[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 39 (Tuesday, February 27, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8463-8465]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-03931]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[EERE-2017-BT-DET-0046]
Final Determination Regarding Energy Efficiency Improvements in
ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2016: Energy Standard for Buildings,
Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Notice of order.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: After receiving and reviewing public comments, the U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE) issues this Order finalizing DOE's
determination that the 2016 edition of the ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard
90.1: Energy Standard for Buildings, Except Low-Rise Residential
Buildings improves overall energy efficiency in buildings subject to
the code compared to the 2013 edition of Standard 90.1.
DATES: This Order applies as of February 27, 2018.
ADDRESSES: A copy of the final analysis is available at https://www.energycodes.gov/development/determinations.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeremiah Williams; U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, 1000
Independence Avenue SW, EE-5B, Washington, DC 20585; (202) 441-1288;
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Title III of the Energy Conservation and Production Act, as amended
(ECPA), establishes requirements for building energy conservation
standards, administered by the DOE Building Energy Codes Program. (42
U.S.C. 6831 et seq.) Section 304(b), of ECPA, as amended, provides that
whenever the ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1-1989 (Standard 90.1-1989
or 1989 edition), or any successor to that code, is revised, the
Secretary of Energy (Secretary) must make a determination, not later
than 12 months after such revision, whether the revised code would
improve energy efficiency in commercial buildings required to meet the
standard, and must publish notice of such determination in the Federal
Register. (42 U.S.C. 6833(b)(2)(A)) If the Secretary makes an
affirmative determination, within two years of the publication of the
determination, each State is required to certify that it has reviewed
and updated the provisions of its commercial building code regarding
energy efficiency with respect to the revised or successor code and
include in its certification a demonstration that the provisions of its
commercial building code, regarding energy efficiency, meet or exceed
the revised Standard. (42 U.S.C. 6833(b)(2)(B)(i))
Standard 90.1-2016, the most recent edition, was published by
ASHRAE in October 2016, triggering the statutorily-required DOE review
process. The Standard is developed under ANSI-approved consensus
procedures, and is under continuous maintenance by an ASHRAE Standing
Standard Project Committee (commonly referenced as SSPC 90.1). ASHRAE
has an established program for regular publication of addenda, or
revisions, including procedures for timely, documented, consensus
action on requested changes to the Standard. More information on the
consensus process and ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2016 is available
at: https://www.ashrae.org/resources-publications/bookstore/standard-90-1.
To meet the statutory requirement, DOE conducted a preliminary
analysis to quantify the expected energy savings associated with
Standard 90.1-2016 relative to the previous 2013 version. The
preliminary analysis is available at: https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2014-BT-DET-0009-0001.
[[Page 8464]]
Standard 90.1-2016 includes several paths for compliance in order
to provide flexibility to users of the Standard. The prescriptive path,
which is widely considered the most traditional, establishes criteria
for energy-related characteristics of individual building components
such as minimum insulation levels, maximum lighting power, and controls
for lighting and HVAC&R systems. Some of those requirements are
considered ``mandatory'', meaning that they must be met even when one
of the other optional paths are utilized (e.g., performance path).
These other optional paths are further described below.
In addition to the prescriptive path, Standard 90.1 includes two
optional whole building performance paths. The first, known as the
Energy Cost Budget (ECB) method, provides flexibility in allowing a
designer to ``trade-off'' compliance. This effectively allows a
designer to not meet a given prescriptive requirement if the impact on
energy cost is offset by exceeding other prescriptive requirements, as
demonstrated through established energy modeling protocols. A building
is deemed in compliance when the annual energy cost of the proposed
design is no greater than the annual energy cost of the reference
building design (baseline). In addition, Standard 90.1-2016 includes a
second performance approach, Appendix G, the Performance Rating Method.
In previous editions of Standard 90.1 (i.e., prior to the current 2016
edition), Appendix G has been used to rate the performance of buildings
that exceed the requirements of Standard 90.1 for ``beyond code''
programs, including the LEED Rating System, ASHRAE Standard 189.1, the
International Green Construction Code (IgCC), and other above-code
programs. Beginning with the 2016 edition of Standard 90.1, Appendix G
also adds the capability to demonstrate minimum energy code compliance.
II. Public Participation and Error Correction
In a July 25, 2017, Federal Register notice, DOE requested public
comments on the preliminary analysis. (82 FR 34513) DOE received four
public comments, all of which DOE considered (see Appendix A to this
Order.). In addition, a DOE review of the simulation analysis
identified a mistake in how much outdoor ventilation air was being
introduced in two prototypes. Correction of this mistake resulted in
savings increasing from .6% to 4.9% in Large Office and an increase of
less than 1% in Mid-rise Apartment. Overall savings from the standard
increased from 6.7% to 6.8%. These corrections were incorporated into
the final analysis document but did not impact the determination
ruling. DOE has now issued the final analysis of the expected energy
savings associated with Standard 90.1-2016 as compared to Standard
90.1-2013. The final analysis is available at: https://www.energycodes.gov/development/determinations.
III. Order
Based on the requirements of Section 304(b) of ECPA, as amended,
and DOE's final analysis prepared after consideration of comments on
the preliminary analysis and correction of the simulation analysis
describe above, I have determined that the 2016 edition of the ANSI/
ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1: Energy Standard for Buildings, Except Low-
Rise Residential Buildings would improve overall energy efficiency in
buildings subject to the code compared to the 2013 edition of Standard
90.1.
Issued in Washington, DC, on February 15, 2018.
Kathleen B. Hogan,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy.
Appendix A
DOE received comments on the preliminary analysis from the
American Chemistry Council (ACC) Plastics Division, the ACC Foam
Sheathing Committee, the Responsible Energy Codes Alliance (RECA),
and the Edison Electric Institute (EEI). The comments are summarized
below and are available at: https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EERE-2014-BT-DET-0009.
Addenda Scope
Comment: The ACC Plastics Division commented that DOE's analysis
is too conservative because it fails to consider the impact of
addenda only affecting existing buildings. ACC's Foam Sheathing
Committee expressed the same concern. ACC recommended that DOE
analyze provisions affecting existing buildings for consistency with
statutory requirements and to provide critical guidance to states.
DOE response: DOE notes that only one addendum (addendum e) in
the prescriptive and mandatory requirements was applicable to
existing buildings only and, therefore, was excluded from the
quantitative analysis. In addition, this addendum was determined to
decrease energy use through the qualitative analysis, which was
presented in the preliminary determination. The majority of addenda
apply to new buildings and the impact of these addenda was captured
in the analysis. The goal of the determination is to evaluate
whether the latest edition of Standard 90.1 improves energy
efficiency of buildings relative to the previous edition, and DOE
believes that the current methodology is sufficient to make such a
determination.
Comment: The Responsible Energy Codes Alliance (RECA)
recommended that the magnitude of the impact of requirements for
existing buildings in the Standard taken as a whole should be
evaluated.
DOE response: The impact of individual addenda impacting
existing buildings are considered as part of DOE's qualitative
analysis. However, baseline conditions for existing building can
vary significantly depending upon a wide variety of factors,
including the age of the building, baseline systems and components,
and past renovations. While these requirements are part of the
Standard and do impact energy efficiency in commercial buildings,
they cannot be adequately represented by the quantitative analysis.
Analyzing Compliance Paths
Comment: The ACC Plastics Division stated that DOE's analysis is
too conservative because it fails to consider the impact of addenda
affecting the performance paths for compliance in Standard 90.1.
DOE response: DOE notes that evaluating the prescriptive and
mandatory requirements effectively captures the impact of all
compliance paths within Standard 90.1-2016. The performance paths
within Standard 90.1-2016 are intended to provide equivalent
performance to the prescriptive path. As the energy efficiency
stringency of the prescriptive path is increased, the performance
path rules and targets are changed to mirror that increase. Using
the prescriptive and mandatory requirements therefore effectively
represents changes to the entire standard. Additionally, the purpose
of the performance paths is to give designers and builders
flexibility by allowing an almost unlimited number of trade-off
combinations which will comply with the Standard. Analytically, it
is not practical or possible to model all of these design
combinations.
Comment: RECA also recommended that DOE make a separate
determination for each of the compliance paths in Standard 90.1:
Prescriptive path, Energy Cost Budget, and performance path.
DOE response: DOE believes that evaluating the prescriptive and
mandatory requirements effectively captures the impact of all
compliance paths within Standard 90.1-2016 and is satisfactory for
the purpose of determining whether the new edition of Standard 90.1
will save energy in commercial buildings relative to the previous
edition. The performance paths within Standard 90.1-2016 are
intended to provide equivalent performance to the prescriptive path.
As the energy efficiency stringency of the prescriptive path is
increased, the performance path rules and targets are changed to
mirror that increase. Thus evaluating the performance paths
separately, even in simplified form, would provide no additional
information. The performance paths provide designers and builders
flexibility by allowing trade-offs between prescriptive requirements
and makes the Standard easier to comply with--a benefit for states
looking to adopt the new Standard.
[[Page 8465]]
Site vs. Source Energy
Comment: EEI's first comment on this topic was that DOE should
only use site energy and energy cost results in its determination
and that source energy results should not be used.
DOE response: DOE notes that EEI submitted a similar comment on
the Notice of Preliminary Determination for Standards 90.1-2010 and
2013. DOE continues to believe that source energy estimates are of
interest to many stakeholders and are important to the discussion of
global resources and environmental issues. However, DOE realizes
that site energy is the energy that typically appears on utility
bills and that is seen by the consumer, and that energy cost (as
shown on energy bills) is a metric also important to many consumers.
It is for these reasons that DOE provides all three metrics--site
energy, source energy, and energy cost--in its determinations.
Comment: EEI also stated that the value associated with source
energy for electricity overstates losses and does not appropriately
characterize the significant improvements in the overall efficiency
of the electricity sector because: (1) DOE considered only
commercial customers; (2) the U.S. Energy Information Administration
(EIA) fossil fuel heat rate assigned to renewable energy is too
high; (3) estimates of primary energy values should look forward not
backward; and (4) estimates of primary energy values should account
for regional differences in electricity generation and renewable
portfolio standards.
DOE response: DOE notes that EEI submitted a similar comment on
the Notice of Preliminary Determination for Standards 90.1-2010 and
2013. DOE continues to believe that its use of EIA data, conversion
factors, and treatment of renewable energy is appropriate and
remains consistent with past determinations and DOE's Appliance and
Equipment Standards Program (AESP) analyses. While it is true that
the site-to-source conversion factor used in this analysis is
derived from EIA data for commercial sector energy use, analyzing
the data from all sectors results in the same conversion factor. The
determination methodology does not calculate the future impact of
the new Standard, and thus DOE believes that using conversion
factors from the year of publication of the Standard is appropriate.
DOE notes that it makes analyses available for states on the future
impact of energy codes, which are beneficial for determining the
long-term benefits of new code adoption. Finally, the use of the
conversion factor from 2016 in this analysis also mitigates the
impact of using the fossil fuel equivalency approach to determine
the conversion factor for electricity because the proportion of
renewable sources in the overall fuel mix was very small in 2016.
[FR Doc. 2018-03931 Filed 2-26-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P