[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 87 (Thursday, May 5, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 25622-25648]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-10877]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 431
[Docket No. EERE-2011-BT-STD-0029]
RIN 1904-AC47
Energy Conservation Program for Certain Industrial Equipment:
Energy Conservation Standards for Commercial Heating, Air-Conditioning,
and Water-Heating Equipment
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Notice of data availability and request for public comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA), as
amended, directs the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to establish
energy conservation standards for certain commercial and industrial
equipment, including commercial heating, air-conditioning, and water-
heating products. Of particular relevance here, the statute also
requires that each time the corresponding consensus standard--the
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning
Engineers, Inc. (ASHRAE)/Illuminating Engineering Society of North
America (IESNA) Standard 90.1--is amended by the industry, DOE must
assess whether there is a need to update the uniform national energy
conservation standards for the same equipment covered under EPCA.
ASHRAE officially released an amended version of this industry standard
(ASHRAE 90.1-2010) on October 29, 2010, thereby triggering DOE's
related obligations under EPCA. In addition, the Energy Independence
and Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007) amended EPCA to require DOE to
review the most recently published ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1 with
respect to single-package vertical air conditioners and single-package
vertical heat pumps in accordance with the procedures established for
reviewing the energy conservation standards for other
[[Page 25623]]
ASHRAE products. As a first step in meeting these statutory
requirements, today's notice of data availability (NODA) discusses the
results of DOE's analysis of the energy savings potential of amended
energy conservation standards for certain types of commercial equipment
covered by ASHRAE Standard 90.1, including single-package vertical air
conditioners and single-package vertical heat pumps. The energy savings
potentials are based upon either the efficiency levels specified in the
amended industry standard (i.e., ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010) or more
stringent levels that would result in significant additional
conservation of energy and are technologically feasible and
economically justified. DOE is publishing this NODA to: Announce the
results and preliminary conclusions of DOE's analysis of potential
energy savings associated with amended standards for this equipment,
and request public comment on this analysis, as well as the submission
of data and other relevant information.
DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this
NODA submitted no later than June 6, 2011. See section IV, ``Public
Participation,'' of this notice for details.
ADDRESSES: Any comments submitted must identify the NODA for ASHRAE
Products and provide the docket number EERE-2011-BT-STD-0029 and/or
Regulatory Information Number (RIN) 1904-AC47. Comments may be
submitted using any of the following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the instructions for submitting comments.
2. E-mail: [email protected]. Include the Docket
Number EERE-2011-BT-STD-0029 and/or RIN number 1904-AC47 in the subject
line of the message.
3. Postal Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy,
Building Technologies Program, Mailstop EE-2J, 1000 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. If possible, please submit all
items on a compact disc (CD), in which case it is not necessary to
include printed copies.
4. Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of
Energy, Building Technologies Program, 950 L'Enfant Plaza, SW., Suite
600, Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: (202) 586-2945. If possible,
please submit all items on a CD, in which case it is not necessary to
include printed copies.
No telefacsimilies (faxes) will be accepted. For detailed
instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the
rulemaking process, see section IV of this document (Public
Participation).
Docket: The docket is available for review at www.regulations.gov,
including Federal Register notices, comments, and other supporting
documents/materials. 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.
A link to the docket web page can be found at: www.regulations.gov.
The www.regulations.gov web page contains a link to the docket for this
notice, along with simple instructions on how to access all documents,
including public comments, in the docket. See section IV.A for further
information on how to submit comments through www.regulations.gov.
For further information on how to submit a comment or review other
public comments and the docket, contact Ms. Brenda Edwards at (202)
586-2945 or by email: [email protected].
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Mohammed Khan, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building
Technologies Program, Mailstop EE-2J, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-7892. E-mail:
[email protected].
Mr. Eric Stas, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General
Counsel, Mailstop GC-71, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC
20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-9507. E-mail: [email protected].
For information on how to submit or review public comments, contact
Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Program,
Mailstop EE-2J, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-
0121. Telephone: (202) 586-2945. E-mail: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
A. Authority
B. Purpose of the Notice of Data Availability
C. Background
1. ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010
2. ASHRAE Standard 90.1 Proposed Addenda
D. Summary of DOE's Preliminary Assessment of Equipment for
Energy-Savings Analysis
II. Discussion of Changes in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010
A. Commercial Warm-Air Furnaces
B. Commercial Package Air-Conditioning and Heating Equipment
1. Water-Cooled Equipment
2. Evaporatively-Cooled Equipment
3. Variable Refrigerant Flow Equipment
4. Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps
5. Small-Duct, High-Velocity, and Through-The-Wall Equipment
6. Single-Package Vertical Air Conditioners and Single-Package
Vertical Heat Pumps
C. Air Conditioners and Condensing Units Serving Computer Rooms
D. Test Procedures
1. Updates to AHRI 210/240 Test Method
2. Updates to AHRI 340/360 Test Method
3. Updates to UL 727 Test Method
4. Updates to ANSI Z21.47 Test Method
5. Updates to ANSI Z21.10.3 Test Method
III. Analysis of Potential Energy Savings
A. Annual Energy Use
1. Water-Cooled Air Conditioners
2. Evaporatively-Cooled Air Conditioners
3. Single-Package Vertical Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps
B. Shipments
C. Other Analytical Inputs
1. Site-to-Source Conversion
2. Product Lifetime
3. Compliance Date and Analysis Period
D. Estimates of Potential Energy Savings
IV. Public Participation
A. Submission of Comments
B. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment
V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
I. Introduction
A. Authority
Title III, Part C \1\ of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of
1975 (EPCA or the Act), Public Law 94-163 (42 U.S.C. 6311-6317, as
codified), added by Public Law 95-619, Title IV, Sec. 441(a),
established the Energy Conservation Program for Certain Industrial
Equipment, which includes the commercial heating, air-conditioning, and
water-heating equipment that is the subject of this rulemaking.\2\ In
general, this program addresses the energy efficiency of certain types
of commercial and industrial equipment. Relevant provisions of the Act
specifically include definitions (42 U.S.C. 6311), test procedures (42
U.S.C. 6314), labelling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6315), energy
conservation standards (42 U.S.C. 6313), and the authority to require
information
[[Page 25624]]
and reports from manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6316).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code,
Part C was redesignated Part A-1.
\2\ All references to EPCA in this document refer to the statute
as amended through the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007,
Public Law 110-140.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In relevant part here, EPCA contains mandatory energy conservation
standards for commercial heating, air-conditioning, and water-heating
equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)) Specifically, the statute sets standards
for small, large, and very large commercial package air-conditioning
and heating equipment, packaged terminal air conditioners (PTACs) and
packaged terminal heat pumps (PTHPs), warm-air furnaces, packaged
boilers, storage water heaters, instantaneous water heaters, and
unfired hot water storage tanks. Id. In doing so, EPCA established
Federal energy conservation standards that generally correspond to the
levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1, Energy Standard for Buildings Except
Low-Rise Residential Buildings, as in effect on October 24, 1992 (i.e.,
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-1989), for each type of covered equipment listed
in 42 U.S.C. 6313(a). EISA 2007 further amended EPCA by adding
definitions and setting minimum standards for single-package vertical
air conditioners (SPVACs) and single-package vertical heat pumps
(SPVHPs). (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(10)(A)) The standards for SPVACs and
SPVHPs established by EISA 2007 corresponded to the levels contained in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2004, which originated as addendum ``d'' to
Standard 90.1-2001.
In acknowledgement of technological changes that yield energy
efficiency benefits, Congress directed DOE through EPCA to consider
amending the existing Federal energy efficiency standard for each type
of equipment listed, each time ASHRAE Standard 90.1 is amended with
respect to such equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)) For each type of
equipment, EPCA directs that if ASHRAE Standard 90.1 is amended,\3\ DOE
must adopt amended 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 level as a national
standard would produce significant additional energy savings and be
technologically feasible and economically justified. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)) If DOE decides to adopt as a national standard the
minimum efficiency levels 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)) However, if DOE determines that a more stringent
standard is justified under 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(II), then DOE
must establish such more stringent standard not later than 30 months
after publication of the amended ASHRAE Standard 90.1. (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(B))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Although EPCA does not explicitly define the term
``amended'' in the context of ASHRAE Standard 90.1, DOE provided its
interpretation of what would constitute an ``amended standard'' in a
final rule published in the Federal Register on March 7, 2007
(hereafter referred to as the ``March 2007 final rule''). 72 FR
10038. In that rule, DOE stated that the statutory trigger requiring
DOE to adopt uniform national standards based on ASHRAE action is
for ASHRAE to change a standard for any of the equipment listed in
EPCA section 342(a)(6)(A)(i) (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(i)) by
increasing the energy efficiency level for that equipment type. Id.
at 10042. In other words, if the revised ASHRAE Standard 90.1 leaves
the standard level unchanged or lowers the standard, as compared to
the level specified by the national standard adopted pursuant to
EPCA, DOE does not have the authority to conduct a rulemaking to
consider a higher standard for that equipment pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(A). DOE subsequently reiterated this position in a final
rule published in the Federal Register on July 22, 2009. 74 FR
36312, 36313.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, EISA 2007 amended EPCA to require that DOE review the
most recently published ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1 with respect to
single-package vertical air conditioners and single-package vertical
heat pumps in accordance with the procedures established for ASHRAE
products under paragraph 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6). (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(10)(B)) However, DOE believes that this requirement is separate
and independent from the requirement described in the paragraph above
for all ASHRAE products and that it requires DOE to evaluate potential
standards higher than the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 level for single-
package vertical air conditioners and heat pumps, even if the
efficiency levels for SPVACs and SPVHPs have not changed since the last
version of ASHRAE Standard 90.1.
As a preliminary step in the process of reviewing the changes to
ASHRAE Standard 90.1, EPCA directs DOE to publish in the Federal
Register for public comment an analysis of the energy savings potential
of amended energy efficiency standards, within 180 days after ASHRAE
Standard 90.1 is amended with respect to any of the covered products
specified under 42 U.S.C. 6313(a). (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A))
On October 29, 2010, ASHRAE officially released for distribution
and made public ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010.\4\ This action by ASHRAE
triggered DOE's obligations under 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6), as outlined
above. This NODA embodies the analysis of the energy savings potential
of amended energy efficiency standards, as required under 42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(A)(i). This NODA also addresses DOE's obligations under 42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(10)(B) to consider the most recently published ASHRAE/
IES Standard 90.1 with respect to single-package vertical air
conditioners and single-package vertical heat pumps in accordance with
the procedures established for ASHRAE products under paragraph 42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ This industry standard is developed with input from a number
of organizations--most prominently ASHRAE, the American National
Standards Institute (ANSI), and the Illuminating Engineering Society
of North America (IESNA). Therefore, this document may sometime be
referred to more formally as ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1-2010.
See http://www.ashrae.org for more information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Purpose of the Notice of Data Availability
As explained above, DOE is publishing today's NODA as a preliminary
step pursuant to EPCA's requirements for DOE to consider amended energy
conservation standards for certain types of commercial equipment
covered by ASHRAE Standard 90.1, whenever ASHRAE amends its standard to
increase the energy efficiency level for that equipment type. This NODA
also addresses the requirements to consider amended energy conservation
standards for SPVACs and SPVHPs under 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(10)(B).
Specifically, this NODA presents for public comment DOE's analysis of
the potential energy savings estimates for amended national energy
conservation standards for these types of commercial equipment based
on: (1) The amended efficiency levels contained within ASHRAE Standard
90.1-2010,\5\ and (2) more stringent efficiency levels. DOE describes
these analyses and preliminary conclusions and seeks input from
interested parties, including the submission of data and other relevant
information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ For SPVACs and SPVHPs, ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 did not
change the efficiency levels from the Federal standards, so DOE did
not review ASHRAE Standard 90.1 levels for those equipment classes
for that purpose, and only estimated potential energy savings for
more stringent efficiency levels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE is not required by EPCA to review additional changes in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2010 for those equipment types where ASHRAE did not
increase the efficiency level. For those types of equipment for which
efficiency levels clearly did not change, DOE has conducted no further
analysis (with the exception of SPVACs and SPVHPs, for which EPCA
requires DOE to review standard levels regardless of whether there was
a change to ASHRAE Standard 90.1). However, for certain
[[Page 25625]]
equipment classes of ASHRAE covered equipment, DOE found that while
ASHRAE had made changes in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010, it was not
immediately clear that the revisions to Standard 90.1 would increase
the efficiency requirement in that Standard as compared to the existing
Federal energy conservation standards. For example, for commercial
warm-air furnaces, ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 changes the efficiency
metric to thermal efficiency from combustion efficiency, which was the
metric used in the previous version of ASHRAE Standard 90.1 (i.e.,
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2007). However, as discussed in section II.A of
this NODA, the change does not result in an increase to the required
efficiency, so DOE did not perform additional analysis for that
equipment. Therefore, DOE carefully examined the changes for such
products in ASHRAE Standard 90.1 in order to thoroughly evaluate the
amendments in ASHRAE 90.1-2010, thereby permitting DOE to determine
what action, if any, is required under its statutory mandate.
Section II of this notice contains a discussion of DOE's evaluation
of each ASHRAE equipment type for which energy conservation standards
have been set pursuant to EPCA (``covered equipment''), in order for
DOE to determine whether the amendments in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010
have resulted in increased efficiency levels. For covered equipment
types determined to have increased efficiency levels in ASHRAE Standard
90.1-2010, DOE subjected that equipment to further analysis as
discussed in section III of this NODA.
In summary, the energy savings analysis presented in this NODA is a
preliminary step required under 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(i) and
6313(a)(10)(B). After review of the public comments on this NODA, if
DOE determines that the amended efficiency levels in ASHRAE Standard
90.1-2010 have the potential for additional energy savings for types of
equipment currently covered by uniform national standards, DOE will
commence a rulemaking to consider amended standards, based upon either
the efficiency levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 or more-stringent
efficiency levels which would be expected to result in significant
additional conservation of energy and are technologically feasible and
economically justified. In conducting such rulemaking, DOE will address
the general rulemaking requirements for all energy conservation
standards, such as the anti-backsliding provision \6\ (42 U.S.C.
6316(a); 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(1)), the criteria for making a determination
that a standard is economically justified \7\ (42 U.S.C. 6316(a); 42
U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)-(ii)), and the prohibition on making
unavailable existing products with performance characteristics
generally available in the U.S.\8\ (42 U.S.C. 6316(a); 42 U.S.C.
6295(o)(4)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ EPCA contains what is commonly known as an ``anti-
backsliding'' provision. (42 U.S.C. 6316(a); 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(1))
This provision mandates that the Secretary not prescribe any amended
standard that either increases the maximum allowable energy use or
decreases the minimum required energy efficiency of covered
equipment.
\7\ In deciding whether a more stringent standard is
economically justified, DOE must review comments on the proposed
standard, and then determine whether the benefits of the standard
exceed its burdens by considering the following seven factors to the
greatest extent practicable:
(1) The economic impact on manufacturers and consumers subject
to the standard;
(2) The savings in operating costs throughout the estimated
average life of the product in the type (or class), compared to any
increase in the price, initial charges, or maintenance expenses of
the products 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 product utility or performance likely to
result from the standard;
(5) The impact of any lessening of competition, as determined in
writing by the Attorney General, likely to result from the standard;
(6) The need for national energy conservation; and
(7) Other factors the Secretary considers relevant.
(42 U.S.C. 6316(a); 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)-(ii)).
\8\ The Secretary may not prescribe an amended standard if
interested persons have established by a preponderance of evidence
that the amended standard would likely result in unavailability in
the U.S. of any covered product type or class of performance
characteristics, such as reliability, features, capacities, sizes,
and volumes that are substantially similar to those generally
available in the U.S. at the time of the Secretary's finding. (42
U.S.C. 6316(a); 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(4)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Background
1. ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010
As noted above, ASHRAE released a new version of ASHRAE Standard
90.1 on October 29, 2010. The ASHRAE standard addresses efficiency
levels for many types of commercial heating, ventilating, air-
conditioning (HVAC), and water-heating equipment covered by EPCA.
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 revised the efficiency levels for certain
commercial equipment, but for the remaining equipment, ASHRAE left in
place the preexisting levels (i.e. the efficiency levels specified in
EPCA or the efficiency levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2007).
Table I.1 below shows the equipment classes (and corresponding
efficiency levels) where ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 efficiency levels
differed from the previous version of ASHRAE Standard 90.1 (i.e.,
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2007), as well as the requirements for SPVAC and
SPVHP equipment (which were unchanged in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 but
which nonetheless must be addressed in this rulemaking for the reasons
discussed above). Table I.1 also displays the existing Federal energy
conservation standards and the corresponding standard levels in the
latest version of ASHRAE Standard 90.1 for those equipment classes.
Section II of this document assesses each of these equipment types to
determine whether the amendments in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010
constitute increased energy efficiency levels, as would necessitate
further analysis of the potential energy savings from amended Federal
energy conservation standards, the conclusions of which are presented
in the final column of Table I.1.
[[Page 25626]]
Table I.1--Federal Energy Conservation Standards and Energy Efficiency Levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 for
Specific Types of Commercial Equipment *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Energy efficiency Energy efficiency Federal energy Energy-savings
ASHRAE equipment class ** levels in ASHRAE levels in ASHRAE conservation potential analysis
standard 90.1-2007 standard 90.1-2010 standards required?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commercial Warm-Air Furnaces
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gas-Fired Commercial Warm-Air Ec = 80% Et = 80% Et = 80%.......... No. See section
furnace. Interrupted or Interrupted or II.A.
intermittent intermittent
ignition device, ignition device,
jacket losses not jacket losses not
exceeding 0.75% of exceeding 0.75%
input rating, of input rating,
power vent or flue power vent or
damper ***. flue damper ***.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commercial Package Air-Conditioning and Heating Equipment--Water-Cooled
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Water-cooled Air Conditioner, 11.5 EER........... 12.1 EER (as of 6/ 11.5 EER.......... Yes. See section
>=65,000 and <135,000 Btu/h, 1/11). II.B.1.
Electric Resistance Heating or
No Heating.
Water-cooled Air Conditioner, 11.3 EER........... 11.9 EER (as of 6/ 11.3 EER.......... Yes. See section
>=65,000 and <135,000 Btu/h, 1/11). II.B.1.
All Other Heating.
Water-cooled Air Conditioner, 11.0 EER........... 12.5 EER (as of 6/ 11.0 EER.......... Yes. See section
>=135,000 and <240,000 Btu/h, 1/11). II.B.1.
Electric Resistance Heating or
No Heating.
Water-cooled Air Conditioner, 10.8 EER........... 12.3 EER (as of 6/ 11.0 EER.......... Yes. See section
>=135,000 and <240,000 Btu/h, 1/11). II.B.1.
All Other Heating.
Water-cooled Air Conditioner, 11.0 EER........... 12.4 EER (as of 6/ 11.0 EER.......... Yes. See section
>=240,000 Btu/h, Electric 1/11). II.B.1.
Resistance Heating or No
Heating.
Water-cooled Air Conditioner, 10.8 EER........... 12.2 EER (as of 6/ 10.8 EER.......... Yes. See section
>=240,000 Btu/h, All Other 1/11). II.B.1.
Heating.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commercial Package Air-Conditioning and Heating Equipment--Evaporatively-Cooled
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Evaporatively-cooled Air 11.5 EER........... 12.1 EER (as of 6/ 11.5 EER.......... Yes. See section
Conditioner, >=65,000 and 1/11). II.B.2.
<135,000 Btu/h, Electric
Resistance Heating or No
Heating.
Evaporatively-cooled Air 11.3 EER........... 11.9 EER (as of 6/ 11.3 EER.......... Yes. See section
Conditioner, >=65,000 and 1/11). II.B.2.
<135,000 Btu/h, All Other
Heating.
Evaporatively-cooled Air 11.0 EER........... 12.0 EER (as of 6/ 11.0 EER.......... Yes. See section
Conditioner, >=135,000 and 1/11). II.B.2.
<240,000 Btu/h, Electric
Resistance Heating or No
Heating.
Evaporatively-cooled Air 10.8 EER........... 11.8 EER (as of 6/ 11.0 EER.......... Yes. See section
Conditioner, >=135,000 and 1/11). II.B.2.
<240,000 Btu/h, All Other
Heating.
Evaporatively-cooled Air 11.0 EER........... 11.9 EER (as of 6/ 11.0 EER.......... Yes. See section
Conditioner, >=240,000 and 1/11). II.B.2.
<760,000 Btu/h, Electric
Resistance Heating or No
Heating.
Evaporatively-cooled Air 10.8 EER........... 11.7 EER[dagger] 10.8 EER.......... Yes. See section
Conditioner, >=240,000 and (as of 6/1/11). II.B.2.
<760,000 Btu/h, All Other
Heating.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commercial Package Air-Conditioning and Heating Equipment--VRF Systems[dagger][dagger]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VRF Air Conditioners, Air- N/A................ 13.0 SEER......... 13.0 SEER......... No. See section
cooled, <65,000 Btu/h. II.B.3.
VRF Air Conditioners, Air- N/A................ 11.2 EER.......... 11.2 EER.......... No. See section
cooled, >=65,000 and <135,000 II.B.3.
Btu/h, Electric Resistance or
No Heating.
VRF Air Conditioners, Air- N/A................ 11.0 EER.......... 11.0 EER.......... No. See section
cooled, >=135,000 and <240,000 II.B.3.
Btu/h, Electric Resistance or
No Heating.
[[Page 25627]]
VRF Air Conditioners, Air- N/A................ 10.0 EER.......... 10.0 EER.......... No. See section
cooled, >=240,000 Btu/h, II.B.3.
Electric Resistance or No
Heating.
VRF Heat Pumps, Air-cooled, N/A................ 13.0 SEER, 7.7 13.0 SEER, 7.7 No. See section
<65,000 Btu/h. HSPF. HSPF. II.B.3.
VRF Heat Pumps, Air-cooled, N/A................ 11.0 EER, 3.3 COP. 11.0 EER, 3.3 COP. No. See section
>=65,000 and <135,000 Btu/h, II.B.3.
without heat recovery,
Electric Resistance or No
Heating.
VRF Heat Pumps, Air-cooled, N/A................ 10.8 EER, 3.2 COP. 11.0 EER (electric No. See section
>=65,000 and <135,000 Btu/h, resistance II.B.3.
with heat recovery, Electric heating), 10.8
Resistance or No Heating. EER (no electric
resistance
heating)[dagger][
dagger][dagger]
3.3 COP.
VRF Heat Pumps, Air-cooled, N/A................ 10.6 EER, 3.2 COP. 10.6 EER, 3.2 COP. No. See section
>=135,000 and <240,000 Btu/h, II.B.3.
without heat recovery,
Electric Resistance or No
Heating.
VRF Heat Pumps, Air-cooled, N/A................ 10.4 EER, 3.2 COP. 10.6 EER (electric No. See section
>=135,000 and <240,000 Btu/h, resistance II.B.3.
with heat recovery, Electric heating), 10.4
Resistance or No Heating. (no electric
resistance
heating)[dagger][
dagger][dagger]
3.2 COP.
VRF Heat Pumps, Air-cooled, N/A................ 9.5 EER, 3.2 COP.. 9.5 EER, 3.2 COP.. No. See section
>=240,000 Btu/h, without heat II.B.3.
recovery, Electric Resistance
or No Heating.
VRF Heat Pumps, Air-cooled, N/A................ 9.3 EER, 3.2 COP.. 9.5 EER (electric No. See section
>=240,000 Btu/h, with heat resistance II.B.3.
recovery, Electric Resistance heating), 9.3 EER
or No Heating. (no electric
resistance
heating)[dagger][
dagger][dagger]
3.2 COP.
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source, N/A................ 12.0 EER, 4.2 COP. 11.2 EER (<17,000 Yes[diam][diam][di
<65,000 Btu/h, without heat Btu/ am] for <17,000
recovery. h)[dagger][dagger Btu. No for
], 12.0 EER >=17,000 Btu/h
(>=17,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/
and <65,000 Btu/ h. See section
h) 4.2 COP. II.B.3.
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source, N/A................ 11.8 EER, 4.2 COP. 11.2 EER (< 17,000 Yes[diam][diam][di
<65,000 Btu/h, with heat Btu/ am] for <17,000
recovery. h)[dagger][dagger Btu, No for
] 12.0 EER (>= >=17,000 Btu/h
17,000 Btu/h and and <65,000 Btu/
<65,000 Btu/h), h, See section
4.2 COP. II.B.3,
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source, N/A................ 12.0 EER, 4.2 COP. 12.0 EER, 4.2 COP. No. See section
>=65,000 and <135,000 Btu/h, II.B.3.
without heat recovery.
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source, N/A................ 11.8 EER, 4.2 COP. 12.0 EER, 4.2 COP. No. See section
>=65,000 and <135,000 Btu/h, II.B.3.
with heat recovery.
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source, N/A................ 10.0 EER, 3.9 COP. N/A............... Yes[diam][diam][di
>=135,000 Btu/h, without heat am]. See section
recovery. II.B.3.
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source, N/A................ 9.8 EER, 3.9 COP.. N/A............... Yes[diam][diam][di
>=135,000 Btu/h, with heat am]. See section
recovery. II.B.3.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commercial Package Air-Conditioning and Heating Equipment--PTACs and PTHPs[Dagger][Dagger]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Package Terminal Air EER = 11.0......... EER = 11.7 (as of EER = 11.7........ No. See section
Conditioner, <7,000 Btu/h, 10/8/12). II.B.4.
Standard Size (New
Construction)[Dagger][Dagger].
Package Terminal Air EER = 12.5--(0.213 EER = 13.8--(0.300 EER = 13.8--(0.300 No. See section
Conditioner, >=7,000 and x Cap[diam]). x Cap[diam]) (as x Cap[diam]). II.B.4.
<15,000 Btu/h, Standard Size of 10/8/12).
(New
Construction)[Dagger][Dagger][
Dagger].
Package Terminal Air EER = 9.3.......... EER = 9.3......... EER = 9.3......... No. See section
Conditioner, >15,000 Btu/h, II.B.4.
Standard Size (New
Construction)[Dagger][Dagger][
Dagger].
Package Terminal Heat Pump, EER = 10.8, COP = EER = 11.9, COP = EER = 11.9, COP = No. See section
<7,000 Btu/h, Standard Size 3.0. 3.3 (as of 10/8/ 3.3. II.B.4.
(New 12).
Construction)[Dagger][Dagger][
Dagger].
[[Page 25628]]
Package Terminal Heat Pump, EER = 12.3--(0.213 EER = 14.0--(0.300 EER = 14.0--(0.300 No. See section
>=7,000 and <15,000 Btu/h, x Cap[diam]), COP x Cap[diam]), COP x Cap[diam]), COP II.B.4.
Standard Size (New = 3.2--(0.026 x = 3.7--(0.052 x = 3.7--(0.052 x
Construction)[Dagger][Dagger][ Cap[diam]). Cap[diam]) (as of Cap[diam]).
Dagger]. 10/8/12).
Package Terminal Heat Pump, EER = 9.1, COP = EER = 9.5, COP = EER = 9.5, COP = No. See section
>15,000 Btu/h, Standard Size 2.8. 2.9. 2.9. II.B.4.
(New
Construction)[Dagger][Dagger][
Dagger].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commercial Package Air-Conditioning and Heating Equipment--SDHV and TTW
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Through-the-Wall, Air-cooled 12.0 SEER, 7.4 HSPF 13.0 SEER, 7.4 13.0 SEER, 7.7 No. See section
Heat Pumps, <=30,000 Btu/h. HSPF. HSPF. II.B.5.
Small-Duct, High-Velocity, Air- 10.0 SEER, 6.8 HSPF N/A[diam][diam]... 13.0 SEER, 7.7 No. See section
cooled Heat Pumps, <65,000 Btu/ HSPF. II.B.5.
h.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commercial Package Air-Conditioning and Heating Equipment--SPVACs and SPVHPs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Single-Packaged Vertical Air 9.0 EER............ 9.0 EER........... 9.0 EER........... Yes. See section
Conditioners, <65,000 Btu/h. II.B.6.
Single-Packaged Vertical Air 8.9 EER............ 8.9 EER........... 8.9 EER........... Yes. See section
Conditioners, >=65,000 and II.B.6.
<135,000 Btu/h.
Single-Packaged Vertical Air 8.6 EER............ 8.6 EER........... 8.6 EER........... Yes. See section
Conditioners, >=65,000 and II.B.6.
<240,000 Btu/h.
Single-Packaged Vertical Heat 9.0 EER, 3.0 COP... 9.0 EER, 3.0 COP.. 9.0 EER, 3.0 COP.. Yes. See section
Pumps, <65,000 Btu/h. II.B.6.
Single-Packaged Vertical Heat 8.9 EER, 3.0 COP... 8.9 EER, 3.0 COP.. 8.9 EER, 3.0 COP.. Yes. See section
Pumps, >=65,000 and <135,000 II.B.6.
Btu/h.
Single-Packaged Vertical Heat 8.6 EER, 2.9 COP... 8.6 EER, 2.9 COP.. 8.6 EER, 2.9 COP.. Yes. See section
Pumps, >=65,000 and <240,000 II.B.6.
Btu/h.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air Conditioners and Condensing Units Serving Computer Rooms
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air conditioners, air-cooled, N/A................ 2.20 SCOP N/A............... Yes[diam][diam][di
<65,000 Btu/h. (downflow), 2.09 am]. See section
SCOP (upflow). II.C.
Air conditioners, air-cooled, N/A................ 2.10 SCOP N/A............... Yes[diam][diam][di
>=65,000 and <240,000 Btu/h. (downflow), 1.99 am]. See section
SCOP (upflow). II.C.
Air conditioners, air-cooled, N/A................ 1.90 SCOP N/A............... Yes[diam][diam][di
>=240,000 Btu/h. (downflow), 1.79 am]. See section
SCOP (upflow). II.C.
Air conditioners, water-cooled, N/A................ 2.60 SCOP N/A............... Yes[diam][diam][di
<65,000 Btu/h. (downflow), 2.49 am]. See section
SCOP (upflow). II.C
Air conditioners, water-cooled, N/A................ 2.50 SCOP N/A............... Yes[diam][diam][di
>=65,000 and <240,000 Btu/h. (downflow), 2.39 am]. See section
SCOP (upflow). II.C.
Air conditioners, water-cooled, N/A................ 2.40 SCOP N/A............... Yes[diam][diam][di
>=240,000 Btu/h. (downflow), 2.29 am]. See section
SCOP (upflow). II.C.
Air conditioners, water-cooled N/A................ 2.55 SCOP N/A............... Yes[diam][diam][di
with fluid economizer, <65,000 (downflow), 2.44 am]. See section
Btu/h. SCOP (upflow). II.C.
Air conditioners, water-cooled N/A................ 2.45 SCOP N/A............... Yes[diam][diam][di
with fluid economizer, (downflow), 2.34 am]. See section
>=65,000 and <240,000 Btu/h. SCOP (upflow). II.C.
Air conditioners, water-cooled N/A................ 2.35 SCOP N/A............... Yes[diam][diam][di
with fluid economizer, (downflow), 2.24 am]. See section
>=240,000 Btu/h. SCOP (upflow). II.C.
Air conditioners, glycol- N/A................ 2.50 SCOP N/A............... Yes[diam][diam][di
cooled, <65,000 Btu/h. (downflow), 2.39 am]. See section
SCOP (upflow). II.C.
Air conditioners, glycol- N/A................ 2.15 SCOP N/A............... Yes[diam][diam][di
cooled, >=65,000 and <240,000 (downflow), 2.04 am]. See section
Btu/h. SCOP (upflow). II.C.
Air conditioners, glycol- N/A................ 2.10 SCOP N/A............... Yes[diam][diam][di
cooled, >=240,000 Btu/h. (downflow), 1.99 am]. See section
SCOP (upflow). II.C.
Air conditioners, glycol-cooled N/A................ 2.45 SCOP N/A............... Yes[diam][diam][di
with fluid economizer, <65,000 (downflow), 2.34 am]. See section
Btu/h. SCOP (upflow). II.C.
[[Page 25629]]
Air conditioners, glycol-cooled N/A................ 2.10 SCOP N/A............... Yes[diam][diam][di
with fluid economizer, (downflow), 1.99 am]. See section
>=65,000 and <240,000 Btu/h. SCOP (upflow). II.C.
Air conditioners, glycol-cooled N/A................ 2.05 SCOP N/A............... Yes[diam][diam][di
with fluid economizer, (downflow), 1.94 am]. See section
>=240,000 Btu/h. SCOP (upflow). II.C.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* ``Ec'' means combustion efficiency; ``Et'' means thermal efficiency; ``EER'' means energy efficiency ratio;
``SEER'' means seasonal energy efficiency ratio; ``HSPF'' means heating seasonal performance factor; ``COP''
means coefficient of performance; ``Btu/h'' means British thermal units per hour; and ``SCOP'' means sensible
coefficient of performance.
** ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 equipment classes may differ from the equipment classes defined in DOE's
regulations, but no loss of coverage will occur (i.e., all previously covered DOE equipment classes remained
covered equipment).
*** A vent damper is an acceptable alternative to a flue damper for those furnaces that draw combustion air from
conditioned space.
[dagger] ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 specifies this efficiency level as 12.2 EER. However, as explained in section
II.B of this NODA, DOE believes this level was a mistake and that the correct level is 11.7 EER.
[dagger][dagger] Variable Refrigerant Flow (VRF) systems are newly defined equipment classes in ASHRAE Standard
90.1-2010. As discussed in section II.B.3 of this NODA, DOE believes these systems are currently covered by
Federal standards for commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment.
[dagger][dagger][dagger] For these equipment classes, ASHRAE sets lower efficiency requirements for equipment
with heat recovery systems. DOE believes systems with heat recovery and electric resistance heating would be
required to meet the current Federal standard for equipment with electric resistance heating (i.e., the
Federal standard level shown in the table). However, for equipment with heat recovery and no electric
resistance heating, DOE believes heat recovery would be an ``other'' heating type allowing for a 0.2 EER
reduction in the Federal minimum requirement.
[Dagger] The Federal energy conservation standards for this equipment class are specified differently for
equipment with cooling capacity <17,000 Btu/h. However, ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 does not distinguish this
equipment class.
[Dagger][Dagger] For equipment rated according to the DOE test procedure, all EER values must be rated at 95
[deg]F outdoor dry-bulb temperature for air-cooled products and evaporatively-cooled products, and at 85
[deg]F entering water temperature for water-cooled products. All COP values must be rated at 47 [deg]F outdoor
dry-bulb temperature for air-cooled products, and at 70 [deg]F entering water temperature for water-source
heat pumps.
[Dagger][Dagger][Dagger] ``Standard size'' refers to PTAC or PTHP equipment with wall sleeve dimensions >=16
inches high, or >=42 inches wide.
[diam] ``Cap'' means cooling capacity in kBtu/h at 95[deg]F outdoor dry-bulb temperature.
[diam][diam] ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 includes an efficiency level of 10.0 SEER for these products. However, as
explained in section II.B.5 of this NODA, DOE believes that ASHRAE did not intend to set an efficiency level
for these products.
[diam][diam][diam] An energy-savings analysis for this class of equipment was not conducted due to either a lack
of data or because there is no equipment on the market that would fall into this equipment class.
2. ASHRAE Standard 90.1 Proposed Addenda
Since officially releasing ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 on October 29,
2010, ASHRAE has released three proposed addenda relevant to today's
NODA: Proposed Addendum h, Proposed Addendum i, and Proposed Addendum
j. ASHRAE released all three addenda for first public review in March
2011, and the 45-day public review period ends May 9, 2011. Proposed
Addendum h would remove the small-duct high-velocity (SDHV) product
class from one of the tables of standards and correct the minimum
efficiencies for through-the-wall products. In addition, it would amend
the minimum energy efficiency standards (and change the product class
names) for water-to-air heat pumps, including some product classes
regulated by DOE (e.g., ``water-source'' would become ``water-to-air:
Water loop''), with a proposed effective date immediately upon
publication of the addendum.\9\ Proposed Addendum i would amend the
minimum energy efficiency standards for SPVACs and SPVHPs. It would
also add a new product class designed to address SPVACs and SPVHPs in
space-constrained applications. These would become effective January 1,
2012. Proposed Addendum j would remove SDHV from both tables of
standards in which it was listed, and would also correct the EER for
one product class of evaporatively-cooled units, as discussed in
section II.B.5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Ground water source (water to air: ground water) and ground
source (brine to air: Ground loop) heat pumps are not covered
products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because these proposed addenda have not yet been approved, DOE is
not obligated to address these changes until the addenda are formally
adopted and ASHRAE issues the next version of Standard 90.1 (expected
in 2013). However, DOE acknowledges that these proposed addenda may
affect the market which is addressed in today's NODA. As a result, DOE
seeks comments on what impact, if any, these proposed addenda might
have, if adopted, on the national energy savings analysis presented in
today's NODA. This is Issue 1 under ``Issues on Which DOE Seeks
Comment'' in section IV.B of this NODA.
D. Summary of DOE's Preliminary Assessment of Equipment for Energy-
Savings Analysis
DOE has reached a preliminary conclusion for each of the classes of
commercial equipment in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 addressed in today's
NODA. For each class of commercial equipment addressed in this NODA,
section II presents DOE's initial determination as to whether ASHRAE
increased the efficiency level for a given type of product, a change
which would require an energy-savings potential analysis. Since DOE is
not required by EPCA to review additional changes in ASHRAE Standard
90.1-2010 for those equipment types where ASHRAE did not increase the
efficiency level, DOE has conducted no further analysis for those types
of equipment where efficiency levels clearly did not change.
Additionally, for equipment where ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 has
increased the level in comparison to the previous version of ASHRAE
Standard 90.1, but does not exceed the current Federal standard level,
DOE does not have the authority to conduct a rulemaking to consider a
higher standard for that equipment pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)
and did not perform an potential energy savings analysis. For those
equipment classes where ASHRAE increased the efficiency level (in
comparison to the Federal standard), DOE performed an analysis of the
energy-savings potential,
[[Page 25630]]
unless DOE found no products in the market in that equipment class (in
which case there is no potential for energy savings) or there was a
significant lack of data and information available that would allow DOE
to reasonably estimate the potential for energy savings.
Based upon DOE's analysis discussed in section II, DOE has
determined that ASHRAE increased the efficiency level for the following
equipment classes:
Small, Large, and Very Large Water-cooled Air
Conditioners;
Small, Large, and Very Large Evaporatively-cooled Air
Conditioners;
Certain Small (only those with cooling capacity < 17,000
Btu/h) and Large Variable Refrigerant Flow Water-Source Heat Pumps; and
Air Conditioners and Condensing Units Serving Computer
Rooms.
Out of those equipment classes, when DOE found that equipment is
available on the market and adequate information exists to reasonably
estimate potential energy savings, DOE performed the analysis of the
energy-savings potential which is described in section III. However,
when DOE did not find equipment available on the market (such as for
small variable refrigerant flow water-source heat pumps with capacities
below 17,000 Btu/h), or found that adequate efficiency and/or shipments
data was unavailable (such as for air conditioners and condensing units
serving computer rooms), DOE did not perform a potential energy savings
analysis.
In addition, although ASHRAE did not increase the efficiency level
for SPVACs and SPVHPs, DOE is required by EPCA to consider amending the
energy conservation standards for these equipment classes using the
procedures set forth by 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6) for ASHRAE products.
Accordingly, DOE also performed an energy-savings analysis for SPVACs
and SPVHPs and presents the results in section III.
II. Discussion of Changes in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010
Before beginning an analysis of the potential energy savings that
would result from adopting the efficiency levels specified by ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2010 or more-stringent efficiency levels, DOE first
determined whether or not the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 efficiency
levels actually represented an increase in efficiency above the current
Federal standard levels, thereby triggering DOE action. This section
contains a discussion of each equipment class where the ASHRAE Standard
90.1-2010 efficiency level differs from the current Federal standard
level, along with DOE's preliminary conclusion regarding the
appropriate action to take with respect to that equipment. In addition,
this section contains a discussion of DOE's determination with regard
to newly created equipment classes in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 (i.e.,
VRF commercial package air-conditioning and heating equipment and air
conditioners serving computer rooms), and DOE's decisions with regard
to the requirements for analyzing SPVACs and SPVHPs in EPCA. Finally,
this section provides a brief discussion of the test procedure updates
contained in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010.
A. Commercial Warm-Air Furnaces
Under 42 U.S.C. 6311(11)(A), a ``warm air furnace'' is defined as
``a self-contained oil- or gas-fired furnace designed to supply heated
air through ducts to spaces that require it and includes combination
warm air furnace/electric air-conditioning units but does not include
unit heaters and duct furnaces.'' In its regulations, DOE defines a
``commercial warm air furnace'' as a ``warm air furnace that is
industrial equipment, and that has a capacity (rated maximum input) of
225,000 Btu per hour or more.'' 10 CFR 431.72.
Gas-fired commercial warm-air furnaces are fueled by either natural
gas or propane. The Federal minimum energy conservation standard for
commercial gas-fired warm-air furnaces corresponds to the efficiency
level in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-1989, which specifies for equipment with
a capacity of 225,000 Btu/h or more, the thermal efficiency at the
maximum rated capacity (rated maximum input) must be no less than 80
percent. 10 CFR 431.77(a). The Federal minimum energy conservation
standard for gas-fired commercial warm-air furnaces applies to
equipment manufactured on or after January 1, 1994. 10 CFR 431.77.
The current Federal standard for gas-fired commercial warm-air
furnaces is in terms of ``thermal efficiency,'' which is defined as
``100 percent minus percent flue loss.'' 10 CFR 431.72. The previous
version of ASHRAE Standard 90.1 (i.e., ASHRAE 90.1-2007) specified a
minimum efficiency level of 80 percent combustion efficiency, but it
defined ``combustion efficiency'' as ``100 percent minus flue losses''
in the footnote to the efficiency table for commercial warm-air gas-
fired furnaces, which references ANSI Z21.47-2001, ``Standard for Gas-
Fired Central Furnaces,'' as the test procedure. In its analysis for
the 2009 notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) regarding standards for
ASHRAE Products in which DOE considered the updates in ASHRAE Standard
90.1-2007, DOE noted that upon reviewing the efficiency levels and
methodology specified in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2007, it concluded that
ASHRAE changed the efficiency metric for gas-fired commercial warm-air
furnaces in name only, and not in the actual test or calculation
method. 74 FR 12000, 12008-09 (March 20, 2009). Therefore, DOE stated
its understanding that despite using the term ``combustion efficiency''
rather than ``thermal efficiency,'' ASHRAE did not intend to change the
substance of the metric. Consequently, DOE left the existing Federal
energy conservation standards in place for gas-fired commercial warm-
air furnaces, which specify a ``thermal efficiency'' of 80 percent
using the definition of ``thermal efficiency'' presented at 10 CFR
431.72.
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 updated the tabulated requirements for
gas-fired commercial warm-air furnaces to specify a minimum efficiency
level of 80 percent ``thermal efficiency'' and references ANSI Z21.47-
2006, ``Standard for Gas-Fired Central Furnaces,'' as the test
procedure. ANSI Z21.47-2006 defines ``thermal efficiency'' as ``100
percent minus flue losses,'' which is the same as DOE's definition of
``thermal efficiency'' for this equipment. Because of this, DOE
believes that the purpose of the ASHRAE metric change to ``thermal
efficiency'' was to clarify the alignment to the existing Federal
standards and the ANSI Z21.47-2006 test procedure. As a result, DOE
tentatively concluded that this change does not constitute a revision
to the actual efficiency level for gas-fired commercial warm-air
furnaces and that no further action by the Department is required.
B. Commercial Package Air-Conditioning and Heating Equipment
EPCA, as amended, defines ``commercial package air conditioning and
heating equipment'' as air-cooled, evaporatively-cooled, water-cooled,
or water source (not including ground water source) electrically
operated, unitary central air conditioners and central air conditioning
heat pumps for commercial use. (42 U.S.C. 6311(8)(A); 10 CFR 431.92)
EPCA also defines ``small,'' ``large,'' and ``very large'' commercial
package air conditioning and heating equipment based on the equipment's
rated cooling capacity. (42 U.S.C. 6311(8)(B)-(D); 10 CFR 431.92)
``Small commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment''
means equipment rated below 135,000 Btu per hour (cooling capacity).
(42 U.S.C. 6311(8)(B); 10 CFR 431.92) ``Large
[[Page 25631]]
commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment'' means
equipment rated--(i) at or above 135,000 Btu per hour; and (ii) below
240,000 Btu per hour (cooling capacity). (42 U.S.C. 6311(8)(C); 10 CFR
431.92) ``Very large commercial package air conditioning and heating
equipment'' means equipment rated--(i) at or above 240,000 Btu per
hour; and (ii) below 760,000 Btu per hour (cooling capacity). (42
U.S.C. 6311(8)(D); 10 CFR 431.92)
1. Water-Cooled Equipment
The current Federal energy conservation standards for the six
classes of water-cooled commercial package air conditioners for which
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 amended efficiency levels are shown in Table
I.1. The Federal energy conservation standards for water-cooled
equipment are differentiated based on the cooling capacity (i.e.,
small, large, or very large) and heating type (i.e., electric
resistance heating/no heating or some other type of heating). ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2010 increased the energy efficiency levels for all six
equipment classes to efficiency levels that surpass the current Federal
energy conservation standard levels. Therefore, the Department
conducted an analysis of the potential energy savings due to amended
standards for these products, which is described in section III of this
NODA.
2. Evaporatively-Cooled Equipment
The current Federal energy conservation standards for the six
classes of evaporatively-cooled commercial package air conditioners for
which ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 amended efficiency levels are shown in
Table I.1. Similar to water-cooled equipment, Federal energy
conservation standards divide evaporatively-cooled equipment based on
the cooling capacity (i.e., small, large, or very large) and heating
type (i.e., electric resistance heating/no heating or some other type
of heating). ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 increased the energy efficiency
levels for all six equipment classes to efficiency levels that surpass
the current Federal energy conservation standard levels.
DOE reviewed the market for evaporatively-cooled equipment and
could not identify any models available on the market in the ``small''
unit product class (i.e., cooling capacity < 135,000 Btu/h) and the
``large'' unit product class (i.e., cooling capacity >= 135,000 and <
240,000 Btu/h). Because there is currently no equipment in these
classes being manufactured, DOE believes there are no energy savings
associated with these classes at this time; therefore, it is not
possible to assess the potential for additional energy savings at the
levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 or more-stringent levels. Thus, DOE
did not perform a potential energy-savings analysis for the small and
large equipment classes of evaporatively-cooled commercial package air
conditioners. DOE seeks comments from interested parties on its
assessment of the market and energy savings potential for this
equipment type. This is Issue 2 under ``Issues on Which DOE Seeks
Comment'' in section IV.B of this NODA.
For very large (i.e., cooling capacity >= 240,000 Btu/h)
evaporatively-cooled air conditioners, DOE was able to identify a
number of models on the market, and, therefore, DOE conducted an
analysis of the potential energy savings for these products which is
discussed in section III. For very large evaporatively-cooled air
conditioners, ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 set the efficiency level for
equipment with electric resistance or no heating at 11.9 EER and for
equipment with all other heating at 12.2 EER. However, ASHRAE
historically has set the levels for equipment with other heating at 0.2
EER points below the efficiency levels for equipment with electric
heating or no heating, which would make the expected efficiency level
for very large evaporatively-cooled equipment with other heating 11.7
EER. In February 2011, the Department received a letter from the Air-
Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) indicating
that the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 efficiency level for very large
evaporatively-cooled equipment with other heating is incorrect, and
that the correct minimum energy efficiency standard for this category
is 11.7 EER, as would be expected given the historical ASHRAE Standard
90.1 efficiency levels for these products. (AHRI, No. 0001 at p. 1)
Further, AHRI indicated that at its winter 2011 meeting, the ASHRAE
90.1 committee approved an addendum for public review that corrects
this error. In March 2011, ASHRAE released proposed Addendum j to
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010, which corrects the value from 12.2 to 11.7
EER. Based on release of the public review draft of this addendum, the
Department has tentatively decided to analyze the potential energy
savings for this category at an ASHRAE Standard 90.1 level of 11.7 EER.
3. Variable Refrigerant Flow Equipment
ASHRAE 90.1-2010 created a separate product class for variable
refrigerant flow (VRF) air-conditioning and heating equipment. These
products are currently covered under DOE's standards for commercial air
conditioners and heat pumps, but they are not broken out as a separate
product class.
In general, a VRF system will have a single condensing unit serving
multiple evaporator coils within a building. Specific ``subclasses'' of
variable refrigerant flow heat pumps equipped with heat recovery
capability have been specified in ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2010 with
lower efficiency requirements than specified for VRF systems without
heat recovery. (Heat recovery capability provides for shuttling of heat
from one part of the building to another and allows for simultaneous
cooling and heating of different zones within a building.)
Specifically, the efficiency requirements in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010
for air-cooled VRF heat pumps with heat recovery are equivalent to the
Federal minimum energy conservation standards defined for air-cooled
heat pumps with ``all other heating system types that are integrated
into the equipment,'' and the efficiency requirements for air-cooled
VRF heat pumps without heat recovery are equivalent to the Federal
minimum standards for air-cooled heat pumps with electric or no
heating.\10\ The VRF systems with heat recovery specified by ASHRAE may
often have electric resistance heating systems, as a back-up. For air-
cooled VRF heat pump systems that have both electric resistance heating
and heat recovery heating capability, the Department has tentatively
concluded that these systems must meet the efficiency requirements
contained in EPCA for small, large, and very large air-cooled central
air-conditioning heat pumps with electric resistance heating, which are
codified at 10 CFR 431.97(b). (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(7)-(9)) In addition,
the Department has tentatively concluded that air-cooled VRF systems
without electric resistance heating but with heat recovery can qualify
as having an ``other'' means of heating and that these systems must
meet the efficiency requirements contained in EPCA for small, large,
and very large air-cooled central air-conditioning heat pumps with
other heating, which are codified at 10 CFR 431.97(b). (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(7)-(9))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Section 136 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPACT 2005;
Pub, L. 109-58) amended EPCA to include separate minimum efficiency
requirements for commercial package air-cooled air conditioners and
heating equipment with ``all other heating system types that are
integrated into the equipment'' and with electric resistance or no
heating.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table II.1 shows the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 efficiency levels
for
[[Page 25632]]
VRF water-source heat pumps in comparison to the current Federal
minimum energy conservation standards for water-source heat pumps,
which DOE has preliminarily determined would apply to VRF systems. For
water-source VRF heat pumps, ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 generally
maintains the existing energy efficiency requirements that apply to
commercial package air-conditioning and heating equipment for the VRF
systems, with several notable exceptions. For VRF water-source heat
pumps under 17,000 Btu/h and VRF water-source heat pumps over 135,000
Btu/h, ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 raises the efficiency levels above
current Federal energy conservation standards (or in the case of water-
source heat pumps over 135,000 Btu/h, ASHRAE sets standards for
products where DOE did not previously have standards). As a result, the
Department conducted further analysis for these classes. DOE began by
reviewing the current market for VRF water-source heat pumps with
cooling capacities below 17,000 Btu/h or above 135,000 Btu/h and less
than 760,000 Btu/h. The Department did not identify any models under
17,000 Btu/h on the market. DOE did identify 19 models above 135,000
Btu/h on the market and attempted to contact the manufacturer producing
most of these models, but DOE was unable to obtain EER information for
most of the models and has no shipment information for this product
class. Because DOE could not identify any VRF water-source heat pumps
being manufactured with cooling capacities below 17,000 Btu/h, DOE
believes that there are no energy savings associated with this
equipment class. Therefore, DOE did not perform a potential energy-
savings analysis for this equipment. In addition, due to the lack of
available information and data on VRF water-source heat pumps with
cooling capacities above 135,000 Btu/h at this time, the Department has
not conducted a preliminary energy saving estimate for the additional
energy savings beyond the levels anticipated in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2010 for this VRF water source heat pump product class. DOE is
requesting public comment regarding the market for this equipment and
is seeking data and information that would allow it to accurately
characterize the energy savings from amended energy conservation
standards for these products. This is identified as Issue 3 in section
IV.B ``Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment.''
In addition to the changes for the two equipment classes discussed
above, ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 includes efficiency levels for VRF
water-source heat pumps that provide for a 0.2 EER reduction in the
efficiency requirement for systems with heat recovery. However, the
current Federal minimum standards for water-source heat pumps do not
provide for any reduction in the EER requirements for equipment with
``other'' heating types. Therefore, the 0.2 EER reduction below the
current Federal standard levels for the VRF water-source heat pump
equipment classes in which ASHRAE did not raise the standard from the
existing Federal minimum for water-source heat pumps (i.e., water-
source heat pumps with cooling capacities >= 17,000 and < 65,000 Btu/h
and >= 65,000 and < 135,000 Btu/h) would result in a decrease in
stringency in comparison to current standards. As noted in section I.A,
if ASHRAE Standard 90.1 lowers its efficiency level as compared to the
Federal minimum standard level, DOE does not have the authority to
conduct a rulemaking to consider a higher standard for that equipment
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A). Therefore, DOE did not consider
the lower EER requirements for systems with heat recovery and will not
perform an analysis of those product classes.
Table II.1--Comparison of Federal Energy Conservation Standards for
Water-source Heat Pumps to ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 Requirements for
VRF Water-Source Heat Pumps
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASHRAE Standard
Federal minimum 90.1-2010
energy efficiency level
Existing Federal equipment class conservation for newly
standard established VRF
equipment class
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Water-source Heat Pump < 17,000 11.2 EER.......... 12.0 EER (without
Btu/h. heat recovery).
11.8 EER (with
heat recovery).
4.2 COP........... 4.2 COP.
Water-source Heat Pump >= 17,000 12.0 EER.......... 12.0 EER (without
and. heat recovery).
< 65,000 Btu/h.................. 11.8 EER (with
heat recovery).
4.2 COP........... 4.2 COP.
Water-source Heat Pump >= 65,000 12.0 EER.......... 12.0 EER (without
and. heat recovery).
< 135,000 Btu/h................. 11.8 EER (with
heat recovery).
4.2 COP........... 4.2 COP.
Water-source Heat Pump >= N/A............... 10.0 EER (without
135,000 and. heat recovery).
< 760,000 Btu/h................. 9.8 EER (with heat
recovery).
3.9 COP.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps
EPCA defines a ``packaged terminal air conditioner'' as ``a wall
sleeve and a separate unencased combination of heating and cooling
assemblies specified by the builder and intended for mounting through
the wall. It includes a prime source of refrigeration, separable
outdoor louvers, forced ventilation, and heating availability by
builder's choice of hot water, steam, or electricity.'' (42 U.S.C.
6311(10)(A)) EPCA defines a ``packaged terminal heat pump'' as ``a
packaged terminal air conditioner that utilizes reverse cycle
refrigeration as its prime heat source and should have supplementary
heat source available to builders with the choice of hot water, steam,
or electric resistant heat.'' (42 U.S.C. 6311(10)(B)) DOE codified
these definitions in 10 CFR 431.92 in a final rule published in the
Federal Register on October 21, 2004. 69 FR 61962, 61970.
DOE adopted amended energy conservation standards for this class of
equipment in a final rule published in the Federal Register on October
7, 2008. 73 FR 58772, 58828-30. The adopted Federal standards exceeded
the standards in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2007. These Federal standards
apply to standard size equipment manufactured on or after October 7,
2012, and non-standard size equipment manufactured on or after October
8, 2010. ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 increased the efficiency levels for
standard size equipment in comparison to the efficiency levels in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2007. However, the efficiency levels specified by
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 for these equipment classes
[[Page 25633]]
meet and do not exceed the Federal standards established by DOE in the
October 2008 final rule. Because ASHRAE seems to be harmonizing the
levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 with the Federal levels rather than
increasing the minimum efficiency, DOE has tentatively concluded that
it is not required to take action on these products at this time.
5. Small-Duct, High-Velocity, and Through-The-Wall Equipment
EPCA does not separate small-duct high-velocity (SDHV) or through-
the-wall (TTW) heat pumps from other types of small commercial package
air-conditioning and heating equipment in its definitions. (42 U.S.C.
6311(8)) Therefore, EPCA's definition of ``small commercial package air
conditioning and heating equipment'' would include SDHV and TTW heat
pumps.
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 increased some of the efficiency levels
for these classes of equipment. Specifically, ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010
increased the efficiency requirements for TTW heat pumps to 13.0 SEER
and 7.4 HSPF in comparison to the efficiency levels of 12.0 SEER and
7.4 HSPF in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2007. However, in March 2011, ASHRAE
issued Proposed Addendum h for public review that would correct the
minimum SEER for these products to 12.0 SEER. For SDHV heat pumps,
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 did not increase the cooling efficiency
requirement of 10.0 SEER beyond that in ASHRAE 90.1-2007. In addition,
although ASHRAE 90.1-2007 specified a heating efficiency requirement of
6.8 HSPF, ASHRAE 90.1-2010 did not specify any heating efficiency level
for SDHV heat pumps. However, Proposed Addenda h and j would remove the
SDHV product class from the standards tables entirely, stating: ``In
addition the small duct high velocity requirements have been dropped by
DOE and they are only allowing such systems under waiver clause so the
addendum has also made a change to remove the small duct high velocity
systems from table 6.8.1a and table 6.8.1b.'' Therefore, DOE believes
that ASHRAE did not intend to specify any efficiency levels for these
products in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010.
The DOE standards for both TTW and SDHV heat pumps, which are 13.0
SEER and 7.7 HSPF, were established for the overall equipment category
of small commercial package air-conditioning and heating equipment by
EISA 2007, which amended EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(7)(D)) Because the
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 efficiency levels for TTW equipment meet or
do not exceed the DOE standards and because DOE believes that SDHV are
no longer meant to be covered separately by ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010,
DOE has tentatively concluded that it is not required to take action on
these products at this time.
6. Single-Package Vertical Air Conditioners and Single-Package Vertical
Heat Pumps
DOE issued standards for single-package vertical air conditioner
and heat pump units (SPVUs) as part of the March 23, 2009 final rule
technical amendment in response to mandated efficiency levels for SPVUs
established in the EISA 2007 legislation. 74 FR 12058. However, SPVUs
are subject to a unique ``look back'' provision established by EISA
2007, which amended the applicable provisions of EPCA such that not
later than three years after the date of this statutory provision's
enactment (i.e., December 19, 2007), the Secretary must review the most
recently published ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1 with respect to single-
package vertical air conditioners and single-package vertical heat
pumps using the procedures established under 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6). (42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(10)(B))
As noted in section I.A, the Department interprets the provision at
42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(10)(B) as constituting a separate trigger to evaluate
standards higher than the ASHRAE Standard 90.1 level. SPVUs are
considered classes within the broader scope of small and large
commercial package air-conditioning and heating equipment; however,
because of their special status (i.e., that the efficiency levels for
this equipment were statutorily prescribed by EISA 2007), Congress
intended that DOE review them for potential energy savings and higher
standards along the lines of the 18 month time frame review for other
products (i.e., do everything in part (6) with regard to analysis, but
ignore the triggering requirement of ASHRAE Standard 90.1 changing its
efficiency levels). EPCA, as amended, directs DOE to conduct a review
of the energy savings potential sometime in the three-year interval,
and DOE believes this separate trigger is a one-time mechanism, after
which SPVUs revert to the normal ``ASHRAE trigger.'' Accordingly, DOE
has commenced analytical work on these products along with the other
equipment which is subject to the current ``ASHRAE trigger.''
Upon review of the SPVU market, DOE identified several models of
SPVUs in the small equipment class. However, DOE did not identify any
models of SPVUs in the very large category or any models of SPVHPs in
the large category. The Department identified only five models of
SPVACs in the large category, and these were all close to the upper
size limit of the small category, at 70,000 Btu/h or less. As a result
of the apparent lack of a market for very large SPVUs and large SPVHPs,
and a lack of shipment estimates for the large SPVACs, DOE conducted
complete preliminary energy saving estimates for only the small
equipment classes. Additionally, DOE used the energy saving results for
small SPVACs to derive an estimate of the potential energy savings for
large SPVACs. DOE requests comments regarding the market for SPVUs,
specifically on the market for large and very large equipment. This is
identified as Issue 4 in section IV.B ``Issues on Which DOE Seeks
Comment.''
C. Air Conditioners and Condensing Units Serving Computer Rooms
Air conditioners and condensing units serving computer rooms
operate similarly to other types of commercial packaged air
conditioners in that they provide space conditioning using a
refrigeration cycle consisting of a compressor, condenser, expansion
valve, and evaporator. However, air conditioners and condensing units
serving computer rooms are typically designed to maintain the
temperature in the conditioned space at 72 degrees Fahrenheit, and
maintain a specific relative humidity. This equipment is commonly
capable of humidifying or dehumidifying the air and then, if necessary,
reheating it to maintain a specific humidity.
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 created a separate product class for
``air conditioners and condensing units serving computer rooms,'' and
set efficiency levels using the sensible coefficient of performance
(SCOP) metric as measured using the test method in ASHRAE Standard 127-
2007, ``Method of Testing for Rating Computer and Data Processing Room
Unitary Air Conditioners.'' The product classes and efficiency levels
established in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 are shown in Table I.1 above.
Prior to this equipment having separate efficiency levels and test
procedures specified in ASHRAE Standard 90.1, DOE discussed such units
using the terminology ``computer room air conditioners'' in an August
9, 2000 NOPR (65 FR 48828, 48830-31) and an October 21, 2004 direct
final rule (69 FR 61962, 61967). In the August 2000 NOPR, DOE
determined that computer room air conditioners were not covered as part
of the commercial
[[Page 25634]]
packaged air conditioning and heating equipment classes in EPCA and
subsequently upheld this position in the October 2004 final rule. DOE
made this determination because at the time of passage of the Energy
Policy Act of 1992 (EPACT 1992, Pub. L. 102-486, which gave DOE the
authority to cover commercial package air-conditioning and heating
equipment), the statute excluded this equipment, and as a result, DOE
concluded that it lacked the authority to regulate this equipment. The
basis for DOE's decision stemmed from the scope of ASHRAE Standard
90.1, which at the time specified that the standard did not cover
``equipment and portions of building systems that use energy primarily
to provide for industrial, manufacturing, or commercial processes.''
(See section 2.3.c. of ASHRAE 90.1 standards prior to ASHRAE Standard
90.1-2010). Further, the House Report on EPACT 1992 (H.R. Rep. No. 474,
102d Cong., 2d Sess., pt. 1 at 175 (1992)) pointed out that the
efficiency standards contained in the bill were developed by ASHRAE in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1. DOE concluded that this indicated that the
efficiency standards for commercial products in EPACT 1992 would have
the same scope as the version of ASHRAE Standard 90.1 current at the
time of the legislation's enactment, which did not cover computer room
air conditioners. As a result, DOE concluded at the time that it did
not have the authority to cover computer room air conditioners.
However, DOE stated in both the NOPR and final rule that ``if some of
the relevant circumstances were to change--if, for example, ASHRAE
Standard 90.1 were to incorporate efficiency standards and test
procedures for this equipment or the equipment was to become widely
used for conventional air conditioning applications--the Department
might revisit this issue.'' 65 FR 48828, 48831 (August 9, 2000); 69 FR
61962, 61967 (Oct. 21, 2004).
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 expanded the scope from previous versions
of ASHRAE Standard 90.1 to include process loads (e.g., computer rooms)
and created a separate product class for ``air conditioners and
condensing units serving computer rooms.'' EPCA generally directs DOE
to follow ASHRAE Standard 90.1 when it is amended with respect to
certain equipment types, including commercial package air conditioning
and heating equipment. Thus, DOE has tentatively concluded that because
ASHRAE has expanded the scope of Standard 90.1 to include air
conditioners and condensing units serving computer rooms, the scope of
DOE's requirements with regard to ASHRAE products in EPCA is also
expanded to encompass these products. As such, DOE has tentatively
concluded it has the authority to review the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010
efficiency levels for air conditioners and condensing units serving
computer rooms and to establish minimum energy conservation standard
levels for this equipment. DOE seeks comment on how best to establish
minimum energy conservation standards for air conditioners and
condensing units serving computer rooms. This is identified as Issue 5
in section IV.B, ``Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment.''
Although DOE has tentatively concluded that it has the authority to
consider adopting minimum efficiency standards for air conditioners and
condensing units serving computer rooms at or above the ASHRAE Standard
90.1-2010 efficiency levels, DOE did not perform a potential energy
savings analysis for these products as a part of this NODA due to the
lack of available data. The State of California requires manufacturers
of computer room air conditioners to certify the EER of their computer
room air conditioning equipment (20 CCR 1605.3(c)(2)),\11\ and DOE
examined the information in the California Energy Commission (CEC)
appliance database \12\ for computer room air conditioners. The CEC
database contained over 300 models, indicating that there is a
potentially significant market for computer room air conditioners.
However, the database only contains efficiency information in the form
of EER, and manufacturers currently do not report SCOP in the CEC
database or in their literature. Because the efficiency levels in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 are in SCOP, the EER efficiency information
is of little use to DOE in analyzing the potential energy savings of
the SCOP efficiency levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010. Since these
equipment classes of air conditioners and condensing units serving
computer rooms and the SCOP metric specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2010 are newly-defined requirements, DOE was unable to obtain reliable
efficiency data for the majority of models or shipments data that would
allow DOE to characterize the energy savings potential of this
equipment in a reasonably accurate manner. DOE is requesting data and
information from interested parties regarding air conditioners and
condensing units serving computer rooms that could be used in
performing an energy savings analysis at a future stage of this
rulemaking (e.g., SCOP efficiency ratings, shipments information). This
is identified as Issue 6 under section IV.B ``Issues on Which DOE Seeks
Comment.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ For more information see California Code of Regulations.
Title 20, Public Utilities and Energy, Division 2, State Energy
Resources Conservation and Development Commission (August 2008)
(Available at: http://www.energy.ca.gov/2008publications/CEC-140-2008-001/CEC-140-2008-001-REV1.PDF).
\12\ The CEC Appliance Efficiency Database is available at:
http://www.appliances.energy.ca.gov/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lastly, although DOE addressed computer room air conditioners in
the August 2000 NOPR and October 2004 direct final rule, DOE never
formally defined this equipment. In reviewing ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2010, DOE noted that ASHRAE does not define a class of equipment but
rather an application (i.e., ``serving computer rooms''). Because air
conditioners and condensing units serving computer have the same basic
components as conventional air conditioners, there is some difficulty
in defining air conditioners and condensing units serving computer
rooms such that they can be clearly differentiated from conventional
commercial packaged air conditioners and heat pumps. DOE reviewed the
definitions in both ASHRAE 127-2007 (the test procedure specified in
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 for air conditioners and condensing units
serving computer rooms) and Title 20 in the California Code of
Regulations (which establishes California's requirements for this
equipment), and found that the definitions in each do not contain
criteria that would allow DOE to clearly differentiate these equipment
from conventional equipment, without overlap between the types of
equipment. DOE seeks comment on approaches for developing appropriate
definitions for this equipment that would not result in overlap between
``air conditioners and condensing units serving computer rooms'' and
the other types of commercial packaged air-conditioning and heating
equipment covered by EPCA. This is identified as Issue 7 in section
IV.B under ``Issues for Which DOE Seeks Comment.''
D. Test Procedures
EPCA requires the Secretary to amend the test procedures for ASHRAE
products to the latest version generally accepted by industry or the
rating procedures developed or recognized by AHRI or by ASHRAE, as
referenced by ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1, unless the Secretary determines
by clear and convincing evidence that the latest version of the
industry test procedure does not meet the requirements for test
[[Page 25635]]
procedures described in paragraphs (2) and (3) of 42 U.S.C.
6314(a).\13\ (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(4)(B)) ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010
updated several of its test procedures for ASHRAE products.
Specifically, ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 updated to the most recent
editions of test procedures for small commercial package air
conditioners and heating equipment (AHRI 210/240-2008, Performance
Rating of Unitary Air-Conditioning & Air-Source Heat Pump Equipment),
large and very large commercial package air conditioners and heating
equipment (AHRI 340/360-2007, Performance Rating of Commercial and
Industrial Unitary Air-Conditioning and Heat Pump Equipment),
commercial warm-air furnaces (UL 727-2006, Standard for Safety for Oil-
Fired Central Furnaces, and ANSI Z21.47-2006, Standard for Gas-Fired
Central Furnaces), and commercial water heaters (ANSI Z21.10.3-2006,
Gas Water Heaters, Volume III, Storage Water Heaters with Input Ratings
Above 75,000 Btu Per Hour, Circulating and Instantaneous).
Additionally, ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 adopts new test procedures for
measuring the efficiency of variable refrigerant flow equipment (AHRI
1230-2010, Performance Rating of Variable Refrigerant Flow (VRF) Multi-
Split Air-Conditioning and Heat Pump Equipment) and air conditioners
and condensing units serving computer rooms (ASHRAE 127-2007, Method of
Testing for Rating Computer and Data Processing Room Unitary Air
Conditioners). Lastly, ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 specifies ARI 390-
2003, Performance Rating of Single Packaged Vertical Air-Conditioners
and Heat Pumps, as the test procedure for SPVACs and SPVHPs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Specifically, the relevant provisions (42 U.S.C.
6314(a)(2)-(3)) provide that test procedures must be reasonably
designed to produce test results that reflect energy efficiency,
energy use, and estimated operating costs of a type (or class) of
industrial equipment during a representative average use cycle, and
must not be unduly burdensome to conduct. Moreover, if the test
procedure is for determining estimated annual operating costs, it
must provide that such costs will be calculated from measurements of
energy use in a representative average-use cycle, and from
representative average unit costs of the energy needed to operate
the equipment during such cycle. The Secretary must provide
information to manufacturers of covered equipment regarding
representative average unit costs of energy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE has preliminarily reviewed each of the test procedures that
were updated in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 and discusses the changes to
the test procedures below. For the newly established test procedures
AHRI 1230 and ASHRAE 127, DOE is in the process of assessing the
appropriateness of these test methods with respect to the requirements
for test procedures specified by EPCA pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
6314(a)(4)(B), and will provide a preliminary determination regarding
those test procedures in the notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) that
will follow this NODA. EISA 2007 established separate equipment classes
and efficiency levels for SPVACs and SPVHPs, but the statute did not
specify test procedures for this equipment. As a result, DOE is also
considering the test procedure for SPVACs and SPVHPs in ASHRAE Standard
90.1-2010 (i.e., AHRI 390) pursuant to the requirements in 42 U.S.C.
6314(a)(4)(B), and will provide a preliminary determination regarding
that test procedure in the NOPR as well. DOE seeks comment on the
appropriateness of AHRI 1230, ASHRAE 127, and AHRI 390 as the test
method for VRF equipment, air conditioners and condensing units serving
computer rooms, and SPVACs and SPVHPs, respectively. This is identified
as Issue 8 in section IV.B, ``Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment.''
1. Updates to AHRI 210/240 Test Method
In 2008, AHRI updated AHRI 210/240, Performance Rating of Unitary
Air-Conditioning & Air-Source Heat Pump Equipment, which is
incorporated by reference as the DOE test procedure for commercial
small air conditioners and air-source heat pumps with a cooling
capacity below 65,000 Btu/h at 10 CFR 431.95. AHRI made numerous
reorganizational and additive changes to this standard from the version
currently incorporated by reference in DOE's test procedures for
commercial air conditioners and heat pumps (i.e., AHRI 210/240-2003).
The AHRI 210/240-2008 test procedure references and includes as
Appendix C the DOE test procedure for residential central air
conditioners and heat pumps at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, Appendix M.
In section 3 of AHRI 210/240-2008, Definitions, AHRI changed the
definitions of heating seasonal performance factor (HSPF) and seasonal
energy efficiency ratio (SEER) to match the definitions for those terms
that are contained in the test procedure for residential central air
conditioners and heat pumps (which consequently are also contained in
Appendix C of AHRI 210/240-2008). Also, AHRI added definitions for
tested combination for multiple-split air conditioners and heat pumps,
small-duct, high-velocity systems, space-constrained products, and
through-the-wall air conditioners and heat pumps that match DOE's
definitions at 10 CFR 430.2.
In section 6, Rating Requirements, AHRI updated the tables that
specify the standard rating conditions specified for equipment covered
by the standard. AHRI reorganized the existing tables for air
conditioners and heat pumps, and it created several new tables listing
the standard rating conditions for equipment with variable air volume
fans, two-stage compressors, or variable-speed compressors. AHRI also
added a minimum external static pressure requirement for small-duct,
high-velocity systems. In addition to updating the tables and tests in
section 6, AHRI also reorganized section 6.1.3.3, Indoor-Coil Airflow
Rate, and added a new section 6.1.4, Conditions for Standard Rating
Tests (which is the section where tables discussed above are located).
The updates made to AHRI 210/240-2008 from the 2003 version of the
standard were identical to updates made by DOE to its test procedure
for residential central air conditioners and heat pumps at 10 CFR part
430, subpart B, Appendix M. The updates discussed in the preceding
paragraph were described in detail and previously were evaluated by DOE
in two test procedure final rules for residential central air
conditioners and heat pumps, published in the Federal Register on
October 11, 2005 and October 22, 2007. 70 FR 59122; 72 FR 59906. In
each of those test procedure amendments, DOE concluded that the changes
did not have a significant impact on product efficiency as measured by
the test procedure that would cause DOE to revise its existing energy
conservation standards. 70 FR 59122, 51932 (Oct. 11, 2005); 72 FR
59906, 59917-18 (Oct. 22, 2007). Because the major changes to AHRI 210/
240 have already been approved for the residential central air
conditioner and heat pump test procedure and because DOE previously
concluded that those changes do not impact the efficiency of
residential units, DOE believes that the changes also do not impact the
energy efficiency measurements for small commercial air conditioners
and heat pumps with a cooling capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h (the
ASHRAE equipment for which AHRI 210/240-2008 applies). DOE seeks
comments on this tentative conclusion. This is identified as Issue 9 in
section IV.B, ``Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment.''
2. Updates to AHRI 340/360 Test Method
In 2007, AHRI updated AHRI 340/360, Performance Rating of
Commercial and Industrial Unitary Air-Conditioning and Heat Pump
[[Page 25636]]
Equipment. The primary purpose of the update was to change the part-
load rating metric from integrated part-load value (IPLV) to integrated
energy efficiency ratio (IEER). AHRI also expanded the scope of the
test procedure to include air-cooled packaged unitary air-conditioners
with a cooling capacity from 250,000 Btu/h to less than 760,000 Btu/h
in addition to equipment that was included in the scope of the previous
AHRI 340/360 standard (which covered air-cooled, water-cooled, and
evaporatively-cooled unitary air-conditioning, air-source unitary heat
pump equipment, and air-conditioning condensing units rated at or above
65,000 Btu/h but below 250,000 Btu/h). AHRI also added a tolerance
criterion for the minimum external static pressure test (from -0.0 in
H2O to +0.05 in H2O). Since DOE does not regulate
or require manufacturers to certify part-load ratings, the change from
IPLV to IEER does not affect the Federal energy conservation standards.
Also, DOE believes that the added tolerance criterion does not
significantly impact the measure of energy efficiency. DOE seeks
comments on its preliminary determination that the changes to AHRI 340/
360-2007 do not significantly impact energy efficiency ratings. This is
identified as Issue 9 in section IV.B, ``Issues on Which DOE Seeks
Comment.''
3. Updates to UL 727 Test Method
In 2006, Underwriters Laboratories (UL) updated its standard UL
727, Standard for Safety for Oil-Fired Central Furnaces. DOE's test
procedure for measuring the energy efficiency of commercial warm-air
furnaces at 10 CFR 431.76 only references the procedures pertinent to
the measurement of the steady-state efficiency for this equipment in UL
727 (i.e., the measurements described in sections 1 through 3, 37
through 42 (but not 40.4 and 40.6.2 through 40.6.7), 43.2, 44, 45, and
46 of UL 727). Therefore, when reviewing the test procedure, DOE only
looked at the changes to these sections. Most of the changes to UL 727
were to reorganize the document and convert it to the Standard
Generalized Markup Language (SGML) \14\ as a way of keeping the data
consistent, reusable, shareable, and portable. In addition, UL removed
a section from the scope that allowed a manufacturer to propose
appropriate revisions to requirements of UL 727 if the product's new
features, components, materials, or systems are unsafe to be tested
with the UL 727 Standard, provided that the new revisions conforms to
the intent of the Standard. DOE believes that these changes to UL 727-
2006 do not significantly impact the energy efficiency ratings and
seeks comments as to its tentative conclusion. This is identified as
Issue 9 in section IV.B, ``Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ SGML is a document markup language developed by the
International Organization for Standardization (ISO) to allow for
the sharing of machine-readable documents in government or law.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Updates to ANSI Z21.47 Test Method
In 2006, the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) updated
ANSI Z21.47, Standard for Gas-Fired Central Furnaces. DOE's test
procedure for measuring the energy efficiency of gas-fired warm air
furnaces at 10 CFR 431.76 only references the procedures contained in
ANSI Z21.47 that are relevant to the steady-state efficiency
measurement (i.e., sections 1.1, 2.1 through 2.6, 2.38, and 4.2.1 of
ANSI Z21.47). As a result, DOE focused its test procedure review on the
relevant sections of ANSI Z21.47 that DOE's test procedure references.
In those sections referenced by DOE's test procedures, ANSI made
several updates. First, ANSI updated the scope section to include
optional special construction provisions for furnaces designed to
operate at altitudes over 2000 feet. ANSI also added an entirely new
section for a Proved Igniter and renumbered the other sections to
accommodate this addition. The newly added section does not fall under
the procedures relevant for steady-state efficiency measurement;
however, it does cause the Thermal Efficiency section (which is
relevant for the steady-state efficiency measurement) to move from
section 2.38 to section 2.39 of the test procedure. DOE preliminarily
determined that these changes to ANSI Z21.47-2006 do not impact the
energy efficiency ratings for gas-fired furnaces and seeks comments
regarding this tentative conclusion. This is identified as Issue 9 in
section IV.B, ``Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment.''
5. Updates to ANSI Z21.10.3 Test Method
In 2004, ANSI updated ANSI Z21.10.3, Gas Water Heaters, Volume III,
Storage Water Heaters with Input Ratings Above 75,000 Btu Per Hour,
Circulating and Instantaneous. DOE's test procedure for gas-fired water
heaters at 10 CFR 431.106 only references sections 2.9 (Thermal
Efficiency) and 2.10 (Standby Loss) of the ANSI Z.21.10 test procedure.
Accordingly, DOE's review focused on those sections, as well as any
other sections to which sections 2.9 and 2.10 refer. In the updated
version, ANSI moved both of these sections to Exhibit G. In addition,
ANSI added a provision to limit the duration of the standby loss test
to a maximum of 48 hours if there is no cutout (i.e., the thermostat
acts to shut off the burner) after the 24-hour mark. Currently, there
is already an additional stipulation in DOE's test procedure at 10 CFR
431.106 that the standby test should last from the first fuel and/or
electric consumption measurement until either the first cutout after
the 24-hour mark or a maximum of 48 hours, if the water heater is not
in the heating mode at that time. This stipulation was added by a
direct final rule amending the test procedure for commercial water
heaters (which was published on October 21, 2004) to limit the duration
of the standby test and reduce the testing burden for manufacturers. 69
FR 61974, 61979.
DOE notes that its provision limiting the duration of the standby
loss test is slightly different than the provision included in ANSI Z
21.10.3-2004. Using DOE's test procedure, if the water heater is in
heating mode at the 48-hour mark, the tester is instructed to let the
heating mode complete before ending the test. However, the updated ANSI
Z21.10.3 test method directs the tester to end the test at 48 hours
regardless of whether the water heater is in heating mode. DOE believes
that this slight difference between the ANSI test procedure and the
current DOE test procedure may have a very small impact on the measured
energy efficiency if the water heater has not yet cut off after 24
hours and is in heating mode at the 48-hour mark. In such a situation,
the DOE test procedure would allow the water heater to continue
operating in heating mode to continue until a cutout before ending the
test, whereas the ANSI test method would end the test immediately and
possibly not capture the energy used during that final heating cycle.
However, as noted above, DOE's test procedure already includes a
provision to address the standby mode energy loss that is independent
of the ANSI Z21.10.3 test method. Therefore, the update to the
provision for the duration of the standby mode test in ANSI Z21.10.3
would be superseded by DOE's test requirements at 10 CFR 431.106 and
would not change the standby test method. As a result, DOE believes
that the new changes to ANSI Z21.10.3 would not significantly affect
the measure of energy efficiency. DOE seeks comment regarding its
preliminary conclusion that the updated ANSI Z21.10.3-2004 does not
significantly impact energy efficiency ratings of
[[Page 25637]]
commercial gas-fired water heaters. This is identified as Issue 9 in
section IV.B, ``Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment.''
III. Analysis of Potential Energy Savings
As required under 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A), DOE performed an
analysis to determine the energy-savings potential of amending Federal
minimum energy conservation standard levels to the efficiency levels
specified in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010, as well as more-stringent
efficiency levels than those specified in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010. As
explained above, DOE's energy-savings analysis is limited to types of
equipment covered by Federal energy conservation standards for which
the amended ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 increased the efficiency levels
and for which a market exists and sufficient data are available.\15\
Based upon the conclusions reached in section II, DOE is conducting the
energy-savings analysis for eight equipment classes of water-cooled and
evaporatively-cooled products: (1) Small water-cooled air conditioners
with electric resistance or no heating (65,000 to less than 135,000
Btu/h); (2) small water-cooled air conditioners with other heating
(65,000 to less than 135,000 Btu/h); (3) large water-cooled air
conditioners with electric resistance or no heating (135,000 to less
than 240,000 Btu/h); (4) large water-cooled air conditioners with other
heating (135,000 to less than 240,000); (5) very large water-cooled air
conditioners with electric resistance or no heating (240,000 Btu/h to
less than 760,000 Btu/h); (6) very large water-cooled air conditioners
with other heating (240,000 Btu/h to less than 760,000 Btu/h); (7) very
large evaporatively-cooled air conditioners with electric resistance or
no heating (240,000 Btu/h to less than 760,000 Btu/h); and (8) very
large evaporatively-cooled air conditioners with other heating (240,000
Btu/h to less than 760,000 Btu/h).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ As discussed in section II, when no products are available
on the market or no reliable data exist for calculating potential
energy savings, DOE did not perform an analysis. The products for
which ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 increased the efficiency level, but
for which DOE did not perform an analysis due to lack of a market or
lack of data include: (1) VRF water-source heat pumps under 17,000
Btu/h (see section II.B.3); (2) VRF water-source heat pumps over
135,000 Btu/h (see section II.B.3); and (3) air conditioners and
condensing units serving computer rooms (see section II.C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, although ASHRAE did not increase the efficiency level
for SPVACs and SPVHPs, DOE is required by EPCA to consider amending the
energy conservation standards for these equipment classes using the
procedures set forth by 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6) for ASHRAE products.
Accordingly, DOE also performed an energy-savings analysis for four
equipment classes of SPVACs and SPVHPs where there is a market and
sufficient data are available: (1) Single-phase SPVACs under 65,000
Btu/h; (2) three-phase SPVACs under 65,000 Btu/h; (3) single-phase
SPVHPs under 65,000 Btu/h; and (4) three-phase SPVHPs under 65,000 Btu/
h.
The following discussion provides an overview of the energy-savings
analysis conducted for these twelve classes of products, followed by
summary results of that analysis. For each efficiency level analyzed,
DOE calculated the potential energy savings to the Nation as the
difference between a base-case forecast (without amended standards) and
the standards-case forecast (with amended standards). The national
energy savings (NES) refers to cumulative energy savings for a 30-year
period that differs by product. The analysis is based on a stock
accounting method. 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 below, and details are
available in the ASHRAE NODA TSD on DOE's website.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ The ASHRAE NODA TSD is available on the webpage for ASHRAE
Products at: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/commercial/ashrae_products_docs_meeting.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While DOE did not have sufficient data to follow this analytical
method for large SPVACs, DOE approximated the energy savings potential
for this product class based on the energy savings results from the
small SPVAC product classes. The calculation method and results for
estimating the energy savings potential for large SPVACs are summarized
in section III.D.
A. Annual Energy Use
DOE's analysis of the annual unit energy consumption (UEC) for each
class of equipment analyzed was based on the use of building simulation
models or previously available building simulation data for equipment
at or near the current Federal standard baseline for each equipment
class analyzed. DOE then used a scaling process to assess the UEC
corresponding to higher efficiency levels, including the efficiency
levels provided in ASHRAE 90.1-2010. These UEC estimates form the basis
of the national energy savings estimates discussed in section III.D.
This section describes the energy use analysis performed for water-
cooled and evaporatively-cooled products, as well as for SPVUs. For
each of these equipment types, the Federal standard and higher
efficiency levels are expressed in terms of an efficiency metric or
metrics (EER for cooling efficiency, Coefficient of Performance (COP)
for heating efficiency). For each equipment class, this section
describes how DOE developed estimates of annual energy consumption at
the baseline efficiency level and higher levels for each equipment
type. More detailed discussion is found in the ASHRAE NODA TSD.
1. Water-Cooled Air Conditioners
The analysis to assess the per-unit energy saving of water-cooled
air conditioners began with review of the existing market, as well as
the review of historical shipments data provided by AHRI for the period
from 1989-2009.\17\ The review of the market for equipment from 65,000
Btu/h to 760,000 Btu/h suggested that most of the water-cooled air
conditioner units currently on the market are designed for installation
inside of commercial buildings (as opposed to on building rooftops),
and the shipments data suggested that in recent years, shipments were
dominated by larger equipment (>= 240,000 Btu/h capacity), with
relatively few shipments of smaller-capacity units. Given these
findings, DOE's analysis of energy savings focused on typical
applications for this larger equipment. Review of manufacturer's
literature suggested that a common application is floor-by-floor
cooling in a multi-story building.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute,
Historical Shipment Data Commercial Air Conditioners Water Cooled,
2011. This information was provided by AHRI to the U.S. Department
of Energy on March 4, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To provide an estimate of the energy use of water-cooled air
conditioners in this application, DOE used annual hourly simulation
data developed from computer simulations of a prototypical commercial
office building. The prototype building model was a 3-story, 53,600
square foot (sf) commercial office building developed as part of DOE's
commercial reference building models.\18\ This building has each floor
[[Page 25638]]
served by a separate packaged air-conditioning unit. The hourly data
used in this analysis were previously developed from simulations using
the DOE EnergyPlus \19\ building simulation software and reflected
building simulations in 15 climate locations in the U.S., with each
climate representing one of 15 climate regions that have been developed
in DOE's Building Energy Codes Program and subsequently used in the
development of the commercial reference building models.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ The commercial reference building models are available on
DOE's website as Energy Plus input files at: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/commercial_initiative/new_construction.html. Documentation of the model development is
provided in: Deru, M., et al. U.S. Department of Energy Commercial
Reference Building Models of the National Building Stock. (NREL/TP-
5500-46861) (2011).
\19\ For more information on EnergyPlus, refer to DOE's
EnergyPlus documentation, available at: http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/energyplus/energyplus_documentation.cfm. EnergyPlus software is freely available for
public download at: http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/energyplus/energyplus_about.cfm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The office building model selected utilized packaged variable air
volume rooftop cooling units in the original reference building
simulations, with each packaged unit serving one floor of the office
model. DOE determined that the cooling thermal loads from modeling of
this type of equipment would be representative of similar cooling
distribution systems served by larger water-cooled equipment that also
provides floor-by-floor cooling and serves multiple building thermal
zones. EnergyPlus does not have an equipment simulation model developed
around a water-cooled air conditioner for this application. For this
reason, DOE relied on using the previously developed hourly cooling
thermal load, air flow, and system air temperature data for the air-
cooled packaged rooftop equipment used in the medium office reference
building model. Since the thermal loads for the specific application
would be essentially the same whether served by air-cooled or water-
cooled packaged cooling equipment, and since the water-cooled packaged
air conditioner equipment performance would be modeled explicitly in
the spreadsheet, DOE believes this is approach provides an accurate
method of estimating energy consumption for the water-cooled equipment
classes.
To process the hourly data into annual equipment energy consumption
for water-cooled air conditioners, DOE developed a spreadsheet model of
the typical equipment performance using actual manufacturer performance
data for a 25-ton water-cooled air conditioner. Cooling capacity and
condenser power consumption curve fits to this data were developed
using polynomial relationships and the independent variables
recommended for modeling of cooling efficiency for water-source heat
pumps in Energy Plus. In addition, DOE used part-load performance
degradation curves previously developed for air-source air conditioners
that already existed in the medium office reference building model. As
these part-load curves reflect the effects of compressor cycling at
part load, it was determined that these curves should be representative
of the compressor cycling impacts for water-cooled air conditioners as
well.
For each climate, DOE's spreadsheet model sized the equipment to
reflect the sizing in the original simulation's hourly load data. To
accurately account for fan power, DOE used the normalized fan power-
versus-supply air flow curves in the original office reference building
model.
The performance equations developed in this spreadsheet model
separately accounted for the water-cooled gross cooling capacity and
power consumption as a function of entering air conditions and supply
water temperature and flow rate. In addition, the spreadsheet model
requires an hourly entering water temperature and entering water flow
rate. For this analysis, a simple cooling tower supply water
temperature model was developed based on a defined control profile with
minimum 70 [deg]F return water temperature and using a 7 [deg]F
approach temperature (the temperature between the return water
temperature from the cooling tower and the outdoor air wet bulb
temperature). Condenser water flow rates were assumed to be equivalent
to the nominal rating condition water flow rates for all cooling hours.
For analysis of energy use at each specific efficiency (EER) level,
DOE first developed estimates for the condenser efficiency (condenser-
only cooling COP) based on the nominal rating conditions. This was done
by backing out the estimated fan power at nominal rating conditions
from the input power and separately accounting for the impact of fan
heat to arrive at the gross cooling capacity of the equipment. DOE
developed estimates of peak fan power at design air flow conditions and
used the fan power versus flow relationships to adjust the fan power
appropriately for periods when air flow was not at design air flow
rates.
Using the spreadsheet model, for each of the 15 climates, DOE first
developed the annual equipment condenser energy consumption and blower
energy consumption for nominal 11 EER water-cooled equipment, with 11
EER being the current Federal standard for water-cooled air
conditioners with electric resistance or no heating, 240,000 Btu/h to
less than 760,000 Btu/h . These were then normalized by dividing by the
equipment capacity in cooling tons. The sum of the resulting condenser
energy per cooling ton and blower energy per cooling ton represents the
annual energy consumption per cooling ton for equipment at the 11 EER
efficiency level. The resulting per-ton energy consumption figures were
then multiplied by the typical equipment capacities developed for each
water-cooled equipment class analyzed to establish the Unit Energy
Consumption (UEC) values for each equipment class at that 11 EER level.
To assess the annual energy consumption at the specific efficiency
levels analyzed, DOE developed estimates of the condenser-only cooling
COP for each efficiency level. It then multiplied the annual condenser
energy consumption for the 11 EER equipment for each climate by the
ratio of the baseline condenser-only cooling COP to the condenser-only
cooling COP at the higher efficiency levels.
The annual fan energy consumption estimates were held constant at
the baseline level for all higher standards. A detailed engineering
analysis of higher efficiency options might suggest a number of
different ways to improve the EER including reducing supply fan energy
consumption. However, several downsides to this approach were
identified. First, the supply fan accounts for a relatively small
portion of the energy use as compared to the condenser at the rating
condition. In addition, because it appears that much of this equipment
is installed inside the building space, changes which reduce fan power,
such as increased case size and lower face velocity over the evaporator
coil, would decrease the amount of rentable space available within the
building. Accordingly, for the assessment of energy savings in this
NODA, supply fan energy use was held constant. The UEC for each
efficiency level analyzed is the sum of the annual condenser energy
consumption and the fan power. From these climate-region-specific
results, DOE developed national average UEC values at each efficiency
level using weighting factors developed for medium and large commercial
office building floor space as part of the development of the DOE
reference building models. A comparison of these office weighting
factors with cumulative weighting factors developed for the larger
stock of commercial floor space is provided in the ASHRAE NODA TSD.
Table III.1 shows the UEC estimates for the current Federal
baseline levels, the proposed ASHRAE levels, and for the higher
efficiency levels for the six water-cooled air conditioner classes
analyzed.
[[Page 25639]]
Table III.1--National UEC Estimates for Water-Cooled Air Conditioners
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Small water- Large water- Very large water-
cooled air Small water- cooled air Large water- cooled air Very large water-
conditioners cooled air conditioners cooled air conditioners cooled air
electric or no conditioners electric or no conditioners electric or no conditioners
heat 65,000- other heat 65,000- heat 135,000- other heat heat 240,000- other heat
135,000 Btu/h 135,000 Btu/h 240,000 Btu/h 135,000-240,000 760,000 Btu/h 240,000-760,000
Btu/h Btu/h
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average Cooling Capacity (tons)....... 8 8 15 15 35 35
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Efficiency Level (EER)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Base Case--Federal Standard........... 11.5 11.3 11.0 11.0 11.0 10.8
Efficiency Level 1.................... 12.1 11.9 12.5 12.3 12.4 12.2
Efficiency Level 2.................... 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0
Efficiency Level 3.................... 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0
Efficiency Level 4.................... 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 * NA * NA
Efficiency Level 5--``Max-Tech''--.... 16.4 16.4 16.1 16.1 14.8 14.8
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit Energy Consumption (kWh/yr)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Base Case--Federal Standard........... 9,199 9,322 17,838 17,838 41,621 42,205
Efficiency Level 1.................... 8,855 8,966 16,206 16,402 38,041 38,504
Efficiency Level 2.................... 8,396 8,396 15,743 15,743 36,733 36,733
Efficiency Level 3.................... 7,953 7,953 14,911 14,911 34,793 34,793
Efficiency Level 4.................... 7,566 7,566 14,186 14,186 *NA *NA
Efficiency Level 5--``Max-Tech''--.... 7,101 7,101 13,490 13,490 33,422 33,422
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*An efficiency level 4 was not identified for very large water-cooled air conditioners.
2. Evaporatively-Cooled Air Conditioners
The analysis to assess the per-unit energy use of evaporatively-
cooled air conditioners began with review of the existing market. DOE
did not identify any current models of evaporatively-cooled air
conditioners with less than 240,000 Btu/h cooling capacity. The review
of the market suggested that all of the currently shipping units
appeared to be packaged rooftop evaporatively-cooled air conditioner
units. Based on the available models, DOE estimated the average
capacity at 40 tons. Because of this, DOE's analysis of energy savings
focused on typical applications for the very large equipment class.
Because of the large capacity, DOE believes that a common system design
would also be a packaged variable air volume (VAV) system. DOE modified
the 3-story office reference building model discussed previously to
serve as the simulation model for the very large evaporatively-cooled
air conditioner equipment class.
The Energy Plus simulation tool has the capability to model
evaporatively-cooled unitary air conditioners with only minor
modifications from the air-cooled unitary air conditioner equipment
models that were used in the original DOE medium office reference
building model. DOE was not able to derive separate performance curves
for evaporatively-cooled equipment, as these data were not available in
the manufacturer literature reviewed. Therefore, DOE modified the air-
cooled model using simulation defaults provided in the Energy Plus
documentation for modeling evaporatively-cooled air conditioners. These
modifications are discussed in the ASHRAE NODA TSD.
DOE performed simulations of the medium office reference building
model in the 15 climates identified previously at an 11 EER efficiency
level, because 11 EER is the current Federal standard for
evaporatively-cooled air conditioners with electric resistance or no
heating. To do this, DOE first developed estimates for the condenser-
only cooling COP based on the nominal rating conditions as input for
the simulation models. DOE used the fan power performance curves and
peak fan power assumptions in the reference building model directly.
Using the spreadsheet model, for each of the 15 climates, DOE
developed the annual equipment condenser energy consumption and blower
energy consumption for the 11 EER evaporatively-cooled equipment
simulated. These values were then normalized by dividing by the
equipment capacity in cooling tons. The sum of the resulting condenser
energy per cooling ton and blower energy per cooling ton represents the
annual energy consumption per cooling ton for equipment at that 11 EER
efficiency level. These per-ton energy consumption figures were then
multiplied by the selected equipment capacities for the evaporatively-
cooled equipment class analyzed to establish the UEC values for each
equipment class at an 11 EER level.
To assess the annual energy consumption at the specific efficiency
levels analyzed, DOE developed estimates of the condenser-only cooling
COP for each efficiency level. It then multiplied the baseline annual
condenser energy consumption developed for each climate by the ratio of
the baseline condenser-only cooling COP at 11 EER to the condenser-only
cooling COP at the efficiency levels analyzed.
The annual fan energy consumption estimates were held constant at
the baseline level for all higher standards. As with water-cooled air
conditioners, a detailed engineering analysis might suggest that
reduction in supply fan power might be a path to improved EER; however,
DOE did not conduct such a detailed analysis. Because supply fan power
is a relatively small fraction of total system power at rating
conditions, DOE concluded that improvement in condenser efficiency is
likely a necessary path to achieve the most
[[Page 25640]]
significant system efficiency improvements. The UEC for each efficiency
level analyzed is the sum of the annual condenser energy consumption
and the fan power. As with water-cooled air conditioners discussed
previously, DOE developed national average UEC values at each
efficiency level using weighting factors developed for medium and large
commercial office building floor space as part of the development of
the DOE reference building models.
Table III.2 shows the unit energy consumption estimates for the
current Federal baseline levels, the proposed ASHRAE levels, and for
the higher efficiency levels for the very large evaporatively-cooled
air conditioner classes.
Table III.2--National UEC Estimates for Evaporatively-Cooled Air Conditioners
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Large evaporatively- Large evaporatively-
cooled air conditioner cooled air conditioner
electric or no heat other heat 240,000-
240,000-760,000 Btu/h 760,000 Btu/h
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average Cooling Capacity (tons) 40 40
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Efficiency Level (EER)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Base case..................................................... 11.0 10.8
Level 1--ASHRAE............................................... 11.9 11.7
Level 2....................................................... 12.5 12.5
Max Tech...................................................... 13.1 13.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit Energy Consumption (kWh/yr)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Base case..................................................... 47,171 47,766
Level 1--ASHRAE............................................... 44,732 45,243
Level 2....................................................... 43,294 43,294
Max Tech...................................................... 41,983 41,983
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Single-Package Vertical Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps
Based on data developed during previous analysis of SPVU equipment
by DOE,\20\ the Department believes that approximately 60 percent of
the SPVU shipments go to educational facilities, the majority of which
are for space conditioning of modular classroom buildings. Another
approximately 20 percent of the shipments go to providing cooling for
non-comfort cooling applications such as telecommunications and
electronics enclosures. The remainder is used in a wide variety of
commercial buildings including offices, temporary buildings, and some
lodging facilities. In many of these commercial building applications,
the buildings served are expected to be of modular construction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ U.S. Department of Energy, Technical Support Document:
Energy Efficiency Program for Commercial and Industrial Equipment:
Efficiency Standards for Commercial Heating, Air-Conditioning, and
Water Heating Equipment Including Packaged Terminal Air-Conditioners
and Packaged Terminal Heat Pumps, Small Commercial Packaged Boiler,
Three-Phase Air-Conditioners and Heat Pumps <65,000 Btu/h, and
Single-Package Vertical Air Conditioners and Single-Package Vertical
Heat Pumps <65,000 Btu/h (March 2006) (Available at: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/commercial/ashrae_products_docs_meeting.html).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For its initial estimate of energy savings for SPVAC and SPVHP, DOE
focused its analysis on the education market, in particular, modular
classrooms, which DOE believes to represent the majority of the usage
for this equipment. To estimate the energy use of single-package
vertical air conditioners and heat pumps in these educational
facilities, DOE developed a modular classroom building simulation model
using the Energy Plus software. Schedules and load profiles were taken
from classroom-space data found in the DOE Primary School reference
building models. Internal loads were based on equipment power and
occupancy figures for the primary school reference building model.
Lighting power requirements were based on levels found in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2004. DOE believes that this is largely representative of
classroom lighting power in the building stock.
DOE simulated this building in each of the 15 climates as was done
for water-cooled air conditioners and evaporatively-cooled air
conditioners. Simulations were done for the buildings with SPVAC
equipment and electric resistance heating, and then a separate set of
simulations was done for buildings with SPVHP equipment. DOE used the
current Federal standard efficiencies of 9.0 EER for SPVAC equipment
and 9.0 EER and 3.0 COP for SPVHP equipment in the <=65,000 Btu/h
cooling capacity range. Fan power at these efficiency levels was based
on manufacturers' literature and reported fan power consumption data.
In addition, based on DOE's review of the existing market, the supply
air blower motors for this baseline equipment used permanent split-
capacitor motors.
Using the fan power data, DOE converted the baseline EER to
condenser cooling COP at rating conditions. DOE converted the baseline
heating COP to condenser heating COP at the heating rating conditions.
These values were used as inputs for the equipment simulations. Further
details of the building model and the simulation inputs used for
modeling the energy consumption of the SPVAC and SPVHP equipment can be
found in the ASHRAE NODA TSD.
From the annual simulation results for SPVAC equipment, DOE
extracted the condenser energy use for cooling, the blower energy use,
and the equipment capacity. From these, DOE developed the annual
cooling energy per ton and annual blower energy per ton for the
baseline efficiency simulated. These per-ton values were then added
together and multiplied by the average cooling capacity estimated for
SPVUs in the <=65,000 Btu/h capacity range to arrive at the baseline
UEC for SPVAC. This average unit capacity was estimated at 3 tons
(i.e., 36,000 Btu/h).
To estimate the UEC for higher efficiency levels for SPVAC, DOE
multiplied the baseline condenser cooling energy by the ratio of the
baseline condenser cooling COP to the condenser cooling COP calculated
for higher efficiency levels. As a review of the market indicated that
ECM motors were the norm at high efficiency levels
[[Page 25641]]
(with a corresponding lower fan power), DOE used the available market
data to establish estimates of the fraction of the market using ECM
motors at each higher efficiency level analyzed. It then calculated the
blower energy consumption per ton for both the baseline fan power (PSC
motor) and the fan power assuming ECM motors. The latter was achieved
by multiplying the baseline fan energy consumption by the ratio of the
rated fan power reported for products using ECM motors to the rated fan
power for products using PSC blower motors. Using the relative market
fractions of the SPVACs and SPVHPs using each motor at approximately
the efficiency levels analyzed, DOE developed weighted-average annual
fan energy consumption for each higher efficiency level. The condenser
energy per ton and blower energy per ton at each efficiency level were
then added together and the result multiplied by the 3-ton average
capacity to develop SPVAC UEC estimates for each higher efficiency
level analyzed.
The analytical method for SPVHP was carried out in a similar
fashion; however, for heat pumps, DOE included the heating energy from
the simulation results. From the SPVHP simulation results at the
baseline 9.0 EER and 3.0 COP levels, DOE extracted the compressor
cooling energy, blower energy, compressor heating energy, backup
electric resistance heating energy, and the cooling capacity. From
these, DOE developed per-ton energy consumption values for each of
these four electrical loads. These per-ton energy figures were summed
and multiplied by the nominal capacity to arrive at the baseline UEC
for SPVHP. To establish UEC estimates for higher efficiency levels, the
baseline condenser cooling energy was scaled by multiplying it by the
ratio of the baseline condenser-only cooling COP to that of the
condenser-only cooling COP for each higher efficiency level. Similarly,
for the analysis of higher COP efficiencies, the condenser heating
energy was multiplied by the ratio the baseline condenser-only heating
COP to that of the condenser-only heating COP calculated for the higher
efficiency levels. The annual blower energy consumption was calculated
based on the estimated relative fractions for ECM and PSC motors for
each analyzed efficiency levels. The backup electric resistance heat
from the baseline simulations was not adjusted for higher efficiency
levels, because it was assumed to be unaffected by higher efficiency
levels. These scaled electrical consumption values for these four
energy uses were then summed to provide the UEC estimate for each
higher efficiency level. For details of this analysis, see the ASHRAE
NODA TSD.
DOE developed national average UEC values at each efficiency level
using weighting factors developed for primary and secondary school
education building floor space as part of the development of the DOE
reference building models.
Table III.3 shows the annual UEC estimates for SPVAC and SPVHP
corresponding to the EER and COP levels analyzed. Note that Level 2,
with an EER of 10.0, matches the minimum standard for SPVUs in Proposed
Addendum i to ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010. Therefore, although DOE
analyzed SPVUs under a separate requirement from an amendment to ASHRAE
Standard 90.1 (as discussed in section I.A), potential energy savings
for this level provide an estimate of the savings that would occur
should this addendum be approved.
Table III.3--National UEC Estimates for SPVAC and SPVHP Equipment
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SPVAC SPVAC
1-phase 3-phase
<65,000 Btu/h <65,000 Btu/h SPVHP 1-phase <65,000 Btu/h
SPVHP 3-phase <65,000 Btu/h
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average Capacity (tons)................................. 3 3 3 3 3 3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Efficiency Level (EER)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EER EER EER COP EER COP
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline................................................ 9.0 9.0 9.0 3.0 9.0 3.0
Level 1................................................. 9.5 9.5 9.5 3.1 9.5 3.0
Level 2................................................. 10.0 10.0 10.0 3.1 10.0 3.1
Level 3................................................. 11.0 11.0 11.0 3.2 11.0 3.2
Level 4................................................. 12.0 12.0 12.0 3.3 12.0 3.3
Level 5--``Max-Tech''................................... 12.6 12.6 12.5 3.4 12.5 3.3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit Energy Consumption (kWh/yr)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline................................................ 6,660 6,660 6,648 6,280 6,648 6,281
Level 1................................................. 6,301 6,301 6,290 6,234 6,290 6,240
Level 2................................................. 5,962 5,962 5,952 6,189 5,952 6,201
Level 3................................................. 5,537 5,537 5,325 6,105 5,325 6,126
Level 4................................................. 5,057 5,057 5,048 6,026 5,048 6,055
Level 5--``Max-Tech''................................... 4,911 4,911 4,925 5,988 4,925 6,021
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE seeks input on its analysis of UEC for the above equipment
classes and its use in establishing the energy savings potential for
higher standards. Of particular interest, DOE is seeking input on the
other building applications for SPVU equipment and the value of
incorporating them into its analysis. DOE identified this as Issue 10
under ``Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment'' in section IV.B of this
NODA.
B. Shipments
DOE obtained historical (1989-2009) water-cooled commercial air
conditioner shipment data from AHRI.\21\ Table III.4 exhibits the
shipment data provided for a selection of years, while the full data
set can be found in the
[[Page 25642]]
ASHRAE NODA TSD. DOE used these shipment data to create two shipment
scenarios: (1) Based on historical trends, and (2) shipments held
constant at 2009 levels. For small and large AC, the historical trends
are exponential (decreasing), while for very large AC, the closest
trend is linear (decreasing). As these trends result in few shipments
by the end of the analysis period, DOE used the second shipment
scenario to represent more of an upper bound on shipments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute,
Historical Shipment Data Commercial Air Conditioners Water Cooled,
2011. This information was provided by AHRI to the U.S. Department
of Energy on March 4, 2011. (AHRI, No. 0002 at p. 2)
Table III.4--Total Shipments of Water-Cooled AC by Equipment Class
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Equipment class * 1989 1999 2009
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Small AC (65,000-134,900 Btu/h)................................. 1,437 874 152
Large AC (135,000-249,000 Btu/h)................................ 793 477 182
Very Large AC (250,000 & Over Btu/h)............................ 1,622 898 585
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Although the Btu/h ranges AHRI uses to categorize equipment into small, large, and very large do not exactly
match the definitions for those categories provided in EPCA, in this analysis, DOE did not attempt to adjust
the shipments to take into account these small differences.
DOE broke out the shipment data into the discrete classes required
for this analysis. DOE could not identify data that would allow the
shipments provided by AHRI to be separated into products with
electrical resistance or no heating, and those with other types of
heating. However, DOE believes that most small and large water-cooled
equipment does not provide heating, and as a result, DOE assigned 90
percent of shipments in those categories to the no heating class, and
10 percent to the other heating class. For very large equipment, DOE
believes that most equipment are roof-top units that are combined with
gas furnaces, and as a result assigned 10 percent of very large
shipments to the ``no heating class'' and 90 percent to the ``other
heating class.''
DOE identified nine models of very large evaporatively-cooled
equipment, but no shipment data were available. For this product class,
DOE used the ratio of very large evaporatively-cooled to water-cooled
models on the market (9:35) and applied this ratio to the water-cooled
shipments to estimate evaporatively-cooled shipments. The same fraction
as for very large water-cooled equipment was used to separate units
into the relevant heating categories.
The complete historical data set and the projected shipments for
each equipment class can be found in the ASHRAE NODA TSD. DOE seeks
input on its allocation of shipments to the eight classes of water-
cooled and evaporatively-cooled equipment for which analysis was
performed, as well as the future market and shipment scenarios for
these products. DOE identified this as Issue 11 under ``Issues on Which
DOE Seeks Comment'' in section IV.B of this NODA.
For SPVUs, DOE did not create two shipment scenarios, but rather
relied upon SPVU shipment data from the Technical Support Document for
the March 13, 2006 Notice of Document Availability on Efficiency
Standards for Commercial Heating, Air-Conditioning, and Water Heating
Equipment.\22\ In this document, DOE provided 2005 shipments data based
on Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute (ARI, now AHRI)
estimates, as shown in Table III.5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ U.S. Department of Energy, Technical Support Document:
Energy Efficiency Program for Commercial and Industrial Equipment:
Efficiency Standards for Commercial Heating, Air-Conditioning, and
Water Heating Equipment Including Packaged Terminal Air-Conditioners
and Packaged Terminal Heat Pumps, Small Commercial Packaged Boiler,
Three-Phase Air-Conditioners and Heat Pumps <65,000 Btu/h, and
Single-Package Vertical Air Conditioners and Single-Package Vertical
Heat Pumps <65,000 Btu/h (March 2006).
Table III.5--Total Shipments of SPVUs by Equipment Class
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Equipment class 2005
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SPVAC <65,000 Btu/h, single-phase....................... 31,976
SPVHP <65,000 Btu/h, single-phase....................... 13,125
SPVAC <65,000 Btu/h, three-phase........................ 14,301
SPVHP <65,000 Btu/h, three-phase........................ 6,129
------------------------------------------------------------------------
As the market for SPVUs is larger and better understood than the
market for water-cooled and evaporatively-cooled products and the
estimated growth rate over time is increasing, DOE did not include a
shipment scenario with shipments fixed to 2009. DOE only used that
scenario for water-cooled and evaporatively-cooled products to provide
an upper bound on shipments and energy savings, as it is unclear if the
historical trend toward extremely few units in those product classes
will continue.
DOE projected shipments of SPVUs according to the average growth
rate of 2.18 percent noted in the 2006 TSD. This was based on analysis
of AHRI data for commercial unitary AC products 65,000 Btu/h to 240,000
Btu/h for DOE's commercial unitary AC and HP rulemaking.
DOE then reviewed the AHRI certified products directory, as well as
manufacturer Web sites, to determine the distribution of efficiency
levels for commercially-available models within each equipment class of
water-cooled and evaporatively-cooled products and SPVUs. DOE bundled
the efficiency levels into ``efficiency ranges'' and determined the
percentage of models within each range. The distribution of
efficiencies in the base case for each equipment class can be found in
the ASHRAE NODA TSD on DOE's Web site.
For the standards case, DOE assumed shipments at lower efficiencies
were most likely to roll up into higher efficiency levels in response
to more-stringent energy conservation standards. For each efficiency
level analyzed within a given equipment class, DOE used a ``roll-up''
scenario to establish the market shares by efficiency level for the
year that standards become effective (i.e., 2012). DOE estimated that
the efficiencies of equipment in the base case that did not meet the
standard level under consideration would roll up to meet the standard
level. Available information also suggests that all equipment
efficiencies in the base case that were above the standard level under
consideration would not be affected. Table III.6 shows an example of
the distribution of efficiencies within the base-case and the roll-up
scenarios to establish the distribution of efficiencies in the
standards cases for very large water-cooled equipment. For all the
tables of the distribution of efficiencies in the base case and
standards cases by equipment class, see the ASHRAE NODA TSD.
[[Page 25643]]
Table III.6--Distribution of Efficiencies in the Base Case and Standards Cases for Very Large Water-Cooled
Commercial AC With Other Heat
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Efficiency ranges (EER) *
Efficiency level ----------------------------------------------------------------
10.8-11.59 11.6-12.69 12.7-13.49 13.5-14.39 14.4-14.89
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Base Case--Federal Standard (10.8 EER)......... 14% 23% 29% 14% 20%
Efficiency Level 1--ASHRAE (12.2 EER).......... ........... 37% 29% 14% 20%
Efficiency Level 2--(13.0 EER)................. ........... ........... 66% 14% 20%
Efficiency Level 3--(14.0 EER)................. ........... ........... ........... 80% 20%
Efficiency Level 5--``Max-Tech''--(14.8 EER)... ........... ........... ........... ........... 100%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* DOE binned models into efficiency ranges surrounding the EER of each efficiency level; the specific bins were
chosen to maintain the same market average efficiency (when the number of models in each range is multiplied
by the efficiency level EER) as calculated using the full distribution of models.
DOE seeks input on its determination of the base-case distribution
of efficiencies and its prediction on how amended energy conservation
standards affect the distribution of efficiencies in the standards
case. DOE identified this as Issue 12 under ``Issues on Which DOE Seeks
Comment'' in section IV.B of this NODA.
Using the distribution of efficiencies in the base case and in the
standards cases for each equipment class analyzed in today's NODA, as
well as the UECs for each specified EER (discussed previously), DOE
calculated market-weighted average efficiency values. The market-
weighted average efficiency value represents the average efficiency of
the total units shipped at a specified amended standard level. The
market-weighted average efficiency values for the base case and the
standards cases for each efficiency analyzed within the equipment
classes is provided in the ASHRAE NODA TSD found on DOE's Web site.
C. Other Analytical Inputs
1. Site-to-Source Conversion
DOE converted the annual site energy savings into the annual amount
of energy saved at the source of electric generation (i.e., primary
energy), using site-to-source conversion factors over the analysis
period (calculated from the Energy Information Agency's (EIA's) Annual
Energy Outlook 2010 (AEO2010) projections).\23\ DOE derived the annual
conversion factors by dividing the delivered electricity to the
commercial sector plus loss for each forecast year in the United
States, as indicated in AEO2010, by the delivered electricity to the
commercial sector for each forecasted year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ AEO2010 can be accessed at: http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/archive/aeo10/index.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Product Lifetime
For both water-cooled and evaporatively-cooled products and SPVUs,
DOE estimated the product lifetime from the advanced notice of proposed
rulemaking on Energy Conservation Standards for Commercial Unitary Air
Conditioners and Heat Pumps published in the Federal Register on July
29, 2004. 69 FR 45460, 45480. The product lifetime from the prior TSD
was estimated to be a mean of 15.4 years. More recent sources confirm
this estimate including the 2008 California Database for Energy
Efficient Resources (15 years).\24\ For this preliminary analysis, DOE
used a single-value lifetime of 15 years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ California Public Utility Commission 2008, Database for
Energy Efficient Resources (Available at: http://www.deeresources.com/).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Compliance Date and Analysis Period
For purposes of calculating the national energy savings (NES) for
water-cooled and evaporatively-cooled equipment, DOE used an analysis
period of 2013 (the assumed compliance date if DOE were to adopt the
ASHRAE levels as Federal standards for small products) or 2014 (the
assumed compliance date if DOE were to adopt the ASHRAE levels as
Federal standards for large and very large products) through 2042 and
2043, respectively. This is the standard analysis period of 30 years
that DOE typically uses in its NES analysis. While the analysis period
remains the same for assessing the energy savings of Federal standard
levels higher than the ASHRAE levels, those energy savings would not
begin accumulating until 2017 (the assumed compliance date if DOE were
to determine that standard levels more stringent than the ASHRAE levels
are justified).
If DOE were to propose a rule prescribing energy conservation
standards at the efficiency levels contained in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2010, EPCA states that any such standards shall become effective on or
after a date which is two or three years (depending on equipment size)
after the effective date of the applicable minimum energy efficiency
requirement in the amended ASHRAE standard (i.e., ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2010). (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(D)) For all water-cooled and
evaporatively-cooled equipment in this rulemaking, the effective date
in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 is June 1, 2011. Thus, if DOE decides to
adopt the levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010, the rule would apply to
small equipment (two product classes) manufactured on or after June 1,
2013, which is two years from the effective date specified in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2010, and to large and very large equipment (six product
classes) manufactured on or after June 1, 2014, which is three years
from the effective date specified in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010.
If DOE were to propose a rule prescribing energy conservation
standards higher than the efficiency levels contained in ASHRAE
Standard 90.1-2010, under EPCA, any such standard will become effective
for products manufactured four years after the date of publication in
the Federal Register. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(D)) Thus, for products for
which DOE might adopt a level more stringent than the ASHRAE efficiency
level, the rule would apply to products manufactured on or after a date
which is four years from the date of publication of the final rule
adopting standards higher than the ASHRAE efficiency levels (30 months
after publication of the revised ASHRAE Standard 90.1, which was
October 29, 2010). Under this timeline, compliance with such more-
stringent standards would be required no later than April 29, 2017.
For purposes of calculating the NES for SPVUs, DOE used a 30-year
analysis period of 2017-2046. As all efficiency levels being considered
for SPVUs are higher than the ASHRAE efficiency levels, any rule
adopted would apply to products manufactured on or after a date which
is four years from the date of publication of the final rule adopting
standards higher than the ASHRAE
[[Page 25644]]
efficiency levels (30 months after publication of the revised ASHRAE
Standard 90.1, which was October 29, 2010). Under this timeline,
compliance with such more-stringent standards would be required no
later than April 29, 2017.
For each equipment class for which DOE developed a potential energy
savings analysis, Table III.7 exhibits the approximate compliance dates
of an amended energy conservation standard.
Table III.7--Approximate Compliance Date of an Amended Energy Conservation Standard for Each Equipment Class
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Approximate compliance date Approximate compliance date
for adopting the efficiency for adopting more stringent
Equipment class levels in ASHRAE standard efficiency levels than those
90.1-2010 in ASHRAE standard 90.1-2010
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Small Water-Cooled AC with Electric Resistance or No 06/2013 04/2017
Heat...............................................
Small Water-Cooled AC with Other Heat............... 06/2013 04/2017
Large Water-Cooled AC with Electric Resistance or No 06/2014 04/2017
Heat...............................................
Large Water-Cooled AC with Other Heat............... 06/2014 04/2017
Very Large Water-Cooled AC with Electric Resistance 06/2014 04/2017
or No Heat.........................................
Very Large Water-Cooled AC with Other Heat.......... 06/2014 04/2017
Very Large Evaporatively-Cooled AC with Electric 06/2014 04/2017
Resistance or No Heat..............................
Very Large Evaporatively-Cooled AC with Other Heat.. 06/2014 04/2017
SPVAC <65,000 Btu/h, single-phase................... * N/A 04/2017
SPVAC <65,000 Btu/h, three-phase.................... * N/A 04/2017
SPVHP <65,000 Btu/h, single-phase................... * N/A 04/2017
SPVHP <65,000 Btu/h, three-phase.................... * N/A 04/2017
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The efficiency levels specified for SPVACs and SPVHPs in ASHRAE 90.1-2010 are already in effect as Federal
minimum energy conservation standards.
D. Estimates of Potential Energy Savings
DOE estimated the potential primary energy savings in quads (i.e.,
10 \15\ Btu) for each efficiency level considered within each equipment
class analyzed. Table III.8--Table III.19 show the potential energy
savings resulting from the analyses conducted as part of this NODA.
Table III.8--Potential Energy Savings for Small Water-Cooled Equipment
With Electric Resistance or No Heat
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary energy savings
estimate * (quads)
Efficiency level -------------------------------
Historical Shipments
shipment trend fixed to 2009
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level 1--ASHRAE--12.1 EER............... 0.000005 0.000011
Level 2--13 EER......................... 0.000018 0.000060
Level 3--14 EER......................... 0.000044 0.000144
Level 4--15 EER......................... 0.000074 0.000238
Level 5--``Max-Tech''--16.4 EER......... 0.000121 0.000388
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The potential energy savings for efficiency levels more stringent than
those specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 were calculated relative
to the efficiency levels that would result if ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2010 standards were adopted.
Table III.9--Potential Energy Savings Estimates for Small Water-Cooled
Equipment With Other Heat
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary energy savings
estimate * (quads)
Efficiency level -------------------------------
Historical Shipments
shipment trend fixed to 2009
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level 1--ASHRAE--11.9 EER............... 0.0000005 0.0000013
Level 2--13 EER......................... 0.0000024 0.0000082
Level 3--14 EER......................... 0.0000053 0.0000174
Level 4--15 EER......................... 0.0000085 0.0000276
Level 5--``Max-Tech''--16.4 EER......... 0.0000137 0.0000441
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The potential energy savings for efficiency levels more stringent than
those specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 were calculated relative
to the efficiency levels that would result if ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2010 standards were adopted.
[[Page 25645]]
Table III.10--Potential Energy Savings Estimates for Large Water-Cooled
Equipment with Electric Resistance or No Heat
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary energy savings
estimate * (quads)
Efficiency level -------------------------------
Historical Shipments
shipment trend fixed to 2009
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level 1--ASHRAE--12.5 EER............... 0.00014 0.00027
Level 2--13 EER......................... 0.00002 0.00008
Level 3--14 EER......................... 0.00013 0.00032
Level 4--15 EER......................... 0.00024 0.00056
Level 5--``Max-Tech''--16.1 EER......... 0.00039 0.00089
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The potential energy savings for efficiency levels more stringent than
those specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 were calculated relative
to the efficiency levels that would result if ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2010 standards were adopted.
Table III.11--Potential Energy Savings Estimates for Large Water-Cooled
Equipment with Other Heat
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary energy savings
estimate * (quads)
Efficiency level -------------------------------
Historical Shipments
shipment trend fixed to 2009
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level 1--ASHRAE--12.3 EER............... 0.00001 0.00003
Level 2--13 EER......................... 0.00001 0.00001
Level 3--14 EER......................... 0.00002 0.00004
Level 4--15 EER......................... 0.00003 0.00007
Level 5--``Max-Tech''--16.1 EER......... 0.00005 0.00010
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The potential energy savings for efficiency levels more stringent than
those specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 were calculated relative
to the efficiency levels that would result if ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2010 standards were adopted.
Table III.12--Potential Energy Savings Estimates for Very Large Water-
Cooled Equipment with Electric Resistance or No Heat
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary energy savings
estimate * (quads)
Efficiency level -------------------------------
Historical Shipments
shipment trend fixed to 2009
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level 1--ASHRAE--12.4 EER............... 0.0002 0.0001
Level 2--13 EER......................... 0.0001 0.0001
Level 3--14 EER......................... 0.0005 0.0003
Level 4--``Max-Tech''--14.8 EER......... 0.0008 0.0005
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The potential energy savings for efficiency levels more stringent than
those specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 were calculated relative
to the efficiency levels that would result if ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2010 standards were adopted.
Table III.13--Potential Energy Savings Estimates for Very Large Water-
Cooled Equipment with Other Heat
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary energy savings
estimate * (quads)
Efficiency level -------------------------------
Historical Shipments
shipment trend fixed to 2009
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level 1--ASHRAE--12.2 EER............... 0.002 0.001
Level 2--13 EER......................... 0.001 0.001
Level 3--14 EER......................... 0.005 0.003
Level 4--``Max-Tech''--14.8 EER......... 0.008 0.005
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The potential energy savings for efficiency levels more stringent than
those specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 were calculated relative
to the efficiency levels that would result if ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2010 standards were adopted.
[[Page 25646]]
Table III.14--Potential Energy Savings Estimates for Very Large
Evaporatively-Cooled Equipment With Electric Resistance or No Heat
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary energy savings
estimate * (quads)
Efficiency level -------------------------------
Historical Shipments
shipment trend fixed to 2009
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level 1--ASHRAE--11.9 EER............... 0.00013 0.00009
Level 2--12.5 EER....................... 0.00008 0.00005
Level 3--``Max-Tech''--13.1 EER......... 0.00017 0.00011
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The potential energy savings for efficiency levels more stringent than
those specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 were calculated relative
to the efficiency levels that would result if ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2010 standards were adopted.
Table III.15--Potential Energy Savings Estimates for Very Large
Evaporatively-Cooled Equipment With Electric Resistance or No Heat
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary energy savings
estimate* (quads)
Efficiency level -------------------------------
Historical Shipments
shipment trend fixed to 2009
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level 1--ASHRAE--11.7 EER **............ 0.0011 0.0007
Level 2--12.5 EER....................... 0.0010 0.0007
Level 3--``Max-Tech''--13.1 EER......... 0.0019 0.0012
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The potential energy savings for efficiency levels more stringent than
those specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 were calculated relative
to the efficiency levels that would result if ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2010 standards were adopted.
Table III.16--Potential Energy Savings Estimates for Small Single-Phase
SPVAC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary energy
Efficiency level savings estimate
(quads)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level 1--9.5 EER..................................... 0.035
Level 2--10 EER...................................... 0.076
Level 3--11 EER...................................... 0.139
Level 4--12 EER...................................... 0.226
Level 5--``Max-Tech''--12.6 EER...................... 0.253
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table III.17--Potential Energy Savings Estimates for Small Three-Phase
SPVAC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary energy
Efficiency level savings estimate
(quads)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level 1--9.5 EER..................................... 0.010
Level 2--10 EER...................................... 0.023
Level 3--11 EER...................................... 0.046
Level 4--12 EER...................................... 0.083
Level 5--``Max-Tech''--12.6 EER...................... 0.095
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table III.18--Potential Energy Savings Estimates for Small Single-Phase
SPVHP
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary energy
Efficiency level savings estimate
* (quads)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level 1--9.5 EER..................................... 0.012
Level 2--10 EER...................................... 0.026
Level 3--11 EER...................................... 0.064
Level 4--12 EER...................................... 0.089
Level 5--``Max-Tech''--12.5 EER...................... 0.101
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* For SPVHPs, the primary energy savings estimates are based on both
cooling savings (EER) and heating savings (COP).
[[Page 25647]]
Table III.19--Potential Energy Savings Estimates for Small Three-Phase
SPVHP
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary energy
Efficiency level savings estimate*
(quads)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level 1--9.5 EER..................................... 0.004
Level 2--10 EER...................................... 0.009
Level 3--11 EER...................................... 0.025
Level 4--12 EER...................................... 0.037
Level 5--``Max-Tech''--12.5 EER...................... 0.042
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* For SPVHPs, the primary energy savings estimates are based on both
cooling savings (EER) and heating savings (COP).
As mentioned previously, due to the small size of the market for
large SPVACs (five models) and a lack of shipment estimates, DOE could
not perform a full analysis of energy savings for this product class.
However, DOE used the results from small SPVACs to approximate the
energy savings for large SPVACs.
DOE notes that analysis of the market shows only a narrow range of
efficiencies for large SPVACs, with two out of the five existing models
(40 percent) at 10.0 EER and three out of the five models (60 percent)
at 9.5 EER. DOE also estimates that the UEC for a typical large SPVAC
at a 9.5 or 10.0 EER will be approximately twice that calculated for a
small SPVAC at the same efficiency levels, as the equipment capacity of
the available large SPVAC products is approximately twice that of the
average size for the small SPVAC equipment. While DOE has no data on
shipments for large SPVACs, it notes that the number of available
models of large SPVACs is approximately 1.4 percent of small SPVACs
based on its market analysis.
Assuming relative shipments of large SPVACs to small SPVACs could
be characterized by the ratio of models available, and that the per-
unit energy savings in going from 9.5 to 10.0 EER (the highest
available efficiency) is twice that of the small SPVACs going between
these levels, DOE estimates that the potential energy savings for
standards set at the market maximum 10.0 EER level is roughly 1.68
percent of the difference in the energy savings calculated for the
small SPVAC standards at 10.0 EER and at 9.5 EER (shown in table III.16
and III.17). This would suggest an energy savings potential of
approximately 0.0009 quads, shown in Table III.20.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ Estimated as [60 percent of the large SPVAC market being
affected at the 10.0 EER standard level times twice the UEC savings
of the small SPVAC products in going from 9.5 to 10.0 EER times 1.4
percent of the total shipments, or equal to 0.60 x 2 x 0.014 x
[(0.076+0.023)-(.035+.01)]] quads. DOE did not separate this product
class into single-phase and three-phase units because the savings
would be even more speculative at this level, and the breakdown is
not required.
Table III.20--Potential Energy Savings Estimates for Large SPVAC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary energy
Efficiency level savings estimate
(quads)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level 1--10.0 EER.................................... 0.0009
------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Public Participation
A. Submission of Comments
DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this NODA
no later than the date provided in the DATES section at the beginning
of this notice. Interested parties may submit comments, data, and other
information using any of the methods described in the ADDRESSES section
at the beginning of this notice.
Submitting comments via www.regulations.gov. The
www.regulations.gov web page will require you to provide your name and
contact information. Your contact information will be viewable to DOE
Building Technologies staff only. Your contact information will not be
publicly viewable except for your first and last names, organization
name (if any), and submitter representative name (if any). If your
comment is not processed properly because of technical difficulties,
DOE will use this information to contact you. If DOE cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, DOE may not be able to consider your comment.
However, your contact information will be publicly viewable if you
include it in the comment itself or in any documents attached to your
comment. Any information that you do not want to be publicly viewable
should not be included in your comment, nor in any document attached to
your comment. Otherwise, persons viewing comments will see only first
and last names, organization names, correspondence containing comments,
and any documents submitted with the comments.
Do not submit to www.regulations.gov information for which
disclosure is restricted by statute, such as trade secrets and
commercial or financial information (hereinafter referred to as
Confidential Business Information (CBI)). Comments submitted through
www.regulations.gov cannot be claimed as CBI. Comments received through
the Web site will waive any CBI claims for the information submitted.
For information on submitting CBI, see the Confidential Business
Information section below.
DOE processes submissions made through www.regulations.gov before
posting. Normally, comments will be posted within a few days of being
submitted. However, if large volumes of comments are being processed
simultaneously, your comment may not be viewable for up to several
weeks. Please keep the comment tracking number that www.regulations.gov
provides after you have successfully uploaded your comment.
Submitting comments via email, hand delivery/courier, or mail.
Comments and documents submitted via email, hand delivery, or mail also
will be posted to www.regulations.gov. If you do not want your personal
contact information to be publicly viewable, do not include it in
[[Page 25648]]
your comment or any accompanying documents. Instead, provide your
contact information in a cover letter. Include your first and last
names, email address, telephone number, and optional mailing address.
The cover letter will not be publicly viewable as long as it does not
include any comments.
Include contact information each time you submit comments, data,
documents, and other information to DOE. Email submissions are
preferred. If you submit via mail or hand delivery/courier, please
provide all items on a CD, if feasible, in which case, it is not
necessary to submit printed copies. No facsimiles (faxes) will be
accepted.
Comments, data, and other information submitted to DOE
electronically should be provided in PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or
Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file format. Provide documents that
are not secured, that are written in English, and that are free of any
defects or viruses. Documents should not contain special characters or
any form of encryption and, if possible, they should carry the
electronic signature of the author.
Campaign form letters. Please submit campaign form letters by the
originating organization in batches of between 50 to 500 form letters
per PDF or as one form letter with a list of supporters' names compiled
into one or more PDFs. This reduces comment processing and posting
time.
Confidential business information. Pursuant to 10 CFR 1004.11, any
person submitting information that he or she believes to be
confidential and exempt by law from public disclosure should submit via
email, postal mail, or hand delivery/courier two well-marked copies:
one copy of the document marked ``confidential'' that includes all the
information believed to be confidential, and one copy of the document
marked ``non-confidential'' with the information believed to be
confidential deleted. Submit these documents via email or on a CD, if
feasible. DOE will make its own determination about the confidential
status of the information and treat it according to its determination.
Factors of interest to DOE when evaluating requests to treat
submitted information as confidential include: (1) A description of the
items; (2) whether and why such items are customarily treated as
confidential within the industry; (3) whether the information is
generally known by or available from other sources; (4) whether the
information has previously been made available to others without
obligation concerning its confidentiality; (5) an explanation of the
competitive injury to the submitting person which would result from
public disclosure; (6) when such information might lose its
confidential character due to the passage of time; and (7) why
disclosure of the information would be contrary to the public interest.
It is DOE's policy that all comments may be included in the public
docket, without change and as received, including any personal
information provided in the comments (except information deemed to be
exempt from public disclosure).
B. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment
Although DOE welcomes comments on any aspect of this notice, DOE is
particularly interested in receiving comments and views of interested
parties concerning the following issues:
(1) The impact of proposed addenda h, i, and j to ASHRAE Standard
90.1-2010 on the energy savings presented in today's NODA;
(2) The energy savings potential of small and large evaporatively-
cooled commercial package air conditioners;
(3) The market for VRF water-source heat pumps with cooling
capacities below 17,000 Btu/h and above 135,000 Btu/h. DOE is seeking
data and information that would allow it to accurately characterize the
energy savings from amended energy conservation standards for these
products;
(4) The market for large and very large SPVACs and SPVHPs;
(5) Approaches for establishing energy conservation standards for
covering air conditioners and condensing units serving computer rooms;
(6) Data and information for air conditioners and condensing units
serving computer rooms that could be used in performing an energy
savings analysis at a future stage of this rulemaking;
(7) Approaches for developing appropriate definitions for ``air
conditioners and condensing units serving computer rooms'' that would
not result in overlap between this equipment and the other types of
commercial packaged air conditioning and heating equipment covered by
EPCA;
(8) The use of AHRI 1230, ASHRAE 127, and AHRI 390 as the test
method for VRF equipment, air conditioners and condensing units serving
computer rooms, and SPVACs and SPVHPs, respectively; and
(9) DOE's preliminary conclusion that the updates to the most
recent versions of AHRI 210/240, AHRI 340/360, UL 727, ANSI Z21.47, and
ANSI Z21.10.3 do not have a substantive impact on the measurement of
energy efficiency for the associated equipment types for each test
procedure;
(10) DOE's analysis of UEC for the water-cooled, evaporatively-
cooled, SVPU equipment classes and its use in establishing the energy
savings potential for higher standards. Of particular interest are
other building applications for SPVU equipment and the value of
incorporating these into the analysis of UEC.
(11) DOE's allocation of shipments to the eight classes of water-
cooled and evaporatively-cooled equipment for which analysis was
performed, as well as the future market and shipment scenarios for
these products; and
(12) DOE's determination of the base-case distribution efficiencies
and its prediction on how amended energy conservation standards affect
the distribution of efficiencies in the standards case for the twelve
classes of equipment for which analysis was performed.
V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of this notice of
data availability.
Issued in Washington, DC, on April 27, 2011.
Kathleen Hogan,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency, Office of Technology
Development, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
[FR Doc. 2011-10877 Filed 5-4-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P