[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 245 (Wednesday, December 21, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 79135-79137]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-32620]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 245 / Wednesday, December 21, 2011 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 79135]]
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 430
[Docket No. EERE-2009-BT-TP-0004]
RIN 1904-AB94
Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products and Certain
Commercial and Industrial Equipment: Test Procedures for Residential
Central Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Extension of public comment period.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document announces a reopening of the comment period for
interested parties to submit comments on the October 24, 2011
supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking for residential central air
conditioner and heat test procedures. The comment period is extended
until January 20, 2012.
DATES: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) will accept comments, data,
and information regarding the supplemental notice of proposed
rulemaking for residential central air conditioner and heat test
procedures received no later than January 20, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Any comments submitted must identify the Supplemental Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking for Test Procedures for Residential Central Air
Conditioners and Heat Pumps and provide docket number EERE-2009-BT-TP-
0004 and/or RIN number 1904-AB94. Comments may be submitted using any
of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Email: Brenda.Edwards@ee.doe.gov. Include docket number
EERE-2009-BT-TP-0004 and/or RIN 1904-AB94 in the subject line of the
message. Submit electronic comments in WordPerfect, Microsoft Word,
PDF, or ASCII file format and avoid the use of special characters or
any form of encryption.
Postal Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of
Energy, Building Technologies Program, Mailstop EE-2J, 1000
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202)
586-2945. Please submit one signed original paper copy.
Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department
of Energy, Building Technologies Program, 950 L'Enfant Plaza SW., 6th
Floor, Washington, DC 20024. Please submit one signed original paper
copy.
Docket: The docket is available for review at www.regulations.gov,
including Federal Register notices, public meeting attendee lists and
transcripts, 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: http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;dct=FR%252BPR%252BN%252BO%252BSR;rpp=10;po=0;D=EERE-
2009-BT-TP-0004. This web page contains a link to the docket for this
notice on the www.regulations.gov site. The www.regulations.gov web
page contains simple instructions on how to access all documents,
including public comments, in the docket.
For further information on how to submit a public comment, review
other public comments and the docket, contact Ms. Brenda Edwards at
(202) 586-2945 or by email: Brenda.Edwards@ee.doe.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mr. Wes Anderson, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Program, EE-2J,
1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone:
(202) 586-7335. Email: Wes.Anderson@ee.doe.gov.
Ms. Jennifer Tiedeman, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General
Counsel, GC-71, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-
0121. Telephone: (202) 287-6111. Email: Jennifer.Tiedeman@hq.doe.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On October 24, 2011, the U.S. Department of
Energy (DOE) published a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking
(SNOPR) in the Federal Register (76 FR 65616) which proposed amendments
to the laboratory test steps and calculation algorithm that would be
used to determine off-mode power consumption for residential central
air conditioners and heat pumps. Specifically, the SNOPR proposed to
measure a system's off-mode power consumption at two temperatures, 82
[deg]F and 57 [deg]F, and then average the two measurements to
determine the system's off-mode rating. The SNOPR required that
interested parties submit any written comments by November 23, 2011. In
response to the SNOPR, the California State Investor Owned Utilities
(CA IOUs), which is appended to this notice, expressed concern about a
potential loophole regarding the 57 [deg]F test point in DOE's
proposal. With the lower test point at 57 [deg]F, it is possible for a
system to be controlled in such a manner that the crankcase heater is
not on at either test point, but comes on just below 57 [deg]F. The
result would be an underestimation of a system's energy consumption
because the energy consumption of the crankcase heater would not be
included in either measurement.
Consequently, the CA IOUs recommended an alternative approach to
the test procedure proposed in the SNOPR. According to this approach,
manufacturers would be required to specify the temperatures at which a
crankcase heater turns on and off, and then to run one off-mode test 3-
5 [deg]F below the point at which the crankcase heater turns on and the
other off-mode test 3-5 [deg]F above the temperature at which the
crankcase heater turns off. (CA IOUs, No. 33 at p. 2) American Council
for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE), the Appliance Standards
Awareness Project (ASAP), Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance (NEEA)
and Northwest Power Conservation Council (NPCC) all supported this
approach. (ACEEE & ASAP, No. 34 at p. 2; NEEA & NPCC, No. 35 at p. 3)
DOE believes that this proposed approach is advantageous for
multiple reasons. It will prevent the potential inaccuracies involved
with requiring 57 [deg]F as the only test point in the DOE
[[Page 79136]]
procedure. If DOE requires just one temperature set point for all
tested equipment, a potential exists that manufacturers may choose to
change the temperature at which the crankcase heater turns on solely
for testing purposes, resulting in an inaccurate power consumption
measurement. Further, different crankcase heater manufacturers may
employ different control strategies, which vary with temperature. The
approach recommended by CA IOUs provides additional flexibility by
allowing manufacturers to design controls schemes for the crankcase
heaters at whatever temperature they feel is necessary to avoid damage
to the compressor in cold outdoor temperatures.
While this approach will not change the tested results in the
SNOPR, it will help to reduce the complexity of test procedure because
the crankcase heater will be on for one temperature test point and off
for the other. Further, depending on the manufacturer's specified
crankcase heater on and off temperatures, the testing burden may be
reduced under this recommended test method as compared to the method
proposed in the SNOPR. Consequently, DOE is strongly considering the
adoption of this approach and specifically seeks comment on any aspect
of this approach.
In order to provide interested parties with adequate time to review
and respond to this alternative test method as outlined by the CA IOUs
in section 1 of their comment, DOE has determined that a re-opening of
the public comment period is appropriate and has printed the CA IOUs
comment concurrently with this notice in the Federal Register. DOE will
consider any comments received on January 20, 2012, and deems any
comments received between November 23, 2011 and January 20, 2012 to be
timely submitted.
Further Information on Submitting Comments
Under 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 two copies: One copy of the document including
all the information believed to be confidential, and one copy of the
document with the information believed to be confidential deleted. DOE
will make its own determination about the confidential status of the
information and treat it according to its determination.
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.
Issued in Washington, DC, on December 14, 2011.
Kathleen B. Hogan,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy.
November 22, 2011
Ms. Brenda Edwards, EE-41, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy, Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products, U.S.
Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC
20585-0121
Docket Number: EERE-2009-BT-TP-0004
RIN: 1904-AB94
Dear Ms. Edwards: This letter comprises the comments of the Pacific
Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) and Southern California Edison (SCE) in
response to the Department of Energy (DOE) Supplementary Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (SNOPR) for the Off Mode Test Procedure for
Residential Central Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps.
The signatories of this letter represent some of the largest
utility companies in the Western United States, serving over 29 million
customers. As energy companies, we understand the potential of
appliance efficiency standards to cut costs and reduce consumption
while maintaining or increasing consumer utility of the products. We
have a responsibility to our customers to advocate for standards that
accurately reflect the climate and conditions of our respective service
areas, so as to maximize these positive effects.
We acknowledge the difficulty faced by the Department to finalize
test method procedures for Residential Central Air Conditioners and
Heat Pumps given the lack of available data and engineering analysis
applied to the development of these test methods. We are concerned that
the test procedure revisions presented in this SNOPR would not
encourage innovative design of the heating system in off-mode and are
misleading to consumers since reported values are not indicative of
actual off-mode energy use.
Therefore, we ask DOE to postpone finalizing the test procedure so
that more engineering analysis and data can be provided by the PG&E,
SCE, the efficiency advocates, and other stakeholders to inform DOE on
accurate updates to the test procedure.
The current test procedures focus on wattage and simple work-
arounds to account for potentially more efficient designs, such as
those with multiple compressors. We believe that the test procedure
should calculate energy use, as opposed to power consumption associated
with off-mode since the run time in off-mode for these units is
substantial. It is possible that units with slightly more power
consumption levels in off mode consume less overall energy since some
of those controls serve to reduce run-time; design strategies like
these are not only overlooked, but not encouraged with this type of
measurement of off-mode power.
Moreover, we believe that these test method procedures may be
substantially improved upon with more data gathering and engineering
analysis, supported by the CA IOUs, other energy efficiency advocates,
ASHRAE, and AHRI. We suggest that DOE conduct market analysis to
provide a better understanding across a range of products the
temperature set points for which the crankcase heater turns on and off.
We also suggest DOE collect actual test data using the test procedures
on an array of products to understand anticipated outputs.
If DOE plans to move forward with the proposal in the SNOPR, we
urge DOE to consider the following recommendations:
1) Manufacturers should report ambient air temperature points for
which the crankcase heater is on and off, and use those points when
calculating off-mode.
We are concerned that manufacturers could game the test procedures
for off-mode power consumption by designing crank case heaters that
operate outside the assumed bound for the crank-case heater being on at
an ambient air temperature of 57 degrees Fahrenheit (F). Moreover, we
think the test procedure would be more accurate if manufacturers tested
their products at the points at which the crankcase heater is certain
to be on (P2) and off (P1). Thus we recommend that DOE require that
manufacturers report these values, and then establish the test
temperature to be 3-5 degrees F below the point at
[[Page 79137]]
which it turns on, and 3-5 degrees above the point at which it turns
off.
2) Instead of applying a simple average to P1 & P2 to calculate
off-mode power draw, DOE should apply a weighted average reflective of
the amount of time the crankcase heater is on and off.
We are concerned that a simple average of P1 & P2 could drastically
under represent off-mode power draw. Using National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) \1\ data on temperature averages
between 1971-2000 for 100 U.S. cities, we found that 54% of the tested
sample had average annual temperatures below 57 degrees F for the
months of January, April, and October, or simplifying the matter, 3 out
of 4 seasons or 75% of the year. If we assume that the majority of
these units are located in uncooled and unheated spaces then we may
also assume that 75% of the time the unit will operate under P2 (on)
conditions, and 25% of the time it will operate under P1 (off)
conditions. We recommend that DOE adopt this weighted average or
conduct further testing to determine how often a crankcase heater is on
versus off at different ambient temperature ranges and apply national
average temperatures across the seasons to determine an appropriate
weighted average.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0762183.html, Date Accessed:
11/14/11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3) DOE should not adjust the off-mode power draw for systems with
multiple compressors or apply a scaling factor for extra-large systems
since this would not represent actual off-mode power consumption.
We strongly recommend against the use of a scaling factor for
extra-large units and for systems with multiple compressors since this
would under represent the actual power associated with off-mode. While
we understand that DOE does not want to penalize units that may have
more energy efficient designs, we do not think that it is appropriate
to apply this work-around to the measurement of off-mode. The merits of
the potentially increased efficiency during run-mode ought to be
captured in the run-mode test method, and not in the off-mode
calculation. Moreover, we are concerned that these changes will make it
easy for almost any unit on the market to meet the standard, thereby
negating the point of a standard in the first place. Finally, the test
procedure should be designed to report the actual value of off-mode.
These values should be evaluated in a future standards rulemaking.
For these reasons, we strongly encourage DOE to revisit this test
method with the help from stakeholders in the rulemaking to develop
more appropriate test procedures. For instance, there has been
discussion at utilities to conduct indepth testing of heat pumps and
central air conditioning units in the coming months. We ask that DOE
seriously consider postponing this final rule to assess stakeholder
interest in improving the test method.
In conclusion, we would like to reiterate our support to DOE for
updating the test procedures for residential central air conditioners
and heat pumps. We thank DOE for the opportunity to be involved in this
process and encourage DOE to carefully consider the recommendations
outlined in this letter.
Sincerely,
Rajiv Dabir,
Manager, Customer Energy Solutions, Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
Ramin Faramarzi, PE,
Manager, Technology Test Centers, Southern California Edison, Design &
Engineering Services.
[FR Doc. 2011-32620 Filed 12-20-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P