHRI 1360-2022, in the March 2023 TP final rule. See EERE-2021-BT-TP-
0017. Because the rating conditions specified in AHRI 1360-2022 and
AHRI 1360-2017 are the same for the classes for which DOE requires a
crosswalk (upflow ducted, upflow non-ducted, and downflow), DOE has
concluded that the NSenCOP levels specified for equipment classes in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 as measured per AHRI 1360-2017 would remain
unchanged if measured per AHRI 1360-2022. Therefore, in the crosswalk
analysis presented in the following sections, DOE considers that the
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 NSenCOP levels are measured per AHRI 1360-
2022.
On this topic, AHRI expressed concern with DOE proposing to adopt a
test procedure, still in draft form, that is not yet cited by ASHRAE
Standard 90.1, and the commenter urged DOE to follow its understanding
of the statutorily-mandated process and to only adopt a
[[Page 36404]]
revised industry test method after it has been published by AHRI and
adopted into ASHRAE Standard 90.1 by the consensus standards writing
body. (AHRI, No. 12 at pp. 1-2) In particular, AHRI commented that
manufacturers, particularly of upflow CRACs, will experience
significant impact if the proposed draft test procedure is adopted by
DOE, rather than AHRI 1360-2017. More specifically, AHRI stated that as
the draft procedure includes an external static pressure (ESP)
adjustment for upflow CRACs tested in limited height chambers, which
could result in up-flow ducted products not achieving ASHRAE Standard
90.1-2019 efficiency values during test, thereby substantially
impacting all upflow unit CRAC manufacturers. Id. AHRI commented that
there is only one modification to AHRI 1360-2017 required to support
the minimum energy levels included in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019, and
that DOE should immediately adopt that test procedure. (AHRI, No. 12 at
p. 3)
As discussed in the March 2023 TP final rule, AHRI's concern
regarding the draft status of AHRI 1360-202X Draft no longer applies,
given the subsequent finalization of the draft and publication of AHRI
1360-2022. See EERE-2021-BT-TP-0017. DOE notes that AHRI 1360-2022
represents an industry consensus update to AHRI 1360-2017.
Regarding AHRI's challenge to DOE's authority, the Department
disagrees with AHRI's argument that it lacks statutory authority for
the adoption of AHRI 1360-2022, rather than AHRI 1360-2017. Although
DOE's rationale was explained in the March 2023 TP final rule (see
EERE-2021-BT-TP-0017), because issues related to the test procedure and
energy conservation standards for CRACs are somewhat linked, the
Department will explain again here its understanding of the relevant
statutory requirements, as presented in the paragraphs that follow.
With respect to small, large, and very large commercial package air
conditioning and heating equipment (of which CRACs are a category),
EPCA directs that when the generally accepted industry testing
procedure or rating procedure developed or recognized by AHRI or by
ASHRAE, as referenced in ASHRAE Standard 90.1, is amended, the
Secretary shall amend the DOE test procedure consistent with the
amended industry test procedure or rating procedure unless the
Secretary determines, by clear and convincing evidence, that to do so
would not meet the requirements for test procedures to produce results
representative of an average use cycle and is not unduly burdensome to
conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(4)(B))
As noted, DOE has a duty under the statute to adopt a test
procedure that produces results representative of the covered
equipment's average use cycle. In this case, DOE has concluded,
supported by clear and convincing evidence, that AHRI 1360-2022 would
better meet that criterion of EPCA than AHRI 1360-2017. First, AHRI
1360-2022 includes test provisions for measuring performance of roof-
mounted and wall-mounted CRACs, configurations which are not considered
in AHRI 1360-2017. Were DOE to adopt AHRI 1360-2017 instead of AHRI
1360-2022, the DOE test procedure would not address representations for
these configurations in terms of NSenCOP. Second, AHRI 1360-2022
provides clarifications and additional test requirements on several
test procedure elements, including test tolerances, enclosure for CRACs
with compressors in indoor units, secondary verification of capacity,
ducted condensers, and refrigerant charging instructions. These
elements were discussed in detail in the February 2022 NOPR (see 87 FR
6948, 6960-6963 (Feb. 7, 2022)). These additional test requirements
improve the representativeness of the CRACs test procedure. For these
reasons, DOE considers AHRI 1360-2022 to be more representative of CRAC
operation than AHRI 1360-2017. With this finding made, DOE does not
read EPCA as requiring the Department to dissect the industry standard
and surgically transplant individual provisions of the new industry
standard into the prior industry standard. DOE views the industry test
standard as a functioning whole, so the approach AHRI suggests could
insert errors and inconsistencies into the industry standard, as would
prevent its proper functioning in practice as part of the DOE test
procedure. Further, even if AHRI's approach were possible, it would be
largely unnecessary; adoption of all the major provisions of the latest
industry test standard would arguably result in the remaining
provisions being uncontroversial. Again, DOE would point out that the
test procedure in question is the most current version of the
industry's own approved test procedure, even if ASHRAE Standard 90.1
has not yet caught up with such change. DOE considered AHRI 1360-2017,
as EPCA requires, but it ultimately determined that it would not
produce results that reflect an average use cycle, in light of the
availability of AHRI 1360-2022, which would be expected to do so. DOE
has concluded that EPCA does not allow the Department to turn a blind
eye to such real world developments, as would be the implication of
following AHRI's suggested approach.
Furthermore, DOE believes that Congress foresaw the practical
benefits of a statutory reading consistent with DOE's interpretation.
To wit, although DOE recognizes that adopting AHRI 1360-2022 as the
Federal test procedure for CRACs may create some disharmony between the
Federal test procedure and the test procedure currently specified in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 for a period of time, such situation is arguably
preferable to the alternative in which DOE and stakeholders would need
to waste significant resources to reinitiate another rulemaking in
short order to once again amend the Federal test procedure for CRACs to
update the reference therein from AHRI 1360-2017 to AHRI 1360-2022--the
very same testing standard already available for consideration.
Therefore, for the reasons previously stated, the Department
decided in the March 2023TP final rule to incorporate by reference AHRI
1360-2022 into the CRACs test procedure (see EERE-2021-BT-TP-0017).
Regarding AHRI's substantive test concerns, DOE notes that the
current Federal test procedure, which references ANSI/ASHRAE 127-2007,
does not have any provisions that allow for testing up-flow CRAC units
in a limited-height set-up. As such, the crosswalk analysis conducted
to translate standards from SCOP to NSenCOP (as presented in the March
2022 ECS NOPR; See 87 FR 12802, 12817-12822 (March 7, 2022)) compared
SCOP as measured per ANSI/ASHRAE 127-2007 to NSenCOP as measured per
AHRI 1360-202X Draft (which is the test procedure DOE proposed to adopt
in the February 2022 TP NOPR). DOE's original crosswalk, conducted in
the September 2020 NODA/RFI, also did not consider the limited height
approach included in AHRI 1360-2017. Therefore, the limited height test
approaches in any intermediate CRAC industry test procedures released
between ANSI/ASHRAE 127-2007 and AHRI 1360-202X Draft (e.g., AHRI 1360-
2017 as mentioned by AHRI) are not relevant for DOE's crosswalk
analysis, as such intermediate industry test procedures were never
proposed or adopted as part of the Federal test procedure. DOE's
crosswalk analysis in this final rule would only consider test
procedures in AHRI 1360-2017 if DOE's amended CRAC test procedure
adopted test provisions from AHRI 1360-2017. However, as stated
previously, since the
[[Page 36405]]
time of AHRI's comment, DOE has finalized its test procedure for CRACs,
adopting AHRI 1360-2022 in the March 2023 TP final rule. See EERE-2021-
BT-TP-0017. The amended test procedure adopted in the March 2023 TP
final rule does not impose any additional test ducting provisions
beyond those included in the amended industry consensus test procedure,
AHRI 1360-2022. Additionally, DOE notes that the test provision for up-
flow CRACs highlighted by AHRI is an alternate ducting methodology to
be used when there is limited chamber height to meet the ducting
requirements of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 37, which are referenced in both
ANSI/ASHRAE 127-2007 and AHRI 1360-2022. For most up-flow CRAC units
(i.e., all CRACs except for tall units with large discharge duct
dimensions), manufacturers can still choose to test their units in
taller test chambers using the ducting requirements of ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 37, which comply with both the current CRAC test procedure and
the amended test procedure adopted in this final rule. Further, DOE
notes that the AEDM provision in 10 CFR 429.70 allow the use of AEDMs
to develop ratings for CRACs, and, thus, manufacturers would not be
required to test their very tall up-flow CRACs.
AHRI provided extensive additional comments regarding industry-wide
regulatory burdens that support the adoption of the test procedure and
minimum efficiencies in ASHRAE Standard 90.1. (AHRI, No. 12 at pp. 3-5)
These comments are identical to those AHRI provided on the February
2022 TP NOPR, and DOE responded to the test procedure-related comments
in detail in the March 2023 TP final rule. See EERE-2021-BT-TP-0017.
Furthermore, as discussed in section V.D. of this document, DOE is
adopting the minimum efficiencies in ASHRAE Standard 90.1.
C. Efficiency and Capacity Crosswalk Analyses
In the March 2022 ECS NOPR, DOE explained the efficiency and
capacity crosswalk it had performed to translate SCOP levels as
measured per ANSI/ASHRAE 127-2007 to NSenCOP levels as measured per
AHRI 1360-202X Draft. 87 FR 12802, 12808-12826 (March 7, 2022). As
previously mentioned, AHRI 1360-202X Draft has now been finalized as
AHRI 1360-2022 but retains the same rating conditions as AHRI 1360-202X
Draft (and AHRI 1360-2017), such that the crosswalk initially presented
in the September 2020 NODA/RFI can be extended without change. The
following paragraphs present a brief summary of the crosswalk
methodology.
For the efficiency crosswalk, DOE analyzed the CRAC equipment
classes in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 that are currently subject to
Federal standards (i.e., all upflow and downflow classes).\9\ As
discussed in the subsequent paragraphs, for certain CRAC classes,
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 specifies classes that disaggregate the
current Federal equipment classes into additional classes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 includes efficiency levels for
horizontal-flow and ceiling-mounted classes of CRACs. DOE does not
currently prescribe standards for horizontal-flow or ceiling-mounted
classes, so these classes were not included in the crosswalk
analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For upflow CRACs, ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 and AHRI 1360-2022
include separate efficiency levels and rating conditions, respectively,
for ducted and non-ducted units. However, the current Federal test
procedure and standards do not specify different rating conditions for
upflow non-ducted and upflow ducted units; thus, in this crosswalk, DOE
converted the single set of SCOP standards for upflow units to two
``crosswalked'' NSenCOP levels for ducted and non-ducted unit classes.
Similarly, for air-cooled CRACs, ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 includes
separate sets of efficiency levels for equipment with and without fluid
economizers, while the current DOE standards set forth do not
distinguish air-cooled CRACs based on the presence of fluid
economizers. Thus, in this crosswalk, DOE converted the single set of
current Federal standards for air-cooled classes (in terms of SCOP) to
two sets of standards in terms of NSenCOP for air-cooled classes
distinguishing CRACs with and without fluid economizers. The crosswalk
analysis also found no difference between air-cooled CRACs with and
without fluid economizers, so the NSenCOP standards are identical for
the two classes.
The efficiency levels for CRACs in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 rely
on a different metric (NSenCOP) and test procedure (AHRI 1360-2017, and
now by extension AHRI 1360-2022) than the metric and test procedure
required under the current Federal standards (relying on SCOP and ANSI/
ASHRAE 127-2007, respectively). AHRI 1360-2022 and ANSI/ASHRAE 127-2007
notably also specify different rating conditions. These differences are
listed in Table III-2, and are discussed in detail in sections III.C.1
through III.C.4 of this document.
Table III-2--Differences in Rating Conditions Between DOE's Current Test Procedure and AHRI Standard 1360-2022
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Test parameter Affected equipment.... Current DOE test procedure (referencing ANSI/
categories............ ASHRAE 127-2007)
AHRI 1360-2022
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Return air dry-bulb temperature Upflow ducted and 75 [deg]F dry-bulb temperature
(RAT). downflow.
85 [deg]F dry-bulb temperature.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Entering water temperature (EWT)... Water-cooled.......... 86 [deg]F
83 [deg]F
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ESP (varies with NSCC)............. Upflow ducted......... <20 kW................ 0.8 in H2O........... <80 kBtu/h........... 0.3 in H2O.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>=20 kW............... 1.0 in H2O........... >=80 kBtu/h and <295 0.4 in H2O.
kBtu/h.
---------------------------------------------
>=295 kBtu/h and <760 0.5 in H2O.
kBtu/h.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adder for heat rejection fan and Water-cooled and No added power consumption for heat rejection
pump power (add to total power glycol-cooled. fan and pump
consumption).
5 percent of NSCC for water-cooled CRACs.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 36406]]
Table III-2--Differences in Rating Conditions Between DOE's Current Test Procedure and AHRI Standard 1360-2022
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Test parameter Affected equipment.... Current DOE test procedure (referencing ANSI/
categories............ ASHRAE 127-2007)
AHRI 1360-2022
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7.5 percent of NSCC for glycol-cooled CRACs.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The differences between these specified rating conditions impact
the capacity boundaries for CRAC equipment classes. The capacity values
that bound the CRAC equipment classes are in terms of NSCC. For certain
equipment classes, NSCC values determined according to AHRI 1360-2022's
different rating conditions are higher than the NSCC values determined
according to ANSI/ASHRAE 127-2007. Therefore, the test conditions in
AHRI 1360-2022 result in an increased NSCC value for certain equipment
classes, as compared to the NSCC measured in accordance with the
current Federal test procedure requirement. This means that some CRACs
would switch classes (i.e., move into a higher capacity equipment
class) if the test conditions in AHRI 1360-2022 are used without
shifting current equipment class boundaries to match the impact of the
changes in rating conditions.
Class switching would subject some CRAC models to an efficiency
level under ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 that is less stringent than the
standard level that is applicable to that model under the current
Federal requirements. Lowering the stringency of the efficiency level
in the Federal requirements is impermissible under EPCA's anti-
backsliding provision at 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(iii)(I).
Therefore, a capacity crosswalk was conducted to translate the NSCC
boundaries that separate equipment classes in the Federal efficiency
standards to account for the expected increase in measured NSCC values
for affected equipment classes (i.e., equipment classes with test
procedure changes that increase NSCC). DOE's capacity crosswalk
calculated the increases in the capacity boundaries of affected
equipment classes from the Federal efficiency standards if ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2019 were adopted, to evaluate this equipment class
switching issue and to avoid backsliding that would occur from class
switching. Updated SCOP levels and NSCC equipment class boundaries were
calculated for each class (as applicable) by combining the percentage
changes for every test procedure change applicable to that class.
Both efficiency and capacity crosswalk analyses have similar
structure, and the data for both were gathered across numerous sources
including DOE testing, manufacturer performance data gathered through
non-disclosure agreements (NDAs), and public manufacturer literature,
among others. DOE conducted analysis across each test procedure change
independently and determined an aggregated percentage by which that
change impacted efficiency and/or NSCC.
The following sub-sections describe the approaches used to analyze
the impacts on the measured efficiency and capacity of each difference
in rating conditions between DOE's current test procedure and AHRI
1360-2022. As discussed, the crosswalk analysis methodology described
in the following sub-sections is the same as presented in the March
2022 ECS NOPR. 87 FR 12802, 12817-12822 (March 7, 2022). No additional
data sources were added to the analysis for this final rule.
1. Increase in Return Air Dry-Bulb Temperature From 75 [deg]F to 85
[deg]F
ANSI/ASHRAE 127-2007, which is referenced by DOE's current test
procedure, specifies a return air dry-bulb temperature (RAT) of 75
[deg]F for testing all CRACs. AHRI 1360-2022 specifies a RAT of 85
[deg]F for upflow ducted and downflow CRACs, but specifies a RAT for
upflow non-ducted units of 75 [deg]F.
SCOP and NSCC both increase with increasing RAT for two reasons.
First, a higher RAT increases the cooling that must be done for the air
to approach its dew point temperature (i.e., the temperature at which
water vapor will condense if there is any additional cooling). Second,
a higher RAT will tend to raise the evaporating temperature of the
refrigerant, which in turn raises the temperature of fin and tube
surfaces in contact with the air--the resulting reduction in the
portion of the heat exchanger surface that is below the air's dew point
temperature reduces the potential for water vapor to condense on these
surfaces. This is seen in product specifications which show that the
sensible heat ratio \10\ is consistently higher at a RAT of 85 [deg]F
than at 75 [deg]F. Because increasing RAT increases the fraction of
total cooling capacity that is sensible cooling (rather than latent
cooling), the NSCC increases. Further, because SCOP is calculated with
NSCC in the numerator of the calculation, an increase in NSCC also
inherently increases SCOP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ ``Sensible heat ratio'' is the ratio of sensible cooling
capacity to the total cooling capacity. The total cooling capacity
includes both sensible cooling capacity (cooling associated with
reduction in temperature) and latent cooling capacity (cooling
associated with dehumidification).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To analyze the magnitude of the impacts of increasing RAT for
upflow ducted and downflow CRACs on SCOP and NSCC, DOE gathered data
from three separate sources and aggregated the results for each
crosswalk analysis. First, DOE used product specifications for several
CRAC models that provide SCOP and NSCC ratings for RATs ranging from 75
[deg]F to 95 [deg]F. Second, DOE analyzed manufacturer performance data
obtained under NDAs that showed the performance impact of individual
test condition changes, including the increase in RAT. Third, DOE used
results from testing two CRAC units: one air-cooled upflow ducted and
one air-cooled downflow unit. DOE combined the results of these sources
to find the aggregated increases in SCOP and NSCC due to the increase
in RAT. The increase in SCOP due to the change in RAT was found to be
approximately 19 percent, and the increase in NSCC was found to be
approximately 22 percent.
2. Decrease in Entering Water Temperature for Water-Cooled CRACs
ANSI/ASHRAE 127-2007, which is referenced by DOE's current test
procedure, specifies an entering water temperature (EWT) of 86 [deg]F
for water-cooled CRACs, while AHRI 1360-2022 specifies an entering
water temperature of 83 [deg]F. A decrease in the EWT for water-cooled
CRACs increases the temperature difference between the water and hot
refrigerant in the condenser coil, thus increasing cooling capacity and
decreasing compressor power. To analyze the impact of this decrease in
EWT on SCOP and NSCC,
[[Page 36407]]
DOE analyzed manufacturer data obtained through NDAs and a publicly-
available presentation from a major CRAC manufacturer and calculated a
SCOP increase of approximately 2 percent and an NSCC increase of
approximately 1 percent.
3. Changes in External Static Pressure Requirements for Upflow Ducted
CRACs
For upflow ducted CRACs, AHRI 1360-2022 specifies lower ESP
requirements than ANSI/ASHRAE 127-2007, which is referenced in DOE's
current test procedure. The ESP requirements in all CRAC industry test
standards vary with NSCC; however, the capacity bins (i.e., capacity
ranges over which each ESP requirement applies) in ANSI/ASHRAE 127-2007
are different from those in AHRI 1360-2022. Testing with a lower ESP
decreases the indoor fan power input without a corresponding decrease
in NSCC, thus increasing the measured SCOP. Additionally, the reduction
in fan heat entering the indoor air stream that results from lower fan
power also slightly increases NSCC, further increasing SCOP.
To analyze the impacts on measured SCOP and NSCC of the changes in
ESP requirements between DOE's current test procedure and AHRI 1360-
2022, DOE aggregated data from its analysis of fan power consumption
changes, manufacturer data obtained through NDAs, and results from DOE
testing. Notably, the impact of changes in ESP requirements on SCOP and
NSCC was calculated separately in DOE's analysis for each capacity
range specified in AHRI 1360-2022 (i.e., <80 kBtu/h, >=80 and <295
kBtu/h, and >=295 kBtu/h). As discussed in section III.C of this
document, NSCC values determined according to ANSI/ASHRAE 127-2007 are
lower than NSCC values determined according to AHRI 1360-2022 for
certain CRAC classes, including upflow-ducted classes. The increase in
NSCC in AHRI 1360-2022 also impacts the ESP requirements in AHRI 1360-
2022 for upflow-ducted units, because the ESP requirements are
specified based on NSCC. Different ESP requirements impact the
stringency of the test--as discussed, testing with a lower ESP
increases the measured SCOP. AHRI 1360-2022 addresses this issue by
updating the NSCC capacity bin boundaries associated with the
applicable ESP. For the purposes of the efficiency and capacity
crosswalk analyses in this final rule, DOE used the adjusted capacity
boundaries in AHRI 1360-2022 for upflow ducted classes presented in
Table III-4 (as discussed in section III.C.5 of this document) to
specify the applicable ESP requirement.
DOE conducted an analysis to estimate the change in fan power
consumption due to the changes in ESP requirements using performance
data and product specifications for 77 upflow CRAC models with
certified SCOP ratings at or near the current applicable SCOP standard
level in DOE's Compliance Certification Database.\11\ Using the
certified SCOP and NSCC values, DOE determined each model's total power
consumption for operation at the rating conditions specified in DOE's
current test procedure. DOE then used fan performance data for each
model to estimate the change in indoor fan power that would result from
the lower ESP requirements in AHRI 1360-2022 and modified the total
power consumption for each model by the calculated value. For several
models, detailed fan performance data were not available, so DOE used
fan performance data for comparable air conditioning units with similar
cooling capacity, fan drive, and fan motor horsepower.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ DOE's Compliance Certification Database can be accessed at:
www.regulations.doe.gov/ccms (Last accessed Jan. 3, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE also received manufacturer data (obtained through NDAs) showing
the impact on efficiency and NSCC of the change in ESP requirements.
Additionally, DOE conducted tests on an upflow-ducted CRAC at ESPs of 1
in. H2O and 0.4 in. H2O (the applicable ESP
requirements specified in ANSI/ASHRAE 127-2007 and AHRI 1360-2022,
respectively), and included the results of those tests in this
analysis.
For each of the three capacity ranges for which ESP requirements
are specified in AHRI 1360-2022, Table III-3 shows the approximate
aggregated percentage increases in SCOP and NSCC associated with the
decreased ESP requirements specified in AHRI 1360-2022 for upflow
ducted units.
Table III-3--Percentage Increase in SCOP and NSCC From Decreases in External Static Pressure Requirements for
Upflow Ducted Units Between DOE's Current Test Procedure and AHRI 1360-2022
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Net sensible cooling capacity range ESP ESP Approx. Approx.
(kBtu/h) * requirements requirements average average
in DOE's in AHRI percentage percentage
current test 1360-2022 increase in increase in
procedure (in H2O) SCOP NSCC
(referencing
ANSI/ASHRAE
127-2007)
(in H2O)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<65............................................. 0.8 0.3 7 2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>=65 to <240.................. >=65 to <68.2 ** 0.8 0.4 *** 8 *** 2
>=68.2 to <240 1
**.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>=240 to <760................................... 1 0.5 6 2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* These boundaries are consistent with the boundaries in ANSI/ASHRAE 127-2007 and differ from the boundaries in
AHRI 1360-2022, which reflect the expected capacity increases for upflow-ducted and downflow equipment classes
at the AHRI 1360-2022 return air temperature test conditions.
** 68.2 kBtu/h is equivalent to 20 kW, which is the capacity value that separates ESP requirements in ANSI/
ASHRAE 127-2007, which is referenced in DOE's current test procedure.
*** This average percentage increase is an average across upflow ducted CRACs with net sensible cooling capacity
>=65 and <240 kBtu/h, including models with capacity <20 kW and >=20 kW. DOE's Compliance Certification
Database shows that most of the upflow CRACs with a net sensible cooling capacity >=65 kBtu/h and <240 kBtu/h
have a net sensible cooling capacity >=20 kW.
[[Page 36408]]
4. Power Adder To Account for Pump and Heat Rejection Fan Power in
NSenCOP Calculation for Water-Cooled and Glycol-Cooled CRACs
Energy consumption for heat rejection components for air-cooled
CRACs (i.e., condenser fan motor(s)) is measured in the current DOE
test procedure for CRACs; however, for water-cooled and glycol-cooled
CRACs, energy consumption for heat rejection components is not measured
because these components (i.e., water/glycol pump, dry cooler/cooling
tower fan(s)) are not considered to be part of the CRAC unit. ANSI/
ASHRAE 127-2007, which is referenced in DOE's current test procedure,
does not include any factor in the calculation of SCOP to account for
the power consumption of heat rejection components for water-cooled and
glycol-cooled CRACs.
In contrast, AHRI 1360-2022 specifies to increase the measured
total power input for CRACs to account for the power consumption of
fluid pumps and heat rejection fans. Specifically, sections 6.3.3 and
6.3.4 of AHRI 1360-2022 specify to add a percentage of the measured
NSCC (5 percent for water-cooled CRACs and 7.5 percent for glycol-
cooled CRACs) in kW to the total power input used to calculate NSenCOP.
DOE calculated the impact of these additions on SCOP using Equation 1:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JN23.000
Where, x is equal to 5 percent for water-cooled CRACs and 7.5
percent for glycol-cooled CRACs, and SCOP1 is the SCOP value
adjusted for the energy consumption of heat rejection pumps and fans.
5. Calculating Overall Changes in Measured Efficiency and Capacity From
Test Procedure Changes
Different CRAC equipment classes are subject to different
combinations of the test procedure changes between DOE's current test
procedure and AHRI 1360-2022 analyzed in the crosswalk analyses. To
combine the impact of the changes in rating conditions, DOE calculated
the crosswalked NSenCOP levels and translated NSCC boundaries as
detailed in the following sections.
a. Calculation of Crosswalked NSenCOP Levels
To combine the impact on SCOP of the changes to rating conditions
(i.e., increase in RAT, decrease in condenser EWT for water-cooled
units, and decrease of the ESP requirements for upflow ducted units),
DOE multiplied together the calculated adjustment factors representing
the measurement changes corresponding to each individual rating
condition change, as applicable, as shown in Equation 2. These
adjustment factors are equal to 100 percent (which represents SCOP
measured per the current Federal test procedure) plus the calculated
percentage change in measured efficiency.
To account for the impact of the adder for heat rejection pump and
fan power for water-cooled and glycol-cooled units, DOE used Equation
3. Hence, DOE determined crosswalked NSenCOP levels corresponding to
the current Federal SCOP standards for each CRAC equipment class using
the following two equations.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JN23.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JN23.002
In these equations, NSenCOP1 refers to a partially-
crosswalked NSenCOP level that incorporates the impacts of changes in
RAT, condenser EWT, and indoor fan ESP (as applicable), but not the
impact of adding the heat rejection pump and fan power; x1,
x2, x3, and represent the percentage change in
SCOP due to changes in RAT, condenser EWT, and indoor fan ESP
requirements, respectively; and is equal to 5 percent for water-cooled
equipment classes and 7.5 percent for glycol-cooled equipment classes.
For air-cooled classes, x4 is equal to 0 percent; therefore,
for these classes, NSenCOP is equal to NSenCOP1.
b. Calculation of Translated NSCC Boundaries
To combine the impact on NSCC of the changes to rating conditions,
DOE used a methodology similar to that used for determining the impact
on SCOP. To determine adjusted NSCC equipment class boundaries, DOE
multiplied together the calculated adjustment factors representing the
measurement changes corresponding to each individual rating condition
change, as applicable, as shown in Equation 4. These adjustment factors
are equal to 100 percent (which represents NSCC measured per the
current Federal test procedure) plus the calculated percentage change
in measured NSCC. In this equation, Boundary refers to the original
NSCC boundaries (i.e., 65,000 Btu/h, 240,000 Btu/h, or 760,000 Btu/h as
determined according to ANSI/ASHRAE 127-2007), Boundary1
refers to the updated NSCC boundaries as determined according to AHRI
1360-2022, and y1, y2, and y3
represent the percentage changes in NSCC due to changes in RAT,
condenser EWT, and indoor fan ESP requirements, respectively.
[[Page 36409]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JN23.003
As mentioned, ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 and AHRI 1360-2022 include
updated equipment class capacity boundaries for only upflow-ducted and
downflow equipment classes. The updated class ranges for these
categories are <80,000 Btu/h, >=80,000 Btu/h and <295,000 Btu/h, and
>=295,000 Btu/h. In previous versions of ASHRAE Standard 90.1, these
ranges are <65,000 Btu/h, >=65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h, and
>=240,000 Btu/h. The capacity range boundaries for upflow non-ducted
classes were left unchanged at 65,000 Btu/h and 240,000 Btu/h in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2019.
DOE's capacity crosswalk analysis indicates that the primary driver
for increasing NSCC is increasing RAT. The increases in RAT in AHRI
1360-2022, as compared to ANSI/ASHRAE 127-2007, only apply to upflow
ducted and downflow equipment classes. Based on the analysis performed
for this document, DOE found that all the equipment class boundaries in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019, which are in increments of 5,000 Btu/h, vary
by no more than 1.4 percent of the boundary translations calculated
from DOE's capacity crosswalk. DOE considers this 1.4 percent variance
to be de minimis because the only difference appears to be rounding.
When rounded to increments of 5,000 Btu/h, DOE's crosswalk boundary
translations are equivalent to the equipment class boundaries in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2019. As such, to align DOE's analysis more closely with
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019, DOE has used the equipment class boundaries
in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 as the translated boundaries for the
crosswalk analysis. Use of the equipment class boundaries from ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2019 allows for an appropriate comparison between the
energy efficiency levels and equipment classes specified in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1 and those in the current DOE standards, while addressing
the backsliding potential from class switching discussed previously.
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 does not include an upper capacity limit
for coverage of CRACs. DOE's current standards are applicable only to
CRACs with an NSCC less than 760,000 Btu/h, which is the upper boundary
for very large commercial package air conditioning and heating
equipment, the statutory limits on DOE's authority.\12\ 10 CFR
431.97(e). However, the change in the ratings conditions in AHRI 1360-
2022 means this boundary (calculated according to the current Federal
test procedure, which references ANSI/ASHRAE 127-2007) must be
expressed in its calculated equivalent for AHRI 1360-20222 under the
crosswalk analysis. Otherwise, equipment currently covered and subject
to the Federal standards may be removed from coverage, thereby
violating EPCA's anti-backsliding provision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ At the time EPCA was amended to include the definition for
``very large commercial package air conditioning and heating
equipment,'' equipment covered by ASHRAE that met the statutory
definition of ``commercial package air conditioning and heating
equipment'' was generally comfort cooling equipment, which was rated
according to the corresponding test procedures at 80 [deg]F/67
[deg]F indoor air. The upper boundary of 760,000 Btu/h specified by
EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6311(8)(D)) reflects a capacity rating at 80 [deg]F/
67 [deg]F indoor air. As discussed, DOE has translated the 760,000
Btu/h limit to an equivalent rating that is based on testing
according to the conditions specified in the updated industry test
procedure for CRACs. Consequently, DOE does not have authority to
set standards for models with a capacity beyond the 760,000 Btu/h
limit specified by EPCA, as translated to a rating measured per AHRI
1360-2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In order to account for all equipment currently subject to the
Federal standards, DOE calculated the AHRI 1360-2022 equivalent of the
760,000 Btu/h equipment class boundary for certain equipment classes as
part of its capacity crosswalk analysis. This translation of the upper
boundary of the equipment classes applies only for downflow and upflow-
ducted classes (the classes for which the RAT increase applies).
Consistent with the adjustments made in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019, DOE
averaged the crosswalked capacity results across the affected equipment
classes, and rounded to the nearest 5,000 Btu/h. Following this
approach, DOE has derived 930,000 Btu/h as the translated upper
capacity limit for downflow and upflow-ducted CRACs in the analysis
presented in this document. The 930,000 Btu/h upper capacity limit (as
measured per AHRI 1360-2022) used in the crosswalk analysis is
equivalent to the 760,000 Btu/h upper capacity limit (as measured per
ANSI/ASHRAE 127-2007) established in the current DOE standards.
As discussed, in the March 2023 TP final rule, DOE amended its test
procedures for CRACs to: (1) relocate the current test procedure for
measuring SCOP to appendix E to subpart F of 10 CFR part 431; and (2)
adopt an amended test procedure for measuring NSenCOP in appendix E1 to
subpart F of 10 CFR part 431. See EERE-2021-BT-TP-0017. As amended, the
scope of the CRAC test procedures at appendices E and E1 are limited to
CRACs with cooling capacity below 760,000 Btu/h. However, to reflect
the translation of 760,000 Btu/h to 930,000 Btu/h as the upper capacity
limit for downflow and upflow-ducted CRACs (as measured per AHRI 1360-
2022 and discussed previously in this subsection), DOE is
correspondingly amending the upper capacity limit for the scope of
Appendix E1. Specifically, DOE is amending Table 1 to paragraph (b) at
10 CFR 431.96 to specify the following: for upflow ducted and downflow
floor-mounted computer room air conditioners, the test procedure in
appendix E1 of this subpart applies to equipment with net sensible
cooling capacity less than 930,000 Btu/h. For all other configurations
of computer room air conditioners, the test procedure in appendix E1
applies to equipment with net sensible cooling capacity less than
760,000 Btu/h.
6. Crosswalk Results
The ``crosswalked'' DOE efficiency levels (expressed in terms of
NSenCOP) and equipment class capacity boundaries (adjusted to account
for changes in rating conditions) were compared with the NSenCOP
efficiency levels and capacity boundaries specified in ASHRAE Standard
90.1-2019 to determine the stringency of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019
requirements relative to current Federal standards.
Table III-4 presents the results for the crosswalk analyses. The
last column in the table, labeled ``Crosswalk Comparison,'' indicates
whether the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 levels are less stringent,
equivalent to, or more stringent than the current Federal standards,
based on DOE's analysis.
[[Page 36410]]
Table III-4--Crosswalk Results
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross-
Current walked ASHRAE
federal Test procedure current standard
Condenser system type Airflow configuration Current NSCC range (kBtu/h) standard changes affecting Cross-walked NSCC range (kBtu/h) federal 90.1-2019 Crosswalk comparison
(SCOP) efficiency * standard NSenCOP
(NSenCOP) level
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air-cooled....................... Downflow........................... <65............................... 2.20 Return air dry-bulb <80............................... 2.62 2.70 More Stringent
temperature.
Air-cooled....................... Downflow........................... >=65 and <240..................... 2.10 >=80 and <295..................... 2.50 2.58 More Stringent
Air-cooled....................... Downflow........................... >=240 and <760.................... 1.90 >=295 and <930.................... 2.26 2.36 More Stringent
Air-cooled with fluid economizer. Downflow........................... <65............................... 2.20 <80............................... 2.62 2.70 More Stringent
Air-cooled with fluid economizer. Downflow........................... >=65 and <240..................... 2.10 >=80 and <295..................... 2.50 2.58 More Stringent
Air-cooled with fluid economizer. Downflow........................... >=240 and <760.................... 1.90 >=295 and <930.................... 2.26 2.36 More Stringent
Water-cooled..................... Downflow........................... <65............................... 2.60 Return air dry-bulb <80............................... 2.73 2.82 More Stringent
temperature.
Water-cooled..................... Downflow........................... >=65 and <240..................... 2.50 >=80 and <295..................... 2.63 2.73 More Stringent
Water-cooled..................... Downflow........................... >=240 and <760.................... 2.40 >=295 and <930.................... 2.54 2.67 More Stringent
Water-cooled with fluid Downflow........................... <65............................... 2.55 Condenser entering <80............................... 2.68 2.77 More Stringent
economizer. water temperature.
Water-cooled with fluid Downflow........................... >=65 and <240..................... 2.45 Add allowance for >=80 and <295..................... 2.59 2.68 More Stringent
economizer. heat rejection
components to
total power input.
Water-cooled with fluid Downflow........................... >=240 and <760.................... 2.35 >=295 and <930.................... 2.50 2.61 More Stringent
economizer.
Glycol-cooled.................... Downflow........................... <65............................... 2.50 Add allowance for <80............................... 2.43 2.56 More Stringent
heat rejection
components to
total power input.
Glycol-cooled.................... Downflow........................... >=65 and <240..................... 2.15 >=80 and <295..................... 2.15 2.24 More Stringent
Glycol-cooled.................... Downflow........................... >=240 and <760.................... 2.10 >=295 and <930.................... 2.11 2.21 More Stringent
Glycol-cooled with fluid Downflow........................... <65............................... 2.45 <80............................... 2.39 2.51 More Stringent
economizer.
Glycol-cooled with fluid Downflow........................... >=65 and <240..................... 2.10 >=80 and <295..................... 2.11 2.19 More Stringent
economizer.
Glycol-cooled with fluid Downflow........................... >=240 and <760.................... 2.05 >=295 and <930.................... 2.06 2.15 More Stringent
economizer.
Air-cooled....................... Upflow Ducted...................... <65............................... 2.09 Return air dry-bulb <80............................... 2.65 2.67 More Stringent
temperature.
Air-cooled....................... Upflow Ducted...................... >=65 and <240..................... 1.99 >=80 and <295..................... 2.55 2.55 Equivalent
Air-cooled....................... Upflow Ducted...................... >=240 and <760.................... 1.79 >=295 and <930.................... 2.26 2.33 More Stringent
Air-cooled with fluid economizer. Upflow Ducted...................... <65............................... 2.09 ESP requirements... <80............................... 2.65 2.67 More Stringent
Air-cooled with fluid economizer. Upflow Ducted...................... >=65 and <240..................... 1.99 >=80 and <295..................... 2.55 2.55 Equivalent
Air-cooled with fluid economizer. Upflow Ducted...................... >=240 and <760.................... 1.79 >=295 and <930.................... 2.26 2.33 More Stringent
Water-cooled..................... Upflow Ducted...................... <65............................... 2.49 Return air dry-bulb <80............................... 2.77 2.79 More Stringent
temperature.
Water-cooled..................... Upflow Ducted...................... >=65 and <240..................... 2.39 >=80 and <295..................... 2.70 2.70 Equivalent
Water-cooled..................... Upflow Ducted...................... >=240 and <760.................... 2.29 Condenser entering >=295 and <930.................... 2.56 2.64 More Stringent
water temperature.
Water-cooled with fluid Upflow Ducted...................... <65............................... 2.44 ESP requirements... <80............................... 2.72 2.74 More Stringent
economizer.
Water-cooled with fluid Upflow Ducted...................... >=65 and <240..................... 2.34 Add allowance for >=80 and <295..................... 2.65 2.65 Equivalent
economizer. heat rejection
components to
total power input.
Water-cooled with fluid Upflow Ducted...................... >=240 and <760.................... 2.24 >=295 and <930.................... 2.51 2.58 More Stringent
economizer.
Glycol-cooled.................... Upflow Ducted...................... <65............................... 2.39 Return air dry-bulb <80............................... 2.47 2.53 More Stringent
temperature.
Glycol-cooled.................... Upflow Ducted...................... >=65 and <240..................... 2.04 >=80 and <295..................... 2.19 2.21 More Stringent
[[Page 36411]]
Glycol-cooled.................... Upflow Ducted...................... >=240 and <760.................... 1.99 ESP requirements... >=295 and <930.................... 2.11 2.18 More Stringent
Glycol-cooled with fluid Upflow Ducted...................... <65............................... 2.34 Add allowance for <80............................... 2.43 2.48 More Stringent
economizer. heat rejection
components to
total power input.
Glycol-cooled with fluid Upflow Ducted...................... >=65 and <240..................... 1.99 >=80 and <295..................... 2.14 2.16 More Stringent
economizer.
Glycol-cooled with fluid Upflow Ducted...................... >=240 and <760.................... 1.94 >=295 and <930.................... 2.07 2.12 More Stringent
economizer.
Air-cooled....................... Upflow Non-Ducted.................. <65............................... 2.09 No changes......... <65............................... 2.09 2.16 More Stringent
Air-cooled....................... Upflow Non-Ducted.................. >=65 and <240..................... 1.99 >=65 and <240..................... 1.99 2.04 More Stringent
Air-cooled....................... Upflow Non-Ducted.................. >=240 and <760.................... 1.79 >=240 and <760.................... 1.79 1.89 More Stringent
Air-cooled with fluid economizer. Upflow Non-Ducted.................. <65............................... 2.09 <65............................... 2.09 2.09 Equivalent
Air-cooled with fluid economizer. Upflow Non-Ducted.................. >=65 and <240..................... 1.99 >=65 and <240..................... 1.99 1.99 Equivalent
Air-cooled with fluid economizer. Upflow Non-Ducted.................. >=240 and <760.................... 1.79 >=240 and <760.................... 1.79 1.81 More Stringent
Water-cooled..................... Upflow Non-Ducted.................. <65............................... 2.49 Condenser entering <65............................... 2.25 2.43 More Stringent
water temperature.
Water-cooled..................... Upflow Non-Ducted.................. >=65 and <240..................... 2.39 >=65 and <240..................... 2.17 2.32 More Stringent
Water-cooled..................... Upflow Non-Ducted.................. >=240 and <760.................... 2.29 >=240 and <760.................... 2.09 2.20 More Stringent
Water-cooled with fluid Upflow Non-Ducted.................. <65............................... 2.44 Add allowance for <65............................... 2.21 2.35 More Stringent
economizer. heat rejection
components to
total power input.
Water-cooled with fluid Upflow Non-Ducted.................. >=65 and <240..................... 2.34 >=65 and <240..................... 2.13 2.24 More Stringent
economizer.
Water-cooled with fluid Upflow Non-Ducted.................. >=240 and <760.................... 2.24 >=240 and <760.................... 2.05 2.12 More Stringent
economizer.
Glycol-cooled.................... Upflow Non-Ducted.................. <65............................... 2.39 <65............................... 2.03 2.08 More Stringent
Glycol-cooled.................... Upflow Non-Ducted.................. >=65 and <240..................... 2.04 >=65 and <240..................... 1.77 1.90 More Stringent
Glycol-cooled.................... Upflow Non-Ducted.................. >=240 and <760.................... 1.99 Add allowance for >=240 and <760.................... 1.73 1.81 More Stringent
heat rejection
components to
total power input.
Glycol-cooled with fluid Upflow Non-Ducted.................. <65............................... 2.34 <65............................... 1.99 2.00 More Stringent
economizer.
Glycol-cooled with fluid Upflow Non-Ducted.................. >=65 and <240..................... 1.99 >=65 and <240..................... 1.73 1.82 More Stringent
economizer.
Glycol-cooled with fluid Upflow Non-Ducted.................. >=240 and <760.................... 1.94 >=240 and <760.................... 1.69 1.73 More Stringent
economizer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 36412]]
As indicated by the crosswalk, the standard levels established for
CRACs in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 are equivalent to the current
Federal standards for six equipment classes and are more stringent than
the current Federal standards for 48 equipment classes of CRACs. ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2019 also added 66 equipment classes of ceiling-mounted
and horizontal-flow CRACs that did not require a crosswalk because
there are currently no Federal standards for those classes. As
discussed in section III.A of this final rule, DOE is adopting
standards for horizontal-flow CRACs and ceiling-mounted CRACs. ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2019 also incorporates shifted capacity bin boundaries
for upflow ducted and downflow CRAC equipment classes. DOE's crosswalk
analysis indicates that these updated boundaries appropriately reflect
the increase in NSCC that results from the changes in test procedure
adopted under ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 and are equivalent to the
capacity boundaries in the current Federal standards once those changes
are accounted for (as discussed in previous sections of this document).
7. Comments Received Regarding DOE's Crosswalk
AHRI agreed with DOE's crosswalk methodology and noted that AHRI
members, DOE staff, and consultants met extensively in 2018 to develop
the crosswalk analysis in order to ensure that new NSenCOP values
developed for ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 addressed all of the
shortcomings from the previous edition's efficiency levels. (AHRI, No.
12 at p. 1) AHRI expressed support for the direct adoption of all
NSenCOP values, and associated capacities in ASHRAE Standard 90.1 and
agreed that the efficiencies proposed in the NOPR will save energy. Id.
DOE did not receive any other comments regarding its crosswalk
methodology. Therefore, for this final rule, DOE relies on the
crosswalk analysis and results as originally presented in the September
2020 NODA/RFI, in which DOE identifies 48 equipment classes for which
the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 efficiency levels are more stringent than
current DOE efficiency levels (expressed in NSenCOP), six equipment
classes for which the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 efficiency levels are
equal to the current DOE efficiency levels, and 66 classes of CRACs
that are not currently subject to DOE's standards but for which
standards are specified in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 (i.e., horizontal-
flow and ceiling-mounted classes).
IV. Methodology for Estimates of Potential Energy Savings From ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2019 Levels
In the September 2020 NODA/RFI, DOE performed an analysis to
determine the energy-savings potential of amending Federal standards to
the amended ASHRAE levels for CRACs for which ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019
specifies amended energy efficiency levels more stringent than the
corresponding Federal energy conservation standards, as required under
42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A). 85 FR 60642, 60663 (Sept. 25, 2020). DOE's
energy savings analysis was limited to equipment classes for which a
market exists and for which sufficient data were available.
For the equipment classes where ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 specifies
more-stringent levels than the corresponding Federal energy
conservation standard, DOE calculated the potential energy savings to
the Nation associated with adopting ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 as the
difference between a no-new-standards case projection (i.e., without
amended standards) and the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 standards-case
projection (i.e., with adoption of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 levels).
The national energy savings (NES) refers to cumulative lifetime
energy savings for equipment purchased in a 30-year period that differs
by equipment (i.e., the compliance date differs by equipment class
(i.e., capacity) depending upon whether DOE is acting under the ASHRAE
trigger or the 6-year-lookback (see 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(D)). In the
standards case, equipment that is more efficient gradually replaces
less-efficient equipment over time. This affects the calculation of the
potential energy savings, which are a function of the total number of
units in use and their efficiencies. Savings depend on annual shipments
and equipment lifetime. Inputs to the energy savings analysis are
presented in the following sections.
A. Annual Energy Use
The purpose of the energy use analysis is to assess the energy
savings potential of different equipment efficiencies in the building
types that utilize the equipment. The Federal standard and ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2019 levels are expressed in terms of an efficiency
metric. For each equipment class, the description of how DOE developed
estimates of annual energy consumption at the Federal baseline
efficiency level and the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 level can be found
in section III.A.1 of the September 2020 NODA/RFI. 85 FR 60642, 60664-
60666 (Sept. 25, 2020). In the March 2022 ECS NOPR, DOE briefly
summarized that analysis and responded to stakeholder comments. 87 FR
12802, 12827-12830 (March 7, 2022). However, DOE did not change its
analysis in response to those comments. DOE did not receive any
comments specific to this analysis in response to the March 2022 ECS
NOPR, and continues to rely on the analysis from the September 2020
NODA/RFI in this final rule. The annual unit energy consumption (UEC)
estimates are displayed in Table IV-1 and form the basis of the
national energy savings estimates discussed in section IV.E of this
document.
1. Equipment Classes and Analytical Scope
In the September 2020 NODA/RFI, DOE conducted an energy savings
analysis for the 42 CRAC classes that currently have both DOE standards
and more-stringent standards under ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019. 85 FR
60642, 60664 (Sept. 25, 2020). DOE was unable to identify market data
that would allow for disaggregating results for the six equipment
classes of air-cooled CRACs with fluid economizers that have ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2019 levels more stringent than current Federal
standards. Furthermore, although ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 included
levels for the 66 horizontal flow and ceiling-mounted equipment classes
which currently are not subject to Federal standards, DOE was unable to
identify market data that could be used to establish a market baseline
for these classes in order to estimate energy savings at the time the
September 2020 NODA/RFI was published. 85 FR 60642, 60663-60664 (Sept.
25, 2020). DOE did not receive any efficiency data in response to the
March 2022 ECS NOPR and is unaware of any publicly available data.
Therefore, DOE was unable to develop a market baseline and estimate
energy savings for the horizontal-flow and ceiling-mounted equipment
classes for this final rule. The UEC estimates (provided in Table IV-1
of this document) were only developed for equipment classes for which
DOE could develop a market baseline; therefore, they do not include the
horizontal-flow and ceiling-mounted classes.
2. Efficiency Levels
DOE analyzed the energy savings potential of adopting ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2019 levels for CRAC equipment classes that currently
have a Federal
[[Page 36413]]
standard and have an ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 efficiency level more
stringent than the current Federal standard. For each equipment class,
energy savings are measured relative to the baseline (i.e., the current
Federal standard for that class). 85 FR 60642, 60664 (Sept. 25, 2020).
3. Analysis Method and Annual Energy Use Results
In the September 2020 NODA/RFI, to derive UECs for the equipment
classes analyzed in this document, DOE started with the UECs based on
the current DOE standards for downflow equipment classes as analyzed in
the May 2012 final rule. DOE assumed that these UECs correspond to the
NSenCOP that was derived through the crosswalk analysis (i.e., ``Cross-
walked Current Federal Standard'' column in Table III-4). DOE
determined the UEC for the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 level by dividing
the baseline NSenCOP level by the NSenCOP for the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2019 level and multiplied the resulting percentage by the baseline UEC.
85 FR 60642, 60664 (Sept. 25, 2020).
In the May 2012 final rule, DOE assumed that energy savings
estimates derived for downflow equipment classes would be
representative of upflow equipment classes, which differed by a fixed
0.11 SCOP. 77 FR 28928, 28954 (May 16, 2012). Because of the fixed 0.11
SCOP difference between upflow and downflow CRAC units in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2013, DOE determined that the per-unit energy savings
benefits for corresponding CRACs at higher efficiency levels could be
represented using the 15 downflow equipment classes. Id. However, in
this analysis, the efficiency levels for the upflow non-ducted
equipment classes do not differ from the downflow equipment class by a
fixed amount. For the September 2020 NODA/RFI, DOE assumed that the
fractional increase/decrease in NSenCOP between upflow and downflow
units corresponds to a proportional decrease/increase in the baseline
UEC within a given equipment class grouping of condenser system and
capacity. 85 FR 60642, 60665 (Sept. 25, 2020).
Table IV-1 shows UEC estimates for the equipment classes triggered
by ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 (i.e., equipment classes for which the
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 energy efficiency level is more stringent
than the currently applicable Federal standard).
Table IV-1--National UEC Estimates (kWh/Year) for CRAC Systems \1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current federal standard ASHRAE standard 90.1-
Current net sensible 2019
Condenser system type Airflow configuration cooling capacity ---------------------------------------------------
NSenCOP UEC (kwh) NSenCOP UEC (kwh)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air-cooled........................... Downflow........................... <65,000 Btu/h........... 2.62 27,411 2.70 26,599
>=65,000 Btu/h and 2.50 102,762 2.58 99,575
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 2.26 246,011 2.36 235,587
<760,000 Btu/h.
Upflow, ducted..................... <65,000 Btu/h........... 2.65 27,100 2.67 26,897
>=240,000 Btu/h and 2.26 247,104 2.33 238,620
<760,000 Btu/h.
Upflow, non-ducted................. <65,000 Btu/h........... 2.09 34,362 2.16 33,248
>=65,000 Btu/h and 1.99 129,097 2.04 125,933
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 1.79 310,606 1.89 294,172
<760,000 Btu/h.
Water-cooled......................... Downflow........................... <65,000 Btu/h........... 2.73 24,726 2.82 23,850
>=65,000 Btu/h and 2.63 92,123 2.73 88,749
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 2.54 208,727 2.67 198,564
<760,000 Btu/h.
Upflow, ducted..................... <65,000 Btu/h........... 2.77 24,280 2.79 24,106
>=240,000 Btu/h and 2.56 207,096 2.64 200,821
<760,000 Btu/h.
Upflow, non-ducted................. <65,000 Btu/h........... 2.25 29,891 2.43 27,677
>=65,000 Btu/h and 2.17 112,169 2.32 104,433
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 2.09 254,888 2.20 240,985
<760,000 Btu/h.
Water-cooled with fluid economizer... Downflow........................... <65,000 Btu/h........... 2.68 15,443 2.77 14,885
>=65,000 Btu/h and 2.59 57,537 2.68 55,390
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 2.50 129,787 2.61 123,819
<760,000 Btu/h.
Upflow, ducted..................... <65,000 Btu/h........... 2.72 15,159 2.74 15,048
>=240,000 Btu/h and 2.51 128,753 2.58 125,259
<760,000 Btu/h.
Upflow, non-ducted................. <65,000 Btu/h........... 2.21 18,657 2.35 17,546
>=65,000 Btu/h and 2.13 70,022 2.24 66,271
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 2.05 158,416 2.12 152,438
<760,000 Btu/h.
Glycol-cooled........................ Downflow........................... <65,000 Btu/h........... 2.43 24,671 2.56 23,419
>=65,000 Btu/h and 2.15 101,844 2.24 97,297
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 2.11 227,098 2.21 215,794
<760,000 Btu/h.
Upflow, ducted..................... <65,000 Btu/h........... 2.47 24,272 2.53 23,696
>=65,000 Btu/h and 2.19 99,975 2.21 98,618
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 2.11 226,021 2.18 218,764
<760,000 Btu/h.
Upflow, non-ducted................. <65,000 Btu/h........... 2.03 29,679 2.08 28,823
>=65,000 Btu/h and 1.77 123,833 1.90 114,708
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 1.73 275,668 1.81 263,483
<760,000 Btu/h.
Glycol-cooled with fluid economizer.. Downflow........................... <65,000 Btu/h........... 2.39 19,813 2.51 18,866
>=65,000 Btu/h and 2.11 81,668 2.19 78,312
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 2.06 182,034 2.15 174,414
<760,000 Btu/h.
Upflow, ducted..................... <65,000 Btu/h........... 2.43 19,567 2.48 19,094
>=65,000 Btu/h and 2.14 80,142 2.16 79,400
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 2.07 182,034 2.12 176,882
<760,000 Btu/h.
Upflow, non-ducted................. <65,000 Btu/h........... 1.99 23,796 2.00 23,677
>=65,000 Btu/h and 1.73 99,135 1.82 94,232
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 1.69 221,888 1.73 216,757
<760,000 Btu/h.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The air-cooled, upflow ducted, >65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h; water-cooled, upflow ducted, >65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h; and water-cooled
with fluid economizer, upflow ducted, >65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h equipment classes are not included in the table, as the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2019 levels for these classes are equivalent to the current Federal standard.
[[Page 36414]]
B. Shipments Analysis
DOE uses shipment projections by equipment class to calculate the
national impacts of standards on energy consumption, as well as net
present value and future manufacturer cash flows. DOE shipments
projections typically are based on available historical data broken out
by equipment classes. Current sales estimates allow for a more accurate
model that captures recent trends in the market.
In the analysis conducted in the September 2020 NODA/RFI, DOE used
confidential shipments data provided by AHRI to calibrate its shipment
model to produce a breakdown by equipment class. DOE then used a stock
turnover model to project shipments over the 30-year shipments analysis
period. The stock turnover model was broken into three cooling
capacities (<65,000 Btu/h, >=65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h, and
>=240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h), and stock projections for each
cooling capacity grew at a constant rate through the 30-year analysis
period. 85 FR 60642, 60668-60669 (Sept. 25, 2020). Total shipments are
projected to grow slightly over the analysis period, as shown in Table
IV-2 of this document. The analysis in the September 2020 NODA/RFI
relied in part on the 2012 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption
Survey (CBECS 2012).\13\ In response to the September 2020 NODA/RFI,
AHRI stated that DOE should rely on CBECS 2018 when it was published.
(AHRI No. 2 at p. 3) \14\ In the March 2022 ECS NOPR, DOE stated that
the full dataset from CBECS 2018 was not available at the time of the
NOPR. 87 FR 12802, 12830-12831 (March 7, 2022). DOE added that CBECS
2012 was used to develop a stock of CRACs that would match the
shipments provided by AHRI in 2012, so the main driver of shipments
analysis was the shipments time series and not CBECS 2012. Id. However,
DOE stated that to the extent that updated CBECS data become available,
DOE will consider such data in the evaluation of a final rule. Id.
CBECS 2018 data is now available; \15\ however as stated previously,
using CBECS 2018 would not be expected to significantly change the
shipments analysis, as it would be calibrated to confidential shipments
data provided by AHRI, just as is done with the CBECS 2012 data. For
this reason, and because DOE is not making other analytical updates in
this final rule, DOE continues to rely on the shipments data and
methodology from the September 2020 NODA/RFI and March 2022 ECS NOPR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ U.S. Department of Energy--Energy Information
Administration, 2012 CBECS Survey Data (Available at: www.eia.gov/consumption/commercial/data/2012/) (Last accessed March 9, 2020).
\14\ Comment received in response to September 2020 NODA/RFI
(Available at: https://www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2020-BT-STD-0008-0001).
\15\ Available at: www.eia.gov/consumption/commercial/data/2018/.
Table IV-2--Projected Shipments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>=65,000 Btu/h and >=240,000 Btu/h and Total
<65,000 Btu/h <240,000 Btu/h <760,000 Btu/h shipments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2020 Shipments...................... 3,208 2,132 3,190 8,530
2052 Shipments...................... 2,634 3,650 3,178 9,462
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. No-New-Standards-Case Efficiency Distribution
The no-new-standards case efficiency distribution is used to
establish the market share of each efficiency level in the case where
there is no new or amended standard. DOE is unaware of available market
data that reports CRAC efficiency in terms of NSenCOP that can be used
to determine the no-new-standards case efficiency distribution. DOE
estimated the no-new-standards case efficiency distribution for each
CRAC equipment class using model counts from DOE's Compliance
Certification Database. DOE calculated the fraction of models that are
above the current Federal baseline and below the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2019 level and assigned this to the Federal baseline. All models that
are at or above that ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 level are assigned to
the ASHRAE level. The no-new-standard case distribution for CRACs are
presented in Table IV-3.
Table IV-3--No-New-Standards Case Efficiency Distribution for CRACs \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal
Airflow Current net sensible baseline ASHRAE standard
Condenser system type configuration cooling capacity market share 90.1-2019 level
(%) market share (%)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air-cooled...................... Downflow.......... <65,000 Btu/h.......... 2 98
>=65,000 Btu/h and 22 78
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 20 80
<760,000 Btu/h.
Upflow, ducted.... <65,000 Btu/h.......... 0 100
>=240,000 Btu/h and 4 96
<760,000 Btu/h.
Upflow, non-ducted <65,000 Btu/h.......... 4 96
>=65,000 Btu/h and 11 89
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 23 77
<760,000 Btu/h.
Water-cooled.................... Downflow.......... <65,000 Btu/h.......... 11 89
>=65,000 Btu/h and 15 85
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 24 76
<760,000 Btu/h.
Upflow, ducted.... <65,000 Btu/h.......... 0 100
>=240,000 Btu/h and 13 87
<760,000 Btu/h.
Upflow, non-ducted <65,000 Btu/h.......... 11 89
>=65,000 Btu/h and 21 79
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 27 73
<760,000 Btu/h.
[[Page 36415]]
Water-cooled with fluid Downflow.......... <65,000 Btu/h.......... 2 98
economizer. >=65,000 Btu/h and 13 87
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 38 62
<760,000 Btu/h.
Upflow, ducted.... <65,000 Btu/h.......... 2 98
>=240,000 Btu/h and 13 87
<760,000 Btu/h.
Upflow, non-ducted <65,000 Btu/h.......... 8 92
>=65,000 Btu/h and 16 84
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 20 80
<760,000 Btu/h.
Glycol-cooled................... Downflow.......... <65,000 Btu/h.......... 57 43
>=65,000 Btu/h and 31 69
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 36 64
<760,000 Btu/h.
Upflow, ducted.... <65,000 Btu/h.......... 20 80
>=65,000 Btu/h and 6 94
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 30 70
<760,000 Btu/h.
Upflow, non-ducted <65,000 Btu/h.......... 20 80
>=65,000 Btu/h and 38 62
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 30 70
<760,000 Btu/h.
Glycol-cooled with fluid Downflow.......... <65,000 Btu/h.......... 57 43
economizer. >=65,000 Btu/h and 31 69
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 31 69
<760,000 Btu/h.
Upflow, ducted.... <65,000 Btu/h.......... 10 90
>=65,000 Btu/h and 8 92
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 33 67
<760,000 Btu/h.
Upflow, non-ducted <65,000 Btu/h.......... 2 98
>=65,000 Btu/h and 30 70
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 27 73
<760,000 Btu/h.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The air-cooled, upflow ducted, >65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h; water-cooled, upflow ducted, >65,000 Btu/h
and <240,000 Btu/h; and water-cooled with fluid economizer, upflow ducted, >65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h
equipment classes are not included in the table, as the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 levels for these equipment
classes are equivalent to the current Federal standards.
D. Compliance Dates and Analysis Period
If DOE were to prescribe energy conservation standards at the
efficiency levels contained in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019, EPCA provides
that the compliance date shall be on or after a date that is two or
three years (depending on the equipment type or size) after the
effective date of the applicable minimum energy efficiency requirement
in the amended ASHRAE standard. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(D)). If ASHRAE
Standard 90.1 does not specify an effective date, then the compliance
date specified by statute would be dependent upon the publication date
of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019.
In this case, ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 does not specify an
effective date for CRAC levels, so, therefore, the publication date of
October 23, 2019, was used to determine the compliance dates for
estimating the energy savings potential of adopting ASHRAE Standard
90.1-levels.
For equipment classes for which the ASHRAE Standard 90.1 levels are
more stringent than the current Federal standards (i.e., classes for
which DOE is triggered), if DOE were to prescribe standards more
stringent than the efficiency levels contained in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2019, EPCA dictates that the compliance date must be on or after a date
which is four years after the date of publication of a final rule in
the Federal Register. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(D)) For equipment classes
for which DOE is acting under its 6-year lookback authority, if DOE
were to adopt more-stringent standards, EPCA states that the compliance
date for any such standard shall be after a date that is the later of
the date three years after publication of the final rule establishing a
new standard or the date six years after the effective date for the
current standard. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C)(iv)) As discussed in Section
V of this document, DOE is not establishing standards for CRACs that
are more stringent than the levels contained in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2019. For purposes of calculating the NES for the equipment in this
evaluation, DOE used a 30-year analysis period starting with the
assumed year of compliance listed in Table IV-4 for equipment analyzed
in the September 2020 NODA/RFI. This is the standard analysis period of
30 years that DOE typically uses in its NES analysis. For equipment
classes with a compliance date in the last six months of the year, DOE
starts its analysis period in the first full year after compliance. For
example, if CRACs less than 65,000 Btu/h were to have a compliance date
of October 23, 2021, the analysis period for calculating NES would
begin in 2022 and extend to 2051.
Table IV-4--Analyzed Compliance Dates of Amended Energy Conservation
Standards for Triggered Equipment Classes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analyzed compliance dates
Equipment class for efficiency levels in
ASHRAE standard 90.1-2019
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Computer Room Air Conditioners
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Equipment with current NSCC <65,000 Btu/h. 10/23/2021
Equipment with current NSCC >=65,000 and 10/23/2022
<240,000 Btu/h.
Equipment with current NSCC >=240,000 Btu/ 10/23/2022
h and <760,000 Btu/h.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The analysis presented in this final rule relies on the minimum
compliance dates provided under EPCA for the energy conservation
standards. In the March 2022 ECS NOPR and in this final
[[Page 36416]]
rule, DOE considered the various applicable lead times required by EPCA
and has determined that the compliance date for amended standards for
all CRAC equipment classes will be 360 days after the publication date
of the final rule adopting amended energy conservation standards. 87 FR
12802, 12834 (March 7, 2022). Comments received on the compliance date
are discussed in section V.D of this document.
E. Estimates of Potential Energy Savings
DOE estimated the potential site, primary, and FFC energy savings
in quads (i.e., 10\15\ Btu) for adopting ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019
efficiency levels for CRACs within each equipment class analyzed. The
potential energy savings of adopting ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 levels
are measured relative to the current Federal standards. Table IV-5
shows the potential energy savings resulting from the analyses
conducted for CRACs. The reported energy savings are cumulative over
the period in which equipment shipped in the 30-year analysis continues
to operate. The national energy savings estimates are identical to
those provided in the September 2020 NODA/RFI. See 85 FR 60642, 60672
(Sep. 25, 2020).
Table IV-5--Potential Energy Savings of Adopting ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 for CRACs \1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASHRAE Site savings Primary FFC savings
efficiency ---------------- savings ---------------
Condenser system type Airflow configuration Current net sensible level ----------------
cooling capacity ---------------- Quads Quads
NSenCOP Quads
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air-cooled........................... Downflow................ <65,000 Btu/h.......... 2.70 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
>=65,000 Btu/h and 2.58 0.0011 0.0029 0.0030
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 2.36 0.0071 0.0185 0.0193
<760,000 Btu/h.
Upflow, ducted.......... <65,000 Btu/h.......... 2.67 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
>=240,000 Btu/h and 2.33 0.0001 0.0003 0.0003
<760,000 Btu/h.
Upflow, non-ducted...... <65,000 Btu/h.......... 2.16 0.0000 0.0001 0.0001
>=65,000 Btu/h and 2.04 0.0003 0.0007 0.0008
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 1.89 0.0014 0.0037 0.0039
<760,000 Btu/h.
Water-cooled......................... Downflow................ <65,000 Btu/h.......... 2.82 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
>=65,000 Btu/h and 2.73 0.0001 0.0003 0.0003
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 2.67 0.0003 0.0007 0.0008
<760,000 Btu/h.
Upflow, ducted.......... <65,000 Btu/h.......... 2.79 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
>=240,000 Btu/h and 2.64 0.0000 0.0001 0.0001
<760,000 Btu/h.
Upflow, non-ducted...... <65,000 Btu/h.......... 2.43 0.0001 0.0004 0.0004
>=65,000 Btu/h and 2.32 0.0002 0.0005 0.0006
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 2.20 0.0001 0.0003 0.0003
<760,000 Btu/h.
Water-cooled with fluid economizer... Downflow................ <65,000 Btu/h.......... 2.77 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
>=65,000 Btu/h and 2.68 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 2.61 0.0001 0.0002 0.0002
<760,000 Btu/h.
Upflow, ducted.......... <65,000 Btu/h.......... 2.74 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
>=240,000 Btu/h and 2.58 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
<760,000 Btu/h.
Upflow, non-ducted...... <65,000 Btu/h.......... 2.35 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
>=65,000 Btu/h and 2.24 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 2.12 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
<760,000 Btu/h.
Glycol-cooled........................ Downflow................ <65,000 Btu/h.......... 2.56 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
>=65,000 Btu/h and 2.24 0.0001 0.0002 0.0002
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 2.21 0.0001 0.0003 0.0003
<760,000 Btu/h.
Upflow, ducted.......... <65,000 Btu/h.......... 2.53 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
>=65,000 Btu/h and 2.21 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 2.18 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
<760,000 Btu/h.
Upflow, non-ducted...... <65,000 Btu/h.......... 2.08 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
>=65,000 Btu/h and 1.90 0.0001 0.0003 0.0003
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 1.81 0.0000 0.0001 0.0001
<760,000 Btu/h.
[[Page 36417]]
Glycol-cooled with fluid economizer.. Downflow................ <65,000 Btu/h.......... 2.51 0.0000 0.0001 0.0001
>=65,000 Btu/h and 2.19 0.0003 0.0007 0.0007
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 2.15 0.0009 0.0022 0.0023
<760,000 Btu/h.
Upflow, ducted.......... <65,000 Btu/h.......... 2.48 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
>=65,000 Btu/h and 2.16 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 2.12 0.0002 0.0004 0.0004
<760,000 Btu/h.
Upflow, non-ducted...... <65,000 Btu/h.......... 2.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
>=65,000 Btu/h and 1.82 0.0003 0.0007 0.0008
<240,000 Btu/h.
>=240,000 Btu/h and 1.73 0.0001 0.0003 0.0003
<760,000 Btu/h.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The air-cooled, upflow ducted, >65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h; water-cooled, upflow ducted, >65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h; and water-cooled
with fluid economizer, upflow ducted, >65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h equipment classes are not included in the table, as the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2019 levels for these equipment classes are equivalent to the current Federal standard.
V. Conclusions
A. Consideration of More-Stringent Efficiency Levels
EPCA requires DOE to establish an amended uniform national standard
for equipment classes at the minimum level specified in the amended
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 unless DOE determines, by rule published in the
Federal Register, and supported by clear and convincing evidence, that
adoption of a uniform national standard more stringent than the amended
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 for the equipment class would result in
significant additional conservation of energy and is technologically
feasible and economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(I)-
(II))
In the March 2022 ECS NOPR, DOE tentatively determined that due to
the lack of market data in terms of the NSenCOP metric and the test
metric change, DOE was unable to determine via clear and convincing
evidence that a more-stringent CRAC standard level than that contained
in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 would result in significant additional
conservation of energy and is technologically feasible and economically
justified. 87 FR 12802, 12837-12838 (March 7, 2022). DOE noted that to
obtain NSenCOP market data for purposes of analysis of standard levels
more stringent than ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019, DOE would be required to
translate the individual SCOP ratings to NSenCOP ratings for all CRAC
models certified in DOE's CCMS Database. As the range of model
efficiencies increases, so does the number of different technologies
used to achieve such efficiencies. With this increase in variation,
there is an increase in the potential for variation in the crosswalk
results from the actual performance under the new metric of the
analyzed models. DOE decided not to conduct further analysis for this
particular rulemaking because DOE lacked the data to assess potential
energy conservation. Id.
AHRI stated that it supports the direct adoption of all NSenCOP
values and associated capacities in ASHRAE Standard 90.1, and the
commenter agreed that the efficiencies proposed in the NOPR will save
energy. (AHRI, No.12 at p. 1)
NYSERDA recognized that the new NSenCOP metric presented difficulty
in obtaining accurate market data but commented that changing ASHRAE
metrics does not preclude DOE from its obligations to conduct a
thorough analysis of the market to determine if there is clear and
convincing evidence to set standards above the ASHRAE levels. (NYSERDA,
No. 14 at p. 2) NYSERDA urged DOE to conduct further analysis and
reassess this determination as more manufacturers adhere to the NSenCOP
standards and demonstrate their equipment performance. Id. NYSERDA
further asserted that, based on their observations of CRAC equipment on
the DOE CCMS database, some equipment already have efficiency levels
higher than required in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 indicating a
potential for more-stringent energy conservation standards, and
recommended that DOE re-evaluate CRAC standards sooner than mandated by
the six-year-lookback requirement. Id.
The CA IOUs encouraged DOE to adopt higher minimum efficiencies
than ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 for three CRAC classes: (1) Air-cooled
Downflow >=295 kBtu/h and <930 kBtu/h; (2) Air-cooled Upflow Ducted
>=295 kBtu/h and <930 kBtu/h, and (3) Air-cooled Upflow Non-Ducted
>=295 kBtu/h and <930 kBtu/h. (CA IOUs, No. 13 at p. 2) The CA IOUs
asserted that based on their analysis, all CRACs sold in the U.S. in
these classes are already more efficient than the efficiency levels in
ASHRAE 90.1-2019. Id. The CA IOUs stated that there are also several
CRAC classes where most of the CRACs exceed ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019
minimum efficiency levels, and the commenter suggested that those
classes should be considered for higher levels. Id. The CA IOUs added
that based on their findings, they would suggest more-stringent
standards for this equipment to the governing body of ASHRAE Standard
90.1, and they encouraged DOE participation in the ASHRAE Standard 90.1
process. Id.
In response to NYSERDA, DOE notes that it makes determinations
pursuant to the ASHRAE trigger (and the six-year look back review) by
evaluating the information and data available specific to the equipment
under review that is present at that time. DOE is not making a general
determination that the clear and convincing evidence threshold cannot
be met in all instances in which there is a metric change. Nonetheless,
as acknowledged by NYSERDA, the lack of market data in terms of the new
metric prevents DOE from comprehensively
[[Page 36418]]
assessing the potential for energy conservation at the current time.
However, in a future rulemaking when more market data are available in
terms of the NSenCOP metric, DOE may be in a better position to conduct
a full economic analysis.
In response to NYSERDA's and the CA IOU's comment regarding
equipment classes with rated equipment efficiencies that are already
higher than the minimum efficiency levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019,
DOE notes that it cannot make such a determination without a
significant number of manufacturers certifying with the NSenCOP metric.
DOE identified NSenCOP market data for less than three percent of the
CRAC models certified in DOE's Certification Compliance Database. Even
if the analysis presented by the CA IOUs is deemed accurate, DOE does
not have enough information to evaluate what an appropriate more-
stringent standard would be for the equipment classes which the CA IOUs
have identified. In response to the CA IOUs' request that DOE
participate in the ASHRAE Standard 90.1 process, the Department notes
that as of the time of this final rule, it is an active participant in
the ASHRAE Standard 90.1 process.
After considering these stakeholder comments, and the lack of
sufficient NSenCOP market data available following the March 2022 ECS
NOPR, DOE maintains its preliminary decision not to conduct additional
analysis of more-stringent CRAC standards as part of this rulemaking.
The lack of market and performance data in terms of the new metric
limits the analysis of energy savings that would result from efficiency
levels more stringent than the amended ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 levels
for this equipment. Accordingly, given the limits of any energy use
analysis resulting from the lack of data, DOE has concluded that it
lacks clear and convincing evidence that more-stringent standards for
CRACs would result in a significant additional amount of energy savings
as required for DOE to establish such more-stringent standards.
B. Review Under Six-Year Lookback Provision
As discussed, DOE is required to conduct an evaluation of each
class of covered equipment in ASHRAE Standard 90.1 every six years. (42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C)(i)) DOE may only adopt more-stringent standards
pursuant to the six-year-lookback review if the Secretary determines,
supported by clear and convincing evidence, that the adoption of more-
stringent standards would result in significant additional conservation
of energy and is technologically feasible and economically justified.
(42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C)(i); 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(II)) The
analysis under the six-year-lookback provision incorporates the same
standards and factors as the analysis for whether DOE should adopt a
standard more stringent than an amended ASHRAE Standard 90.1 standard.
Id. Accordingly, DOE is evaluating the six CRAC equipment classes for
which ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 did not increase the stringency of the
standards.
Similar to the triggered classes discussed in section V.A of this
document, there are limited NSenCOP data for CRACs within each of these
six classes, and there is not a comparable industry analysis (i.e.,
translating ratings to the updated metric for all models on the market)
for comparison. While the crosswalk analysis required only that DOE
translate the efficiency levels at the baseline levels, the analysis
needed to evaluate whether amended standards more stringent than ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2019 would result in significant energy savings and be
technologically feasible and economically justified under the clear and
convincing threshold would require more than baseline data--it would
require NSenCOP data across all efficiency levels on the market.
Therefore, in line with the same initial reasoning presented in
DOE's evaluation of more-stringent standards for those classes of CRAC
for which ASHRAE updated the industry standards, DOE determines that
the clear and convincing evidence threshold is not met for these six
classes. As such, DOE did not conduct an energy savings analysis of
standard levels more stringent than the current Federal standard levels
for the classes of CRACs not triggered by ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019
(i.e., the six classes of CRAC for which ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 does
not specify more-stringent minimum efficiency levels).
C. Definition for Ducted Condenser
As indicated, ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 includes separate equipment
classes for ceiling-mounted CRACs with ducted condensers. The current
definitions at 10 CFR 431.92 do not include a definition of ``ducted
condenser.'' In the March 2022 ECS NOPR, DOE proposed the following
definition of ``ducted condenser'' at 10 CFR 431.92, consistent with
the definition specified in section 3.2.11.1 of AHRI 1360-2022. 87 FR
12802, 12839 (March 7, 2022).
Ducted Condenser means a configuration of computer room air
conditioner for which the condenser or condensing unit that
manufacturer's installation instructions indicate is intended to
exhaust condenser air through a duct(s).
DOE did not receive any comments on this definition, and for the
reasons previously explained, the Department is finalizing it as
proposed.
D. Amended Energy Conservation Standards
DOE is amending the energy conservation standards for CRACs by
adopting the efficiency levels specified for CRACs in ASHRAE Standard
90.1-2019. The standards, which are expressed in terms of NSenCOP, are
shown in Table V-1 and Table V-2 of this document. These standards
apply to all CRACs listed in Table V-1 and Table V-2 of this document
manufactured in, or imported into, the United States starting on the
compliance date as discussed in the following paragraphs.
Table V-1--Amended Standards for Floor-Mounted CRACs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minimum NSenCOP efficiency Minimum NSenCOP efficiency
Net sensible cooling -------------------------------- Net sensible cooling -------------------------------
Equipment type capacity \16\ capacity Upflow non- Horizontal
Downflow Upflow ducted ducted flow
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air-Cooled........................... <80,000 Btu/h........... 2.70 2.67 <65,000 Btu/h.......... 2.16 2.65
>=80,000 Btu/h and 2.58 2.55 >=65,000 Btu/h and 2.04 2.55
<295,000 Btu/h. <240,000 Btu/h.
>=295,000 Btu/h and 2.36 2.33 >=240,000 Btu/h and 1.89 2.47
<930,000 Btu/h. <760,000 Btu/h.
Air-Cooled with Fluid Economizer..... <80,000 Btu/h........... 2.70 2.67 <65,000 Btu/h.......... 2.09 2.65
[[Page 36419]]
>=80,000 Btu/h and 2.58 2.55 >=65,000 Btu/h and 1.99 2.55
<295,000 Btu/h. <240,000 Btu/h.
>=295,000 Btu/h and 2.36 2.33 >=240,000 Btu/h and 1.81 2.47
<930,000 Btu/h. <760,000 Btu/h.
Water-Cooled......................... <80,000 Btu/h........... 2.82 2.79 <65,000 Btu/h.......... 2.43 2.79
>=80,000 Btu/h and 2.73 2.70 >=65,000 Btu/h and 2.32 2.68
<295,000 Btu/h. <240,000 Btu/h.
>=295,000 Btu/h and 2.67 2.64 >=240,000 Btu/h and 2.20 2.60
<930,000 Btu/h. <760,000 Btu/h.
Water-Cooled with Fluid Economizer... <80,000 Btu/h........... 2.77 2.74 <65,000 Btu/h.......... 2.35 2.71
>=80,000 Btu/h and 2.68 2.65 >=65,000 Btu/h and 2.24 2.60
<295,000 Btu/h. <240,000 Btu/h.
>=295,000 Btu/h and 2.61 2.58 >=240,000 Btu/h and 2.12 2.54
<930,000 Btu/h. <760,000 Btu/h.
Glycol-Cooled........................ <80,000 Btu/h........... 2.56 2.53 <65,000 Btu/h.......... 2.08 2.48
>=80,000 Btu/h and 2.24 2.21 >=65,000 Btu/h and 1.90 2.18
<295,000 Btu/h. <240,000 Btu/h.
>=295,000 Btu/h and 2.21 2.18 >=240,000 Btu/h and 1.81 2.18
<930,000 Btu/h. <760,000 Btu/h.
Glycol-Cooled with Fluid Economizer.. <80,000 Btu/h........... 2.51 2.48 <65,000 Btu/h.......... 2.00 2.44
>=80,000 Btu/h and 2.19 2.16 >=65,000 Btu/h and 1.82 2.10
<295,000 Btu/h. <240,000 Btu/h.
>=295,000 Btu/h and 2.15 2.12 >=240,000 Btu/h and 1.73 2.10
<930,000 Btu/h. <760,000 Btu/h.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ DOE has used 930,000 Btu/h as the adjusted upper capacity
limit for downflow and upflow ducted CRACs in its analysis (see
section III.C of this document). The 930,000 Btu/h upper capacity
limit (as measured per AHRI 1360-2022) used in the crosswalk
analysis is equivalent to the 760,000 Btu/h upper capacity limit (as
measured per ANSI/ASHRAE 127-2007) established in the current DOE
standards.
Table V-2--Amended Standards for Ceiling-Mounted CRACs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minimum NSenCOP efficiency
Equipment type Net sensible cooling capacity -------------------------------
Ducted Non-ducted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air-Cooled with Free Air Discharge <29,000 Btu/h...................... 2.05 2.08
Condenser.
>=29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h... 2.02 2.05
>=65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h.. 1.92 1.94
Air-Cooled with Free Air Discharge <29,000 Btu/h...................... 2.01 2.04
Condenser and Fluid Economizer.
>=29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h... 1.97 2.00
>=65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h.. 1.87 1.89
Air-Cooled with Ducted Condenser........... <29,000 Btu/h...................... 1.86 1.89
>=29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h... 1.83 1.86
>=65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h.. 1.73 1.75
Air-Cooled with Fluid Economizer and Ducted <29,000 Btu/h...................... 1.82 1.85
Condenser.
>=29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h... 1.78 1.81
>=65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h.. 1.68 1.70
Water-Cooled............................... <29,000 Btu/h...................... 2.38 2.41
>=29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h... 2.28 2.31
>=65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h.. 2.18 2.20
Water-Cooled with Fluid Economizer......... <29,000 Btu/h...................... 2.33 2.36
>=29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h... 2.23 2.26
>=65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h.. 2.13 2.16
Glycol-Cooled.............................. <29,000 Btu/h...................... 1.97 2.00
>=29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h... 1.93 1.98
>=65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h.. 1.78 1.81
Glycol-Cooled with Fluid Economizer........ <29,000 Btu/h...................... 1.92 1.95
>=29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h... 1.88 1.93
>=65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h.. 1.73 1.76
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 36420]]
As noted, in instances in which DOE is amending an energy
conservation standard for CRACs in response to updates to ASHRAE
Standard 90.1, EPCA specifies certain compliance lead times based on
equipment capacity. If DOE were to prescribe energy conservation
standards at the efficiency levels contained in the updated ASHRAE
Standard 90.1, EPCA states that any such standard shall become
effective on or after a date that is two or three years (depending on
the equipment type or size) after the effective date of the applicable
minimum energy efficiency requirement in the amended ASHRAE standard.
(42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(D)) In the present case, were DOE to adopt
amended standards for ``small'' CRACs (i.e., CRACs with a capacity of
less than 65,000 Btu/h) at the levels specified in ASHRAE Standard
90.1, EPCA provides that the compliance date must be on or after a date
which is two years after the effective date of the level specified in
the updated ASHRAE Standard 90.1 (i.e., October 23, 2021). Were DOE to
adopt amended standards for ``large'' and ``very large'' CRACs (i.e.,
CRACs with a capacity equal to or greater than 65,000 Btu/h) at the
levels specified in ASHRAE Standard 90.1, EPCA provides that the
compliance date must be on or after a date which is three years after
the effective date of the level specified in the updated ASHRAE
Standard 90.1 (i.e., October 23, 2022).
If DOE were to prescribe standards more stringent than the
efficiency levels contained in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019, EPCA dictates
that any such standard will become effective for equipment manufactured
on or after a date which is four years after the date of publication of
a final rule in the Federal Register. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(D)) For
equipment classes for which DOE is acting under its 6-year-lookback
authority, if DOE were to adopt more-stringent standards, EPCA states
that any such standard shall apply to equipment manufactured after a
date that is the latter of the date three years after publication of
the final rule establishing such standard or six years after the
effective date for the current standard. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C)(iv))
Moreover, the amended energy conservation standards are based on a
new metric (i.e., NSenCOP), and DOE has amended the test procedure to
rely on NSenCOP in the March 2023 TP final rule. See EERE-2021-BT-TP-
0017. As adopted in the March 2023TP final rule, the compliance date of
the amended test procedure for CRACs using the NSenCOP metric will be
the compliance date of amended standards in terms of NSenCOP.
In the March 2022 ECS NOPR, DOE considered these various applicable
lead times relevant under EPCA to standards (i.e., October 23, 2021,
for ``small'' CRACs and October 23, 2022, for ``large'' and ``very
large'' CRACs) and the 360-day lead time relevant to a test procedure
update addressing NSenCOP. 87 FR 12802, 12843 (March 7, 2022). In order
to align the compliance dates across equipment classes and account for
an updated test procedure, should one be finalized, DOE proposed that
the compliance date for amended standards for all CRAC equipment
classes would be 360 days after the publication date of the final rule
adopting amended energy conservation standards. Id.
The CA IOUs supported DOE's proposal to align compliance dates
across equipment classes and noted that this approach will reduce the
compliance burden for manufacturers and streamline future rulemakings
for this equipment for all stakeholders. (CA IOUs, No. 13 at p. 2)
AHRI agreed with DOE's assessment that proposed standards, if
adopted, would apply to all CRACs listed in Table I-1 and Table I-2
manufactured in, or imported into, the United States on the same date.
(AHRI, No. 12 at p. 3) However, AHRI commented that given the proposed
expansion of the covered equipment, and the change in Federal metric
being considered, DOE should cover all equipment classes included in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 on one of the two compliance dates options
presented by EPCA rather than the ``arbitrary'' 360-day compliance
period proposed. Id.
In response, DOE notes that both the compliance date options
presented by EPCA (and suggested by AHRI) are dates certain tied to the
effective date of the amended ASHRAE Standard 90.1 which have already
passed (i.e., October 23, 2021 and October 23, 2022). Following the
statutory scheme, an argument could be made for requiring immediate
compliance with the amended standards, since the adopted ASHRAE
Standard 90.1 levels were promulgated and known in late 2019. However,
DOE nevertheless concludes that some reasonable lead time would be
needed for all CRAC manufacturers to come into compliance with the
amended Federal standards. Therefore, given that EPCA's specified
timelines are no longer feasible, and that DOE has now finalized a test
procedure adopting NSenCOP as the metric, DOE has decided to adopt a
compliance date for the amended standards for all CRAC equipment
classes that is 360 days after the publication date in the Federal
Register of this final rule adopting amended energy conservation
standards. DOE has determined that lead time of 360 days would be
adequate for manufacturers to come into compliance with the amended
CRAC standards.
1. Impact of Any Lessening of Competition
EPCA directs DOE to consider the impact of any lessening of
competition, as determined in writing by the Attorney General, that is
likely to result from a standard. (See 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(ii)(V))
To assist the Department of Justice (DOJ) in making such a
determination, DOE transmitted copies of its proposed rule to the
Attorney General for review, with a request that the DOJ provide its
determination on this issue. In its assessment letter responding to
DOE, DOJ concluded that the proposed energy conservation standards for
CRACs are unlikely to have a significant adverse impact on competition.
DOE is publishing the Attorney General's assessment at the end of this
final rule. DOE did not receive any public comments on this issue.
VI. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review,''
58 FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993), as supplemented and reaffirmed by E.O.
13563, ``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review,'' 76 FR 3821 (Jan.
21, 2011), requires agencies, to the extent permitted by law, to: (1)
propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination that
its benefits justify its costs (recognizing that some benefits and
costs are difficult to quantify); (2) tailor regulations to impose the
least burden on society, consistent with obtaining regulatory
objectives, taking into account, among other things, and to the extent
practicable, the costs of cumulative regulations; (3) select, in
choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, those approaches that
maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental,
public health and safety, and other advantages; distributive impacts;
and equity); (4) to the extent feasible, specify performance
objectives, rather than specifying the behavior or manner of compliance
that regulated entities must adopt; and (5) identify and assess
available alternatives to direct regulation, including providing
[[Page 36421]]
economic incentives to encourage the desired behavior, such as user
fees or marketable permits, or providing information upon which choices
can be made by the public. DOE emphasizes as well that E.O. 13563
requires agencies to use the best available techniques to quantify
anticipated present and future benefits and costs as accurately as
possible. In its guidance, the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
emphasized that such techniques may include identifying changing future
compliance costs that might result from technological innovation or
anticipated behavioral changes. For the reasons stated in the preamble,
this regulatory action is consistent with these principles.
Section 6(a) of E.O. 12866 also requires agencies to submit
``significant regulatory actions'' to OIRA for review. OIRA has
determined that this final rule does not constitute a ``significant
regulatory action'' under section 3(f) of E.O. 12866. Accordingly, this
action was not submitted to OIRA for review under E.O. 12866.
B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires
preparation of an initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) and a
final regulatory flexibility analysis (FRFA) for any rule that by law
must be proposed for public comment, unless the agency certifies that
the rule, if promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. As required by E.O. 13272,
``Proper Consideration of Small Entities in Agency Rulemaking,'' 67 FR
53461 (August 16, 2002), DOE published procedures and policies on
February 19, 2003, to ensure that the potential impacts of its rules on
small entities are properly considered during the rulemaking process.
68 FR 7990. DOE has made its procedures and policies available on the
Office of the General Counsel's website (www.energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel). DOE reviewed this final rule under the provisions of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act and the policies and procedures
published on February 19, 2003.
DOE has prepared the following FRFA for the equipment that is the
subject of this energy conservation standards rulemaking.
1. Description of Reasons Why Action Is Being Considered
DOE is amending the existing DOE minimum efficiency standards for
CRACs as is required under EPCA's ASHRAE trigger requirement and the
six-year-lookback provision. DOE must update the Federal minimum
efficiency standards to be consistent with levels published in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1, unless DOE determines, supported by clear and convincing
evidence, that adoption of a more-stringent level would produce
significant additional conservation of energy and would be
technologically feasible and economically justified. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)) DOE must also review and determine whether to amend
standards of each class of covered equipment in ASHRAE Standard 90.1
every six years. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C)(i))
2. Objectives of, and Legal Basis for, Rule
EPCA directs that if ASHRAE amends ASHRAE Standard 90.1, DOE must
adopt amended standards at the new ASHRAE efficiency level, unless DOE
determines, supported by clear and convincing evidence, that adoption
of a more-stringent level would produce significant additional
conservation of energy and would be technologically feasible and
economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)) Under a separate
provision of EPCA, DOE must also review energy efficiency standards for
CRACs every six years and either: (1) issue a notice of determination
that the standards do not need to be amended as adoption of a more-
stringent level is not supported by clear and convincing evidence; or
(2) issue a notice of proposed rulemaking including new proposed
standards based on certain criteria and procedures in subparagraph (B).
(42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C))
3. Description on Estimated Number of Small Entities Regulated
For manufacturers of CRACs, 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 size standards are listed by North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS) code and industry description and are
available at: www.sba.gov/document/support--table-size-standards.
Manufacturing of CRACs is classified under NAICS 333415, ``Air-
Conditioning and Warm Air Heating Equipment and Commercial and
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 used publicly-available information to identify potential small
businesses that manufacture equipment covered this this final rule. DOE
identified ten manufacturers of equipment covered by this final rule.
Of the ten, nine manufacturers are original equipment manufacturers
(OEM). DOE screened out companies that do not meet the definition of a
``small business'' or are foreign-owned and operated. DOE used
subscription-based business information tools to determine head count
and revenue of the small businesses. Of these nine OEMs, DOE identified
three companies that are small, domestic OEMs.
In the March 2022 ECS NOPR, DOE requested comment on the number of
small manufacturers producing covered CRACs, DOE's understanding of the
current market, and DOE's assessment of the efficiency of the equipment
offered by the identified small manufacturers. 87 FR 12802, 12844
(March 7, 2022).
AHRI commented that it represents the following single package
vertical units (SPVU) companies that likely meet the criteria of small
businesses that could be disproportionally impacted by amended energy
conservation standards: Bard Manufacturing Company, Marvair, Systemair,
Temspec, and United CoolAir. (AHRI, No. 12 at p. 5) AHRI commented that
it was not aware of any traditional CRAC manufacturers that would be
considered by DOE as a small business, but that if DOE adopts AHRI
1360-202X Draft, SPVU and RTU \17\ manufacturers would be impacted. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ DOE understand RTU to mean ``roof-top units'' and a
reference to roof-mounted CRACs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response, DOE notes that the manufacturers highlighted by AHRI
do not manufacture floor-mounted or ceiling-mounted CRACs, which are
the equipment for which DOE is adopting amended standards in this
rulemaking. While these manufacturers primarily manufacture SPVUs,
which are not the subject of this rulemaking, DOE's review found that
two of these manufacturers also offer products that meet the definition
of wall-mounted CRAC. One of the two manufacturers qualifies as a small
business under the applicable NAICS code (NAICS code 333415). However,
DOE notes that there are currently no energy conservation standards for
wall-mounted CRACs, and DOE is not adopting standards for wall-mounted
or roof-mounted CRACs in this final rule. Therefore, there is no
associated impact to these
[[Page 36422]]
manufacturers from this rulemaking. Consequently, DOE has retained its
count of small manufacturers from the March 2022 ECS NOPR.
4. Description and Estimate of Compliance Requirements Including
Differences in Cost, if Any, for Different Groups of Small Entities
As noted in the section 2 of the Review under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, DOE must adopt amended standards at the new ASHRAE
efficiency level unless DOE determines, supported by clear and
convincing evidence, that adoption of a more-stringent standard would
produce significant additional conservation of energy and would be
technologically feasible and economically justified. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)) Because DOE had made no such determination, this
final rule adopts amended standards at the new ASHRAE efficiency level
rather than impose more-stringent standards. This is required by EPCA,
but is also less burdensome for small manufacturers than a more-
stringent standard.
In reviewing all commercially-available models in DOE's Compliance
Certification Database, the three small manufacturers account for 13
percent of industry model offerings. For each of the three small
manufacturers, approximately 90 percent of current models would meet
the adopted levels. The small manufacturers will need to either
discontinue or redesign non-compliant models. DOE recognizes that small
manufacturers may need to spread redesign costs over lower shipment
volumes than the industry-at-large. However, adoption of standards at
least as stringent as the ASHRAE levels is required under EPCA;
furthermore, adopting standards above ASHRAE levels (DOE's only other
option under 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)) would lead to an even greater
portion of models requiring redesign.
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 this rule.
6. Significant Alternatives to the Rule
As EPCA requires DOE to either adopt the ASHRAE Standard 90.1
levels or to adopt higher standards, DOE lacks discretion to mitigate
impacts to small businesses from the ASHRAE Standard 90.1 levels. In
this rulemaking, DOE is adopting the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 levels.
Additional compliance flexibilities may be available through other
means. Section 504 of the Department of Energy Organization Act, 42
U.S.C. 7194, provides authority for the Secretary to adjust a rule
issued under EPCA in order to prevent ``special hardship, inequity, or
unfair distribution of burdens'' that may be imposed on that
manufacturer as a result of such rule. Manufacturers should refer to 10
CFR part 1003 for additional detail.
C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
Manufacturers of CRACs must certify to DOE that their equipment
complies with any applicable energy conservation standards. In
certifying compliance, manufacturers must test their equipment
according to the DOE test procedures for CRACs, 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
CRACs. (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 amending the certification or reporting requirements for
CRACs in this final rule. Instead, DOE may consider proposals to amend
the certification requirements and reporting for CRACs under a separate
rulemaking regarding appliance and equipment certification. DOE will
address changes to OMB Control Number 1910-1400 at that time, as
necessary.
Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is
required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty
for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the PRA, unless that collection of information displays
a currently valid OMB Control Number.
D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA),
DOE has analyzed this final rule in accordance with NEPA and DOE's NEPA
implementing regulations (10 CFR part 1021). DOE has determined that
this rule qualifies for categorical exclusion under 10 CFR part 1021,
subpart D, appendix B5.1 because it is a rulemaking that establishes
energy conservation standards for consumer products or industrial
equipment, none of the exceptions identified in categorical exclusion
B5.1(b) apply, no extraordinary circumstances exist that require
further environmental analysis, and it otherwise meets the requirements
for application of a categorical exclusion. See 10 CFR 1021.410.
Therefore, DOE has determined that promulgation of this final rule is
not a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the
human environment within the meaning of NEPA, and does not require an
environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement.
E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
E.O. 13132, ``Federalism,'' 64 FR 43255 (August 10, 1999), imposes
certain requirements on Federal agencies formulating and implementing
policies or regulations that preempt State law or that have federalism
implications. The Executive order requires agencies to examine the
constitutional and statutory authority supporting any action that would
limit the policymaking discretion of the States and to carefully assess
the necessity for such actions. The Executive order also requires
agencies to have an accountable process to ensure meaningful and timely
input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have federalism implications. On March 14, 2000, DOE
published a statement of policy describing the intergovernmental
consultation process it will follow in the development of such
regulations. 65 FR 13735. DOE has examined this final rule and has
determined that it would not have a substantial direct effect on the
States, on the relationship between the national government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. EPCA governs and prescribes Federal
preemption of State regulations as to energy conservation for the
equipment that are the subject of this final rule. States can petition
DOE for exemption from such preemption to the extent, and based on
criteria, set forth in EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6316(a) and (b); 42 U.S.C.
6297) Therefore, no further action is required by Executive Order
13132.
F. Review Under Executive Order 12988
With respect to the review of existing regulations and the
promulgation of new regulations, section 3(a) of E.O.
[[Page 36423]]
12988, ``Civil Justice Reform,'' imposes on Federal agencies the
general duty to adhere to the following requirements: (1) eliminate
drafting errors and ambiguity; (2) write regulations to minimize
litigation; (3) provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct
rather than a general standard, and (4) promote simplification and
burden reduction. 61 FR 4729 (Feb. 7, 1996). Regarding the review
required by section 3(a), section 3(b) of E.O. 12988 specifically
requires that Executive agencies make every reasonable effort to ensure
that the regulation: (1) clearly specifies the preemptive effect, if
any; (2) clearly specifies any effect on existing Federal law or
regulation; (3) provides a clear legal standard for affected conduct
while promoting simplification and burden reduction; (4) specifies the
retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately defines key terms, and (6)
addresses other important issues affecting clarity and general
draftsmanship under any guidelines issued by the Attorney General.
Section 3(c) of E.O. 12988 requires Executive agencies to review
regulations in light of applicable standards in section 3(a) and
section 3(b) to determine whether they are met or it is unreasonable to
meet one or more of them. DOE has completed the required review and
determined that, to the extent permitted by law, this final rule meets
the relevant standards of E.O. 12988.
G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
requires each Federal agency to assess the effects of Federal
regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal governments and the
private sector. Public Law 104-4, sec. 201 (codified at 2 U.S.C. 1531).
For a regulatory action likely to result in a rule that may cause the
expenditure by State, local, and Tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or by the private sector of $100 million or more in any one year
(adjusted annually for inflation), section 202 of UMRA requires a
Federal agency to publish a written statement that estimates the
resulting costs, benefits, and other effects on the national economy.
(2 U.S.C. 1532(a), (b)) The UMRA also requires a Federal agency to
develop an effective process to permit timely input by elected officers
of State, local, and Tribal governments on a ``significant
intergovernmental mandate,'' and requires an agency plan for giving
notice and opportunity for timely input to potentially affected small
governments before establishing any requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect them. On March 18, 1997, DOE published
a statement of policy on its process for intergovernmental consultation
under UMRA. 62 FR 12820. DOE's policy statement is also available at:
www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/gcprod/documents/umra_97.pdf.
DOE examined this final rule according to UMRA and its statement of
policy and determined that this rule does not contain a Federal
intergovernmental mandate, nor is it expected to require expenditures
of $100 million or more in any one year by State, local, and Tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector. As a result,
the analytical requirements of UMRA do not apply.
H. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act,
1999
Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105-277) requires Federal agencies to issue a Family
Policymaking Assessment for any rule that may affect family well-being.
This final rule would not have any impact on the autonomy or integrity
of the family as an institution. Accordingly, DOE has concluded that it
is not necessary to prepare a Family Policymaking Assessment.
I. Review Under Executive Order 12630
Pursuant to E.O. 12630, ``Governmental Actions and Interference
with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights,'' 53 FR 8859 (March
18, 1988), DOE has determined that this rule would not result in any
takings that might require compensation under the Fifth Amendment to
the U.S. Constitution.
J. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act,
2001
Section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C. 3516, note) provides for Federal agencies to
review most disseminations of information to the public under
information quality guidelines established by each agency pursuant to
general guidelines issued by OMB. OMB's guidelines were published at 67
FR 8452 (Feb. 22, 2002), and DOE's guidelines were published at 67 FR
62446 (Oct. 7, 2002). Pursuant to OMB Memorandum M-19-15, ``Improving
Implementation of the Information Quality Act'' (April 24, 2019), DOE
published updated guidelines which are available at: www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/12/f70/DOE%20Final%20Updated%20IQA%20Guidelines%20Dec%202019.pdf. DOE has
reviewed this final rule under the OMB and DOE guidelines and has
concluded that it is consistent with applicable policies in those
guidelines.
K. Review Under Executive Order 13211
E.O. 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly
Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,'' 66 FR 28355 (May 22,
2001), requires Federal agencies to prepare and submit to OIRA at OMB,
a Statement of Energy Effects for any significant energy action. A
``significant energy action'' is defined as any action by an agency
that promulgates or is expected to lead to promulgation of a final
rule, and that: (1) is a significant regulatory action under Executive
Order 12866, or any successor order; and (2) is likely to have a
significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of
energy, or (3) is designated by the Administrator of OIRA as a
significant energy action. For any significant energy action, the
agency must give a detailed statement of any adverse effects on energy
supply, distribution, or use should the proposal be implemented, and of
reasonable alternatives to the action and their expected benefits on
energy supply, distribution, and use.
DOE has concluded that this regulatory action, which sets forth
amended and new energy conservation standards for CRACs, is not a
significant energy action because it is not a significant regulatory
action under Executive Order 12866. Moreover, the standards are not
likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy, nor has it been designated as such by
the Administrator at OIRA. Accordingly, DOE has not prepared a
Statement of Energy Effects.
L. Review Under the Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review
On December 16, 2004, OMB, in consultation with the Office of
Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), issued its Final Information
Quality Bulletin for Peer Review (the Bulletin). 70 FR 2664 (Jan. 14,
2005). The Bulletin establishes that certain scientific information
shall be peer reviewed by qualified specialists before it is
disseminated by the Federal Government, including influential
scientific information related to agency regulatory actions. The
purpose of the Bulletin is to enhance the quality and credibility of
the Government's scientific information. Under the Bulletin, the energy
conservation standards rulemaking analyses are ``influential scientific
information,''
[[Page 36424]]
which the Bulletin defines as ``scientific information the agency
reasonably can determine will have, or does have, a clear and
substantial impact on important public policies or private sector
decisions.'' Id. at 70 FR 2667.
In response to OMB's Bulletin, DOE conducted formal peer reviews of
the energy conservation standards development process and the analyses
that are typically used and has prepared a Peer Review report
pertaining to the energy conservation standards rulemaking
analyses.\18\ Generation of this report involved a rigorous, formal,
and documented evaluation using objective criteria and qualified and
independent reviewers to make a judgment as to the technical/
scientific/business merit, the actual or anticipated results, and the
productivity and management effectiveness of programs and/or projects.
Because available data, models, and technological understanding have
changed since 2007, DOE has engaged with the National Academy of
Sciences to review DOE's analytical methodologies to ascertain whether
modifications are needed to improve the Department's analyses. DOE is
in the process of evaluating the resulting December 2021 NAS
report.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ The 2007 ``Energy Conservation Standards Rulemaking Peer
Review Report'' is available at: energy.gov/eere/buildings/downloads/energy-conservation-standards-rulemaking-peer-review-report-0 (Last accessed Nov. 8, 2022).
\19\ The December 2021 NAS report is available at
www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/review-of-methods-for-setting-building-and-equipment-performance-standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following standards were previously approved for incorporation
by reference into the provisions where they appear in this rulemaking
and no change to the standards are being made: AHRI 210/240-2008, AHRI
340/360-2007, and ISO Standard 13256-1.
M. Congressional Notification
As required by 5 U.S.C. 801, DOE will report to Congress on the
promulgation of this rule prior to its effective date. The report will
state that it has been determined that the rule is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
VII. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of this final
rule.
List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 431
Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business
information, Energy conservation, Household appliances, Imports,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Laboratories,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Small businesses.
Signing Authority
This document of the Department of Energy was signed on March 30,
2023, by Francisco Alejandro Moreno, Acting Assistant Secretary for
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, pursuant to delegated authority
from the Secretary of Energy. That document with the original signature
and date is maintained by DOE. For administrative purposes only, and in
compliance with requirements of the Office of the Federal Register, the
undersigned DOE Federal Register Liaison Officer has been authorized to
sign and submit the document in electronic format for publication, as
an official document of the Department of Energy. This administrative
process in no way alters the legal effect of this document upon
publication in the Federal Register.
Signed in Washington, DC, on May 17, 2023.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, DOE amends part 431 of
chapter II, subchapter D, of title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, as set forth below:
PART 431--ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAM FOR CERTAIN COMMERCIAL AND
INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT
0
1. The authority citation for part 431 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291-6317; 28 U.S.C. 2461 note.
0
2. Amend Sec. 431.92 by adding in alphabetical order a definition for
``Ducted Condenser'' to read as follows:
Sec. 431.92 Definitions concerning commercial air conditioners and
heat pumps.
* * * * *
Ducted Condenser means a configuration of computer room air
conditioner for which the condenser or condensing unit that
manufacturer's installation instructions indicate is intended to
exhaust condenser air through a duct(s).
* * * * *
0
3. Amend Sec. 431.96 by revising table 1 to paragraph (b) to 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.
[[Page 36425]]
>=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).
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.......... Paragraph (g) of this Paragraphs (c), (e),
and Heat Pumps. section. and (g).
Computer Room Air Conditioners..... AC.................... <760,000 Btu/h........ SCOP................. Appendix E to this None.
subpart \3\.
<760,000 Btu/h or NSenCOP.............. Appendix E1 to this None.
<930,000 Btu/h \4\. 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 this table, consult the notes at the beginning of those appendices to determine the applicable
appendix to use for testing.
\4\ For upflow ducted and downflow floor-mounted computer room air conditioners, the test procedure in appendix E1 of this subpart applies to equipment
with net sensible cooling capacity less than 930,000 Btu/h. For all other configurations of computer room air conditioners, the test procedure in
appendix E1 applies to equipment with net sensible cooling capacity less than 760,000 Btu/h.
* * * * *
0
4. Section 431.97 is amended by:
0
a. Removing the words ``Tables 1 through 6 of this section'' and adding
in their place the words ``tables 1 through 6 to this paragraph (b)''
in paragraph (b) introductory text;
0
b. Revising the headings to tables 5 and 6 in paragraph (b);
0
c. Removing the words ``Table 7 of this section'' and adding in their
place the words ``tables 7 to this paragraph (c)'' and removing the
words ``Table 8 of this section'' and adding in their place the words
``table 8 to this paragraph (c)'' in paragraph (c) introductory text;
0
d. Revising the headings to tables 7 and 8 in paragraph (c);
0
e. Revising the headings to tables 9, 10, and 11 in paragraphs (d)(1),
(2), and (3), respectively;
0
f. Revising paragraph (e);
0
g. Removing the words ``table 13 this section'' and adding in their
place the words ``table 15 to this paragraph (f)(1)'' in paragraph
(f)(1) introductory text;
0
h. Redesignating table 13 to Sec. 431.97(f)(1) as table 15 to Sec.
431.97(f)(1);
0
i. Removing the words ``table 14 of this section'' and adding in their
place the words ``table 16 to this paragraph
[[Page 36426]]
(f)(2)'' in paragraph (f)(2) introductory text;
0
j. Redesignating table 14 to Paragraph (f)(2) to Sec. 431.97 as table
16 and revising the heading;
0
k. Removing the words ``table 14 of this section'' and adding in their
place the words ``table 17 to this paragraph (g)'' in paragraph (g)
introductory text;
0
l. Redesignating table 15 as table 17 in paragraph (g) and revising the
heading;
0
m. Removing the words ``tables 16 and 17 to this paragraph (h)'' and
adding in their place the words ``tables 18 and 19 to this paragraph
(h)'' in paragraph (h) introductory text; and
0
n. Redesignating tables 16 and 17 as tables 18 and 19 in paragraph (h).
The revisions read as follows:
Sec. 431.97 Energy efficiency standards and their compliance dates.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
Table 5 to Sec. 431.97(b)--Minimum Cooling Efficiency Standards for
Double-Duct Air-Conditioning and Heating Equipment
* * * * *
Table 6 to Sec. 431.97(b)--Minimum Heating Efficiency Standards for
Double-Duct Air-Cooled Air Conditioning and Heating Equipment
* * * * *
(c) * * *
Table 7 to Sec. 431.97(c)--Minimum Efficiency Standards for PTAC and
PTHP
* * * * *
Table 8 to Sec. 431.97(c)--Updated Minimum Efficiency Standards for
PTAC
* * * * *
(d)(1) * * *
Table 9 to Sec. 431.97(d)(1)--Minimum Efficiency Standards for Single
Package Vertical Air Conditioners and Single Package Vertical Heat
Pumps
* * * * *
(2) * * *
Table 10 to Sec. 431.97(d)(2)--Minimum Efficiency Standards for Single
Package Vertical Air Conditioners and Single Package Vertical Heat
Pumps
* * * * *
(3) * * *
Table 11 to Sec. 431.97(d)(3)--Updated Minimum Efficiency Standards
for Single Package Vertical Air Conditioners and Single Package
Vertical Heat Pumps
* * * * *
(e)(1) Each computer room air conditioner with a net sensible
cooling capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h manufactured on or after
October 29, 2012, and before May 28, 2024 and each computer room air
conditioner with a net sensible cooling capacity greater than or equal
to 65,000 Btu/h and less than 760,000 Btu/h manufactured on or after
October 29, 2013, and before May 28, 2024 must meet the applicable
minimum energy efficiency standard level(s) set forth in table 12 to
this paragraph (e)(1).
Table 12 to Sec. 431.97(e)(1)--Minimum Efficiency Standards for Computer Room Air Conditioners
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minimum SCOP efficiency
Equipment type Net sensible cooling capacity -------------------------------
Downflow Upflow
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air-Cooled................................. <65,000 Btu/h...................... 2.20 2.09
>=65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h.. 2.10 1.99
>=240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h. 1.90 1.79
Water-Cooled............................... <65,000 Btu/h...................... 2.60 2.49
>=65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h.. 2.50 2.39
>=240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h. 2.40 2.29
Water-Cooled with Fluid Economizer......... <65,000 Btu/h...................... 2.55 2.44
>=65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h.. 2.45 2.34
>=240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h. 2.35 2.24
Glycol-Cooled.............................. <65,000 Btu/h...................... 2.50 2.39
>=65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h.. 2.15 2.04
>=240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h. 2.10 1.99
Glycol-Cooled with Fluid Economizer........ <65,000 Btu/h...................... 2.45 2.34
>=65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h.. 2.10 1.99
>=240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h. 2.05 1.94
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Each computer room air conditioner manufactured on or after May
28, 2024 must meet the applicable minimum energy efficiency standard
level(s) set forth in tables 13 and 14 to this paragraph (e)(2).
Table 13 to Sec. 431.97(e)(2)--Updated Minimum Efficiency Standards for Floor-Mounted Computer Room Air Conditioners
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Downflow and upflow ducted Upflow non-ducted and horizontal flow
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minimum NSenCOP efficiency Minimum NSenCOP efficiency
Equipment type Net sensible cooling -------------------------------- Net sensible cooling -------------------------------
capacity capacity Upflow non- Horizontal
Downflow Upflow ducted ducted flow
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air-Cooled........................ <80,000 Btu/h............ 2.70 2.67 <65,000 Btu/h............ 2.16 2.65
>=80,000 Btu/h and 2.58 2.55 >=65,000 Btu/h and 2.04 2.55
<295,000 Btu/h. <240,000 Btu/h.
>=295,000 Btu/h and 2.36 2.33 >=240,000 Btu/h and 1.89 2.47
<930,000 Btu/h. <760,000 Btu/h.
Air-Cooled with Fluid Economizer.. <80,000 Btu/h............ 2.70 2.67 <65,000 Btu/h............ 2.09 2.65
[[Page 36427]]
>=80,000 Btu/h and 2.58 2.55 >=65,000 Btu/h and 1.99 2.55
<295,000 Btu/h. <240,000 Btu/h.
>=295,000 Btu/h and 2.36 2.33 >=240,000 Btu/h and 1.81 2.47
<930,000 Btu/h. <760,000 Btu/h.
Water-Cooled...................... <80,000 Btu/h............ 2.82 2.79 <65,000 Btu/h............ 2.43 2.79
>=80,000 Btu/h and 2.73 2.70 >=65,000 Btu/h and 2.32 2.68
<295,000 Btu/h. <240,000 Btu/h.
>=295,000 Btu/h and 2.67 2.64 >=240,000 Btu/h and 2.20 2.60
<930,000 Btu/h. <760,000 Btu/h.
Water-Cooled with Fluid Economizer <80,000 Btu/h............ 2.77 2.74 <65,000 Btu/h............ 2.35 2.71
>=80,000 Btu/h and 2.68 2.65 >=65,000 Btu/h and 2.24 2.60
<295,000 Btu/h. <240,000 Btu/h.
>=295,000 Btu/h and 2.61 2.58 >=240,000 Btu/h and 2.12 2.54
<930,000 Btu/h. <760,000 Btu/h.
Glycol-Cooled..................... <80,000 Btu/h............ 2.56 2.53 <65,000 Btu/h............ 2.08 2.48
>=80,000 Btu/h and 2.24 2.21 >=65,000 Btu/h and 1.90 2.18
<295,000 Btu/h. <240,000 Btu/h.
>=295,000 Btu/h and 2.21 2.18 >=240,000 Btu/h and 1.81 2.18
<930,000 Btu/h. <760,000 Btu/h.
Glycol-Cooled with Fluid <80,000 Btu/h............ 2.51 2.48 <65,000 Btu/h............ 2.00 2.44
Economizer.
>=80,000 Btu/h and 2.19 2.16 >=65,000 Btu/h and 1.82 2.10
<295,000 Btu/h. <240,000 Btu/h.
>=295,000 Btu/h and 2.15 2.12 >=240,000 Btu/h and 1.73 2.10
<930,000 Btu/h. <760,000 Btu/h.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 14 to Sec. 431.97(e)(2)--Minimum Efficiency Standards for Ceiling-Mounted Computer Room Air Conditioners
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minimum NSenCOP efficiency
Equipment type Net sensible cooling capacity -------------------------------
Ducted Non-ducted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air-Cooled with Free Air Discharge <29,000 Btu/h...................... 2.05 2.08
Condenser.
>=29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h... 2.02 2.05
>=65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h.. 1.92 1.94
Air-Cooled with Free Air Discharge <29,000 Btu/h...................... 2.01 2.04
Condenser and Fluid Economizer.
>=29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h... 1.97 2
>=65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h.. 1.87 1.89
Air-Cooled with Ducted Condenser........... <29,000 Btu/h...................... 1.86 1.89
>=29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h... 1.83 1.86
>=65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h.. 1.73 1.75
Air-Cooled with Fluid Economizer and Ducted <29,000 Btu/h...................... 1.82 1.85
Condenser.
>=29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h... 1.78 1.81
>=65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h.. 1.68 1.7
Water-Cooled............................... <29,000 Btu/h...................... 2.38 2.41
>=29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h... 2.28 2.31
>=65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h.. 2.18 2.2
Water-Cooled with Fluid Economizer......... <29,000 Btu/h...................... 2.33 2.36
>=29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h... 2.23 2.26
>=65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h.. 2.13 2.16
Glycol-Cooled.............................. <29,000 Btu/h...................... 1.97 2
>=29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h... 1.93 1.98
>=65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h.. 1.78 1.81
Glycol-Cooled with Fluid Economizer........ <29,000 Btu/h...................... 1.92 1.95
>=29,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h... 1.88 1.93
>=65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h.. 1.73 1.76
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 36428]]
(f) * * *
(2) * * *
Table 16 to Sec. 497.31(f)(2)--Updated Minimum Efficiency Standards
for Variable Refrigerant Flow Multi-Split Air Conditioners and Heat
Pumps
* * * * *
(g) * * *
Table 17 to Sec. 497.31(g)--Minimum Efficiency Standards for Direct
Expansion-Dedicated Outdoor Air Systems
* * * * *
Note: The following letter will not appear in the Code of
Federal Regulations.
U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust Division, Jonathan S. Kanter,
Assistant Attorney General, Main Justice Building, 950 Pennsylvania
Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20530-0001, (202) 514-2401/(202) 616-2645
(Fax).
May 6, 2022
Ami Grace-Tardy, Assistant General Counsel for Litigation, Regulation
and Energy Efficiency, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC 20585.
Re: Amended standards for computer room air conditioners (CRACs).
DOE Docket No. EERE-2018-BT-STD-0008
Dear Assistant General Counsel Grace-Tardy: I am responding to your
March 7, 2022, letter seeking the views of the Attorney General about
the potential impact on competition of the DOE's proposed amended
standards for computer room air conditioners (CRACs).
The Attorney General must determine the impact, if any, of any
lessening of competition likely to result from a proposed standard. (42
U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(V); 42 U.S.C. 313(a)(6)(B)(ii)(V); 42 U.S.C.
6316(a)). The Attorney General's responsibility for responding to
requests from other departments about the effect of a program on
competition has been delegated to the Assistant Attorney General for
the Antitrust Division in 28 CFR 0.40(g).
In conducting its analysis, the Antitrust Division examines whether
a proposed standard may lessen competition, for example, by
substantially limiting consumer choice or increasing industry
concentration. A lessening of competition could result in higher prices
to manufacturers and consumers.
We have reviewed the proposed standards contained in the Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (87 FR 12,802, Mar. 7, 2022). We have also reviewed
information presented at the public meeting held via webinar on
Wednesday, April 13, 2022.
While industry participants may still be evaluating the impact of
the new standards, the Division has not identified any issues to date
that suggest the standards are likely to lessen competition.
Sincerely,
Jonathan S. Kanter
[FR Doc. 2023-10859 Filed 6-1-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
