[Federal Register: December 11, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 239)]
[Notices]
[Page 75408-75417]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr11de08-46]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Case No. CAC-020]
Energy Conservation Program for Commercial Equipment: Publication
of the Petition for Waiver From Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA,
Inc. and Granting of the Application for Interim Waiver From the
Department of Energy Commercial Package Air Conditioner and Heat Pump
Test Procedure
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Notice of petition for waiver, granting of application for
interim waiver, and request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice announces receipt of and publishes a Petition for
Waiver from Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA, Inc. (Mitsubishi).
The Petition for Waiver (hereafter ``Mitsubishi Petition'') requests a
waiver of the Department of Energy (DOE) test procedure applicable to
commercial package air-cooled central air conditioners and heat pumps.
The waiver request is specific to the Mitsubishi variable speed and
variable refrigerant volume S&L Class (commercial) multi-split heat
pumps and heat recovery systems. Through this document, DOE is: (1)
Soliciting comments, data, and information with respect to the
Mitsubishi Petition; and (2) announcing our determination to grant an
Interim Waiver to Mitsubishi from the applicable DOE test procedure for
the subject commercial air-cooled, multi-split air conditioners and
heat pumps.
DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, and information with respect to
the Mitsubishi Petition until, but no later than January 12, 2009.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by case number ``CAC-
020,'' by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
E-mail: Michael.Raymond@ee.doe.gov. Include either the
case number [CAC-020], and/or ``Mitsubishi Petition'' in the subject
line of the message.
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.,
Suite 600, Washington, DC 20024. Please submit one signed original
paper copy.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name
and case number for this proceeding. Submit electronic comments in
WordPerfect, Microsoft Word, Portable Document Format (PDF), or text
(American Standard Code for Information Interchange (ASCII)) file
format and avoid the use of special characters or any form of
encryption. Wherever possible, include the electronic signature of the
author. Absent an electronic signature, comments submitted
electronically must be followed and authenticated by submitting the
signed original paper document. DOE does not accept telefacsimiles
(faxes).
Any person submitting written comments must also send a copy of
such comments to the petitioner, pursuant to 10 CFR 431.401(d). The
contact information for the petitioner is: Mr. William Rau, Senior Vice
President and General Manager, HVAC Advanced Products Division,
Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA, Inc., 4300 Lawrenceville-Suwanee
Road, Suwanee, GA 30024.
According 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 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
[[Page 75409]]
status of the information and treat it according to its determination.
Docket: For access to the docket to review the background documents
relevant to this matter, you may visit the U.S. Department of Energy,
950 L'Enfant Plaza, SW., (Resource Room of the Building Technologies
Program), Washington, DC 20024; (202) 586-2945, between 9 a.m. and 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Available
documents include the following items: (1) This notice; (2) public
comments received; (3) the Petition for Waiver and Application for
Interim Waiver; and (4) prior DOE rulemakings regarding similar central
air conditioning and heat pump equipment. Please call Ms. Brenda
Edwards at the above telephone number for additional information
regarding visiting the Resource Room.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Michael G. Raymond, U.S.
Department of Energy, Building Technologies Program, Mail Stop EE-2J,
Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC
20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-9611. E-mail:
Michael.Raymond@ee.doe.gov.
Ms. Francine Pinto or Mr. Eric Stas, U.S. Department of Energy,
Office of the General Counsel, Mail Stop GC-72, Forrestal Building,
1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0103. Telephone:
(202) 586-9507. E-mail: Francine.Pinto@hq.doe.gov or
Eric.stas@hq.doe.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Background and Authority
II. Petition for Waiver
III. Application for Interim Waiver
IV. Alternate Test Procedure
V. Summary and Request for Comments
I. Background and Authority
Title III of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) sets
forth a variety of provisions concerning energy efficiency, including
Part A of Title III which establishes the ``Energy Conservation Program
for Consumer Products Other Than Automobiles.'' \1\ (42 U.S.C. 6291-
6309) Similar to the Program in Part A, Part A-1 of Title III provides
for an energy efficiency program titled, ``Certain Industrial
Equipment,'' which includes commercial air conditioning equipment,
package boilers, water heaters, and other types of commercial
equipment.\2\ (42 U.S.C. 6311-6317)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This part was originally titled Part B; however, it was
redesignated Part A, after Part B of Title III was repealed by
Public Law 109-58.
\2\ This part was originally titled Part C; however, it was
redesignated Part A-1, after Part B of Title III was repealed by
Public Law 109-58.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Today's notice involves commercial equipment under Part A-1. Part
A-1 specifically includes definitions (42 U.S.C. 6311), test procedures
(42 U.S.C. 6314), labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6315), energy
conservation standards (42 U.S.C 6313), and the authority to require
information and reports from manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6316). With
respect to test procedures, it generally authorizes the Secretary of
Energy (the Secretary) to prescribe test procedures that are reasonably
designed to produce results which measure energy efficiency, energy
use, and estimated annual operating costs, and that are not unduly
burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2))
For commercial package air-conditioning and heating equipment, EPCA
provides that ``the test procedures shall be those generally accepted
industry testing procedures or rating procedures developed or
recognized by the Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute [ARI] or
by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning
Engineers [ASHRAE], as referenced in ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1 and in
effect on June 30, 1992.'' (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(4)(A)) Under 42 U.S.C.
6314(a)(4)(B), the statute further directs the Secretary to amend the
test procedure for a covered commercial product if the industry test
procedure is amended, unless the Secretary determines that such a
modified test procedure does not meet the statutory criteria set forth
in 42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2) and (3).
On December 8, 2006, DOE published a final rule adopting test
procedures for commercial package air-conditioning and heating
equipment, effective January 8, 2007. 71 FR 71340. DOE adopted ARI
Standard 340/360-2004, ``Performance Rating of Commercial and
Industrial Unitary Air-Conditioning and Heat Pump Equipment,'' for
small and large commercial package air-cooled heat pumps with
capacities >= 65,000 Btu/h and < 760,000 British thermal units per hour
(Btu/h). Id. at 71370. Pursuant to this rulemaking, DOE's regulations
at 10 CFR 431.95(b)(2) incorporate by reference the relevant ARI
Standard, and Table 1 to 10 CFR 431.96 directs manufacturers of
commercial package air-cooled air conditioning and heating equipment to
use the appropriate procedure when measuring energy efficiency of those
products. (The cooling capacities of Mitsubishi's commercial S&L Class
multi-split heat pump products range from 72,000 Btu/hr to 360,000 Btu/
hr, thereby resulting in these products falling within the range
covered by ARI Standard 340/360-2004.)
In addition, DOE's regulations contain provisions allowing a person
to seek a waiver from the test procedure requirements for covered
commercial equipment, for which the petitioner's basic model contains
one or more design characteristics which prevent testing according to
the prescribed test procedures, or if the prescribed test procedures
may evaluate the basic model in a manner so unrepresentative of its
true energy consumption as to provide materially inaccurate comparative
data. 10 CFR 431.401(a)(1). The waiver provisions for commercial
equipment are found at 10 CFR 431.401 and are substantively identical
to those for covered consumer products. Petitioners must include in
their petition any alternate test procedures known to evaluate the
basic model in a manner representative of its energy consumption. 10
CFR 431.401(b)(1)(iii). The Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency
and Renewable Energy (Assistant Secretary) may grant a waiver subject
to conditions, including adherence to alternate test procedures. 10 CFR
431.401(f)(4). In general, a waiver terminates on the effective date of
a final rule, published in the Federal Register, which prescribes
amended test procedures appropriate to the model series manufactured by
the petitioner, thereby eliminating any need for the continuation of
the waiver. 10 CFR 431.401(g).
The waiver process also allows any person who has submitted a
Petition for Waiver to file an Application for Interim Waiver of the
applicable test procedure requirements. 10 CFR 431.401(a)(2). The
Assistant Secretary will grant an Interim Waiver request if it is
determined that the applicant will experience economic hardship if the
Application for Interim Waiver is denied, if it appears likely that the
Petition for Waiver will be granted, and/or the Assistant Secretary
determines that it would be desirable for public policy reasons to
grant immediate relief pending a determination on the Petition for
Waiver. 10 CFR 431.401(e)(3). An Interim Waiver remains in effect for a
period of 180 days or until DOE issues its determination on the
Petition for Waiver, whichever occurs first, and it may be extended by
DOE for an additional 180 days, if necessary. 10 CFR 431.401(e)(4).
[[Page 75410]]
II. Petition for Waiver
On March 28, 2008, Mitsubishi filed a Petition for Waiver from the
test procedures at 10 CFR 431.96 which are applicable to commercial
package air-cooled heat pumps and an Application for Interim Waiver. As
noted above, the applicable test procedure for Mitsubishi's commercial
S&L Class multi-split heat pumps is ARI Standard 340/360-2004, which
manufacturers are directed to use pursuant to Table 1 of 10 CFR 431.96.
The capacities of the Mitsubishi S&L Class multi-split heat pumps range
from 72,000 Btu/hr to 240,000 Btu/hr, and outdoor units may be combined
to create systems of up to 360,000 Btu/hr capacity. Accordingly, the
applicable test procedure for all these sizes is ARI Standard 340/360-
2004.
Mitsubishi seeks a waiver from the applicable test procedures under
10 CFR 431.96 on the grounds that its S&L Class multi-split heat pumps
and heat recovery systems contain design characteristics that prevent
testing according to the current DOE test procedures. Specifically,
Mitsubishi asserts that the two primary factors that prevent testing of
multi-split variable speed products, regardless of manufacturer, are
the same factors stated in the waivers that DOE granted to Mitsubishi
Electric & Electronics USA, Inc. (Mitsubishi) for a similar line of
commercial multi-split air-conditioning systems:
Testing laboratories cannot test products with so many
indoor units.
There are too many possible combinations of indoor and
outdoor units to test.
72 FR 71383 (December 17, 2007); 72 FR 71387 (December 17, 2007); 72 FR
17528 (April 9, 2007); 69 FR 52661 (August 27, 2004).
The S&L Class has operational characteristics similar to
Mitsubishi's R22 and R410A models, which have already been granted
waivers, and the WR2 and WY products, which have been granted an
Interim Waiver. Each of the S&L Class indoor units is designed to be
used with up to 50 other indoor units, which need not be the same
models. There are 64 different indoor models. Unlike other multi-split
products, Mitsubishi's S&L Class has the capability to combine outdoor
units to create a larger capacity system. Mitsubishi further states
that its S&L Class products' capability to perform simultaneous heating
and cooling is not captured by the DOE test procedure. This is true,
but not relevant. DOE is required by EPCA to use the full-load
descriptor EER for these products, and simultaneous heating and cooling
does not occur when operating at full load.
Accordingly, Mitsubishi requests that DOE grant a waiver from the
applicable test procedures for its S&L Class product designs, until a
suitable test method can be prescribed. DOE believes that the S&L Class
Mitsubishi equipment and Mitsubishi equipment for which waivers have
previously been granted are alike with respect to the factors that make
them eligible for test procedure waivers. DOE is therefore granting to
Mitsubishi an S&L Class product waiver similar to the previous
Mitsubishi multi-split waivers. Mitsubishi is requesting one
modification to the alternate test procedure granted in previous
waivers made necessary to account for the ability of S&L Class products
to connect multiple outdoor units. This modification would allow
representation of non-tested combinations based on the capacity-
weighted average of the efficiency ratings of tested combinations of
the outdoor units used in the system. Furthermore, Mitsubishi states
that failure to grant the waiver would result in economic hardship
because it would prevent the company from marketing its S&L Class
products. Also, Mitsubishi states that it is willing to work closely
with DOE, ARI, and other agencies to develop appropriate test
procedures, as necessary.
III. Application for Interim Waiver
On March 28, 2008, in addition to its Petition for Waiver,
Mitsubishi submitted to DOE an Application for Interim Waiver.
Mitsubishi's Application for Interim Waiver does not provide sufficient
information to evaluate the level of economic hardship Mitsubishi will
likely experience if its Application for Interim Waiver is denied.
However, in those instances where the likely success of the Petition
for Waiver has been demonstrated, based upon DOE having granted a
waiver for similar product designs, it is in the public interest to
have similar products tested and rated for energy consumption on a
comparable basis. DOE has previously granted Interim Waivers to Daikin,
Mitsubishi, Samsung and Fujitsu for comparable commercial multi-split
air conditioners and heat pumps. 72 FR 35986 (July 2, 2007), 72 FR
17533 (April 9, 2007), 70 FR 9629 (Feb. 28, 2005), 70 FR 5980 (Feb. 4,
2005), respectively.
Moreover, as noted above, DOE approved the Petition for Waiver from
Daikin, Fujitsu, Samsung and Mitsubishi for their comparable lines of
multi-split air conditioners and heat pumps. 73 FR 39680 (July 10,
2008); 72 FR 71383 (Dec. 17, 2007); 72 FR 71387 (Dec. 17, 2007); 72 FR
17528 (April 9, 2007). The two principal reasons for granting the
waivers also apply to Mitsubishi's S&L Class products: (1) Test
laboratories cannot test products with so many indoor units; \3\ and
(2) it is impractical to test so many combinations of indoor units with
each outdoor unit. Thus, DOE has determined that it is likely that
Mitsubishi's Petition for Waiver will be granted for its new S&L Class
multi-split models. Therefore, it is ordered that:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ According to the Mitsubishi petition, up to 50 indoor units
are possible candidates for testing of its commercial package multi-
split heat pump and heat recovery systems. However, DOE believes
that the practical limits for testing would be about five units.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Application for Interim Waiver filed by Mitsubishi is hereby
granted for Mitsubishi's S&L Class air-cooled multi-split central air
conditioning heat pumps, subject to the specifications and conditions
below.
1. Mitsubishi shall not be required to test or rate its S&L Class
commercial air-cooled multi-split products on the basis of the
currently applicable test procedure under 10 CFR 431.96, which
incorporates by reference ARI Standard 340/360-2004.
2. Mitsubishi shall be required to test and rate its S&L Class
commercial air-cooled multi-split products according to the alternate
test procedure as set forth in section IV(3), ``Alternate test
procedure.''
The Interim Waiver applies to the following models:
CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning System Outdoor
Equipment:
Y-Series (PUHY) 208/230-3-60 and 460-3-60 split-system
variable-speed heat pumps with individual model nominal cooling
capacities of 72,000, 96,000, 120,000 and 144,000 Btu/h, and associated
combined model nominal cooling capacities in the range between 144,000
and 360,000 Btu/hr.
Hyper-heat Y-Series (PUHY-HP) 208/230-3-60 split-system
variable-speed heat pumps with hyper-heat technology, with individual
model nominal cooling capacities of 72,000 and 96,000 Btu/h, and
associated combined model nominal cooling capacities in the range
between 144,000 and 192,000 Btu/hr.
CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning System Indoor
Equipment:
P*FY models, ranging from 6,000 to 48,000 Btu/h, 208/230-1-60 and
from 72,000 to 120,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split system variable-
capacity air conditioner or heat pump.
[[Page 75411]]
PCFY Series--Ceiling Suspended--with capacities of 12/18/
24/30/36 MBtu/h.
PDFY Series--Ceiling Concealed Ducted--with capacities of
06/08/12/15/18/24/27/30/36/48 MBtu/h.
PEFY Series--Ceiling Concealed Ducted (Low Profile)--with
capacities of 06/08/12/18/24 MBtu/h.
PEFY Series--Ceiling Concealed Ducted (Alternate High
Static Option)--with capacities of 15/18/24/27/30/36/48/54/72/96 MBtu/
h.
PEFY-F Series--Ceiling Concealed Ducted (100% OA Option)--
with capacities of 30/54/72/96/120 MBtu/h.
PFFY Series--Floor Standing (Concealed)--with capacities
of 06/08/12/15/18/24 MBtu/h.
PFFY Series--Floor Standing (Exposed)--with capacities of
06/08/12/15/18/24 MBtu/h.
PKFY Series--Wall-Mounted--with capacities of 06/08/12/18/
24/30 MBtu/h.
PLFY Series--4-Way Airflow Ceiling Cassette--with
capacities of 12/18/24/30/36 MBtu/h.
PMFY Series--1-Way Airflow Ceiling Cassette--with
capacities of 06/08/12/15 MBtu/h.
This Interim Waiver is conditioned upon the presumed validity of
statements, representations, and documents provided by the petitioner.
DOE may revoke or modify this Interim Waiver at any time upon a
determination that the factual basis underlying the Petition for Waiver
is incorrect, or upon a determination that the results from the
alternate test procedure are unrepresentative of the basic models' true
energy consumption characteristics.
IV. Alternate Test Procedure
In response to two recent Petitions for Waiver from Mitsubishi, DOE
specified an alternate test procedure to provide a basis from which
Mitsubishi could test and make valid energy efficiency representations
for its R410A CITY MULTI products, as well as for its R22 multi-split
products. Alternate test procedures related to the Mitsubishi petitions
were published in the Federal Register on April 9, 2007. 72 FR 17528;
72 FR 17533.
In general, DOE understands that existing testing facilities have a
limited ability to test multiple indoor units at one time, and the
number of possible combinations of indoor and outdoor units for some
variable refrigerant flow zoned systems is impractical to test. We
further note that subsequent to the waiver that DOE granted for
Mitsubishi's R22 multi-split products, ARI formed a committee to
discuss the issue and to work on developing an appropriate testing
protocol for variable refrigerant flow systems. However, to date, no
additional test methodologies have been adopted by the committee or
submitted to DOE. The ARI committee has considered a draft ISO
methodology, ISO CD 15042, for multi-split systems. However, it
contains no guidance that would affect this waiver.
Therefore, as discussed below, as a condition for granting this
Interim Waiver to Mitsubishi, DOE is including an alternate test
procedure similar to those granted to Mitsubishi for its R22 and R410A
products. DOE plans to consider the same alternate test procedure in
the context of the subsequent Decision and Order pertaining to
Mitsubishi's Petition for Waiver. Utilization of this alternate test
procedure will allow Mitsubishi to test and make energy efficiency
representations for its S&L Class products. More broadly, DOE has
applied a similar alternate test procedure to other waivers for similar
commercial air conditioners and heat pumps. Such cases include
Samsung's waiver for its multi-split products at 72 FR 71387 (Dec. 17,
2007), Fujitsu's waiver for its multi-split products at 72 FR 71383
(Dec. 17, 2007), and Daikin's waiver for its multi-split products at 73
FR 39680 (July 10, 2008). DOE believes that an alternate test procedure
is needed so that manufacturers of such products can make valid and
consistent representations of energy efficiency for their air-
conditioning and heat pump products.
In the present case, DOE is modifying the alternate test procedure
taken from the above-referenced waiver granted to Mitsubishi for its
R410A and R22 CITY MULTI products, with an additional modification to
account for combinations using multiple outdoor units. DOE plans to
consider inclusion of the following waiver language in the Decision and
Order for Mitsubishi's S&L Class commercial multi-split air-cooled heat
pump models:
(1) The ``Petition for Waiver'' filed by Mitsubishi Electric &
Electronics USA, Inc. is hereby granted as set forth in the paragraphs
below.
(2) Mitsubishi shall not be required to test or rate its S&L Class
variable refrigerant volume multi-split heat pump products listed above
in section III, on the basis of the currently applicable test
procedures, but shall be required to test and rate such products
according to the alternate test procedure as set forth in paragraph
(3).
(3) Alternate test procedure.
(A) Mitsubishi shall be required to test the products listed in
section III above according to the test procedures for central air
conditioners and heat pumps prescribed by DOE at 10 CFR 431.96, except
that Mitsubishi shall test a ``tested combination'' selected in
accordance with the provisions of subparagraph (B) of this paragraph.
For every other system combination using the same outdoor unit as the
tested combination, Mitsubishi shall make representations concerning
the S&L Class products covered in this waiver according to the
provisions of subparagraph (C) below.
(B) Tested combination. The term ``tested combination'' means a
sample basic model comprised of units that are production units, or are
representative of production units, of the basic model being tested.
For the purposes of this waiver, the tested combination shall have the
following features:
(1) The basic model of a variable refrigerant flow system used as a
tested combination shall consist an outdoor unit (an outdoor unit can
include multiple outdoor units that have been manifolded into a single
refrigeration system, with a specific model number) that is matched
with between 2 and 8 indoor units in total; for multi-split systems,
each of these indoor units shall be designed for individual operation.
(2) The indoor units shall--
(i) Represent the highest sales model family, or another indoor
model family if the highest sales model family does not provide
sufficient capacity (see ii);
(ii) Together, have a nominal cooling capacity that is between 95%
and 105% of the nominal cooling capacity of the outdoor unit;
(iii) Not, individually, have a nominal cooling capacity that is
greater than 50% of the nominal cooling capacity of the outdoor unit;
(iv) Operate at fan speeds that are consistent with the
manufacturer's specifications; and
(v) All be subject to the same minimum external static pressure
requirement while being configurable to produce the same static
pressure at the exit of each outlet plenum when manifolded as per
section 2.4.1 of 10 CFR Part 430, Subpart B, Appendix M.
(C) Representations. In making representations about the energy
efficiency of its S&L Class variable speed and variable refrigerant
volume air-cooled multi-split heat pump and heat recovery system
products, for compliance, marketing, or other purposes, Mitsubishi must
fairly disclose the results of testing under the DOE test procedure,
doing so in a manner consistent with the provisions outlined below:
[[Page 75412]]
(i) For S&L Class combinations using a single outdoor unit tested
in accordance with this alternate test procedure, Mitsubishi may make
representations based on these test results.
(ii) For S&L Class combinations using a single outdoor unit that
have not been tested, Mitsubishi may make representations based on the
testing results for the tested combination and which are consistent
with either of the two following methods, except that only method (a)
may be used, if available:
(a) Representation of non-tested combinations according to an
Alternative Rating Method (ARM) approved by DOE; or
(b) Representation of non-tested combinations at the same energy
efficiency level as the tested combination with the same outdoor unit.
(iii) For S&L Class combinations utilizing multiple outdoor units
that have been tested in accordance with this alternate test procedure,
MEUS may make representations based on those test results.
(iv) For S&L Class combinations utilizing multiple outdoor units
that have not been tested, MEUS may make representations which are
consistent with any of the three following methods, except that only
method (a) may be used, if available:
(a) Representation of non-tested combinations according to an
Alternative Rating Method (``ARM'') approved by DOE.
(b) Representation of non-tested combinations at the same energy
efficiency level as the tested combination with the same combination of
outdoor units.
(c) Representation of non-tested combinations based on the
capacity-weighted average of the efficiency ratings for the tested
combinations for each of the individual outdoor units used in the
system, as determined in accordance with the provisions of this
alternate test procedure.
V. Summary and Request for Comments
Through today's notice, DOE announces receipt of the Mitsubishi
Petition for Waiver from the test procedures applicable to Mitsubishi's
S&L Class commercial multi-split heat pump products, and for the
reasons articulated above, DOE is granting Mitsubishi an Interim Waiver
from those procedures. As part of this notice, DOE is publishing
Mitsubishi's Petition for Waiver in its entirety. The Petition contains
no confidential information. Furthermore, today's notice includes an
alternate test procedure that Mitsubishi is required to follow as a
condition of its Interim Waiver and that DOE is considering including
in its subsequent Decision and Order. In this alternate test procedure,
DOE is defining a ``tested combination'' which Mitsubishi could use in
lieu of testing all retail combinations of its S&L Class multi-split
heat pump products.
Furthermore, should a subsequent manufacturer be unable to test all
retail combinations, DOE is considering allowing such manufacturers to
rate waived products according to an ARM approved by DOE, or to rate
waived products the same as the specified tested combination with the
same outdoor unit(s). DOE is also considering applying a similar
alternate test procedure to other comparable Petitions for Waiver for
commercial air conditioners and heat pumps. Such cases include
Samsung's Petition for Waiver for its Digital Variable Multi (DVM)
products at 72 FR 71387 (Dec. 17, 2007), and Fujitsu's Petition for
Waiver for its Airstage variable refrigerant flow products at 72 FR
71383 (Dec. 17, 2007). DOE is interested in receiving comments on the
issues addressed in this notice. Pursuant to 10 CFR 431.401(d), any
person submitting written comments must also send a copy of such
comments to the petitioner, whose contact information is included in
the section entitled ADDRESSES section above.
Issued in Washington, DC, on December 1, 2008.
David E. Rodgers,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency, Office of Technology
Development, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
March 28, 2008
Alexander Karsner
Assistant Secretary
Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy
U.S. Department of Energy
1000 Independence Ave., SW.
Washington, DC 20585-0121
Re: Petition for Waiver of Test Procedures and Application for Interim
Waiver for CITY MULTI VRFZ S&L Class Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps
Dear Assistant Secretary Karsner:
Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA, Inc. (``MEUS'') respectfully
submits this petition for waiver, and application for interim waiver,
of the commercial test procedures applicable to the new S&L Class of
MEUS's CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning (``VRFZ'') product
line pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 431.401. The S&L Class is
similar to the R22 and R410A models of MEUS's CITY MULTI VRFZ product
line, which were previously granted waivers, except that (1) these
units have a more compact chassis design, and (2) the outdoor units may
be installed individually in a VRFZ system or combined together to
create larger capacity VRFZ systems, up to 240,000 Btu/h for the R2-
Series units and 360,000 Btu/h for the Y-Series units. Similar to the
CITY MULTI systems covered by the earlier waivers, the systems covered
by this petition cannot be tested according to the prescribed test
procedures for commercial products, and, therefore, should be granted a
waiver from the applicable test procedures. MEUS proposes that DOE
impose an alternate test procedure that can be applied practicably to
these products, consistent with the alternate test procedure outlined
in the waivers applicable to the R22 and R410A models. MEUS
simultaneously requests an interim waiver covering the S&L Class.
The S&L Class contains units that fall into the commercial category
of air conditioners. Thus, MEUS is seeking a waiver from the commercial
test procedures applicable to these models. While the Department of
Energy (``DOE'' or ``Department'') has provided a test procedure which
allows manufacturers to practically test and rate their residential
multi-split systems that can be combined into many potential system
combinations,\4\ currently no such solution exists for similar
commercial products. The Air-Conditioning, Heating and Refrigeration
Institute (``AHRI'') is currently in the process of developing a test
procedure for these types of commercial products, but the test
procedure has yet to be finalized. MEUS is simply seeking a waiver for
the interim period of time until a standard test procedure that can
test and rate these commercial multi-split products is developed and
codified by DOE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Test
Procedure for Residential Central Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps,
72 FR 59906 (Oct. 22, 2007) (hereinafter, ``October 2007 Final
Rule''). MEUS will test and rate the residential sizes of the S&L
Class pursuant to the test procedure outlined in the October 2007
Final Rule. As described below, the S&L Class has the capability of
combining outdoor units together to create larger capacity systems,
with combined capacities of a commercial-sized unit. We expect to
test and rate systems with single outdoor units with capacities of
less than 65,000 Btu/h under the residential test procedure to avoid
any confusion caused by multiple ratings for the same unit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Background
DOE has previously granted waivers and interim waivers from the
applicable air conditioner and heat pump test procedures for other
models of MEUS's
[[Page 75413]]
CITY MULTI products. On August 27, 2004, DOE granted a waiver from the
commercial air conditioner and heat pump test procedures for MEUS's R22
CITY MULTI products.\5\ DOE found that the R22 models should be granted
a waiver because they have ``one or more design characteristics which *
* * prevent testing of the basic model according to the prescribed test
procedures.'' \6\ In April 2007, the Department granted MEUS's
requested waiver for its R410A CITY MULTI models based on an identical
finding.\7\ DOE found that ``the testing problems described [by MEUS]
do prevent testing of the R410A CITY MULTI basic model according to the
test procedures prescribed.'' \8\ Both the R22 and R410A products
cannot be tested according to the prescribed test procedures for two
main reasons: (1) The test laboratories cannot test products with so
many indoor units; and (2) there are too many possible combinations of
indoor and outdoor units (well over 1,000,000 combinations for each
outdoor unit), and it is impractical to test so many combinations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Decision
and Order Granting a Waiver From the DOE Commercial Package Air
Conditioner and Heat Pump Test Procedure to Mitsubishi Electric
(Case No. CAC-008), 69 FR 52660 (Aug. 27, 2004) (hereinafter, ``R22
Waiver'').
\6\ R22 Waiver at 52662. See also 10 CFR 431.201(a)(1) and
(f)(4) (2007) (outlining the standards that must be met for the
grant of a waiver).
\7\ Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Decision
and Order Granting a Waiver From the Department of Energy (DOE)
Residential and Commercial Package Air Conditioner and Heat Pump
Test Procedures to Mitsubishi Electric, and Modification of a 2004
Waiver Granted to Mitsubishi Electric From the Same DOE Test
Procedures (Case No. CAC-012), 72 FR 17528 (Apr. 9, 2007)
(hereinafter, ``R410A Waiver'').
\8\ R410A Waiver at 17531.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On April 9, 2007, DOE granted an interim waiver for the WR2 and WY
models of MEUS's CITY MULTI products.\9\ MEUS's WR2 and WY models are
similar to the R410A products except that they represent the models of
the CITY MULTI product line that are water-source heat pumps. Since DOE
found that the testing problems that existed with the R22 and R410A
products applied to the WR2 and WY products as well, it was ``likely
that MEUS' Petition for Waiver will be granted.'' \10\ Thus, DOE
granted an interim waiver for the WR2 and WY models.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products:
Publication of the Petition for Waiver and Granting of the
Application for Interim Waiver of Mitsubishi Electric From the DOE
Commercial Water Source Heat Pump Test Procedure [Case No. CAC-015],
72 FR 17533 (Apr. 9, 2007) (hereinafter, ``WR2/WY Interim Waiver'').
\10\ WR2/WY Interim Waiver at 17535.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. S&L Class Design Characteristics
MEUS's line of CITY MULTI VRFZ products combines advanced
technologies and are complete, commercial zoning systems that save
energy through the effective use of variable refrigerant control and
distribution, zoning diversity, and system intelligence. As highlighted
in the previous petitions for waiver for the other CITY MULTI products,
the operating characteristics of a VRFZ system allow each indoor unit
to have a different mode of operation (i.e., on/off/heat/cool/dry/auto/
fan) and a different set temperature allowing great flexibility of
operation. The variable speed compressor and the system controls direct
refrigerant flow throughout the system to precisely match the
performance of the system to the load of the conditioned areas. The
CITY MULTI VRFZ systems also have variable frequency inverter driven
scroll compressors, and, therefore, have nearly infinite steps of
capacity. Additionally, the CITY MULTI VRFZ R2-Series products offer
consumers the option of simultaneous heating and cooling. These
characteristics allow the CITY MULTI VRFZ systems to offer cost-
effective functionality and significant energy savings.
Similar to the other CITY MULTI models, the S&L Class has the
capability of connecting a single outdoor unit to up to 30 indoor
units.\11\ Unlike the other CITY MULTI products, however, the S&L Class
has the additional capability of installing the outdoor units
individually in a VRFZ system or combining them together to create
larger capacity VFRZ system. The Y-Series and R2-Series outdoor units
have nominal cooling capacities between 72,000 and 144,000 Btu/h, which
may be combined to create systems with nominal cooling capacities up to
240,000 Btu/h for the R2-Series units and 360,000 for the Y-Series
units. A three module outdoor unit system may be connected to up to 50
indoor units. The ability to combine smaller outdoor units to create
larger outdoor units is a unique feature of the S&L Class that gives
these systems tremendous flexibility to meet customers' specific
demands. This feature, however, increases the already very large number
of potential combinations by several times.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ MEUS offers 64 indoor models in its S&L Class CITY MULTI
product line. The number of potential combinations of the 64 models
in sets of up to 30 is in the millions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although the energy saving characteristics of these products are
not credited under current rules, they are precisely the types of
technological innovations and applications that advance the
Congressional intent of promoting energy savings. These CITY MULTI VRFZ
systems represent a revolutionary advance in HVAC technology, well
positioned to provide new and existing commercial buildings with
effective use of energy and an operationally cost-effective source of
heating and cooling. Additionally, with some of the innovative
capabilities of the CITY MULTI Controls Network, the potential for
energy management and energy savings are even greater. The CITY MULTI
products' unique design characteristics are clearly consistent with
U.S. government's efforts to encourage the availability of high
performance products that consume less energy.
III. Test Procedures From Which Waiver Is Requested
MEUS's petition requests waiver from the commercial test procedures
for its S&L Class products. As stated above, the S&L Class contains
units that fall into both the residential and commercial categories of
air conditioners. However, since DOE recently provided a test procedure
which allows manufacturers to test and rate their residential multi-
split systems that can be combined into multiple potential system
combinations, MEUS is only seeking a waiver from the commercial test
procedures applicable to these models.
Title III of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (``EPCA'') sets
forth the provisions concerning energy efficiency. Part C of EPCA Title
III provides the energy efficiency requirements and test procedures for
commercial products.\12\ On October 21, 2004, DOE published a direct
final rule, effective December 21, 2004, adopting updated test
procedures for commercial package air conditioning equipment.\13\ These
test procedures are outlined in DOE's regulations, at 10 CFR 431.96.
For commercial package air conditioning equipment with capacities
between 65,000 and 760,000 Btu/h, ARI Standard 340/360-2004 is the
applicable test procedure. The capacities of MEUS's S&L Class CITY
MULTI products sold for commercial use fall in that range. Therefore,
MEUS requests waiver from
[[Page 75414]]
the test procedures for commercial products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ 42 U.S.C. 6311-6317.
\13\ Energy Efficiency Program for Certain Commercial and
Industrial Equipment: Test Procedures and Efficiency Standards for
Commercial Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps, Direct Final Rule, 69 FR
61962 (Oct. 21, 2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
MEUS proposes to test and rate a tested combination for each
individual outdoor unit pursuant to an alternate test procedure
discussed below. As noted earlier, however, the outdoor units in the
S&L Class can be combined to make larger capacity systems. Thus, MEUS
is also proposing that it may make representations about the efficiency
of systems using combinations of outdoor units based on: (1) The
results of testing such combinations pursuant to the alternate test
procedure outlined below; or (2) the capacity-weighted average of the
efficiency ratings, determined pursuant to the alternate test
procedure, of the individual outdoor units that make up the combined
system.
IV. Basic Models for Which Waiver Is Requested
MEUS requests a waiver from the test procedures for the basic
models consisting of combinations of the following products:
CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning System Outdoor
Equipment:
Y-Series (PUHY) 208/230-3-60 and 460-3-60 split-system
variable-speed heat pumps with individual model nominal cooling
capacities of 72,000, 96,000, 120,000 and 144,000 Btu/h, and associated
combined model nominal cooling capacities in the range between 144,000
and 360,000 Btu/h.
Hyper-heat Y-Series (PUHY-HP) 208/230-3-60 split-system
variable-speed heat pumps with hyper-heat technology, with individual
model nominal cooling capacities of 72,000 and 96,000 Btu/h, and
associated combined model nominal cooling capacities in the range
between 144,000 and 192,000 Btu/h.
R2-Series (PURY) 208/230-3-60 and 460-3-60 split-system
variable-speed heat pumps with heat recovery and with individual model
nominal cooling capacities of 72,000, 96,000, 120,000 and 144,000 Btu/
h, and associated combined model nominal cooling capacities in the
range between 144,000 and 240,000 Btu/h.
CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning System Indoor
Equipment:
P*FY models, ranging from 6,000 to 48,000 Btu/h, 208/230-1-60 and
from 72,000 to 120,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split system variable-
capacity air conditioner or heat pump.
PCFY Series--Ceiling Suspended--with capacities of 12/18/
24/30/36 MBtu/h.
PDFY Series--Ceiling Concealed Ducted--with capacities of
06/08/12/15/18/24/27/30/36/48 MBtu/h.
PEFY Series--Ceiling Concealed Ducted (Low Profile)--with
capacities of 06/08/12/18/24 MBtu/h.
PEFY Series--Ceiling Concealed Ducted (Alternate High
Static Option)--with capacities of 15/18/24/27/30/36/48/54/72/96 MBtu/
h.
PEFY-F Series--Ceiling Concealed Ducted (100% OA Option)--
with capacities of 30/54/72/96/120 MBtu/h.
PFFY Series--Floor Standing (Concealed)--with capacities
of 06/08/12/15/18/24 MBtu/h.
PFFY Series--Floor Standing (Exposed)--with capacities of
06/08/12/15/18/24 MBtu/h.
PKFY Series--Wall-Mounted--with capacities of 06/08/12/18/
24/30 MBtu/h.
PLFY Series--4-Way Airflow Ceiling Cassette--with
capacities of 12/18/24/30/36 MBtu/h.
PMFY Series--1-Way Airflow Ceiling Cassette--with
capacities of 06/08/12/15 MBtu/h.
V. Need for Waiver of Test Procedures
The Department's regulations contain provisions allowing a person
to seek a waiver from the test procedure requirements for commercial
equipment. These provisions are set forth in 10 CFR 431.401. These
waiver provisions allow DOE to temporarily waive test procedures for a
particular basic model when a petitioner shows that the basic model
contains one or more design characteristics that prevent testing
according to the prescribed test procedures, or when the prescribed
test procedures may evaluate the basic model in a manner so
unrepresentative of its true energy consumption as to provide
materially inaccurate comparative data.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ 10 CFR 431.401(a)(1) and (f)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In both the R22 Waiver and R410A Waiver, DOE found that MEUS's CITY
MULTI products contained one or more design characteristics which
prevent testing of the basic model according to the prescribed test
procedures.\15\ DOE granted MEUS's request for an interim waiver for
the WR2 and WY CITY MULTI products because the testing problems that
existed with the R22 and R410A products applied to the WR2 and WY
products as well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ R22 Waiver at 52662; R410A Waiver at 17531.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The S&L Class has similar operational characteristics as the R22
and R410A models, which have already been granted a waiver, and the WR2
and WY products, which have been granted an interim waiver. Similar to
the R22 and R410A models, and the WR2 and WY systems, the S&L Class can
connect more indoor units than the test laboratories can physically
test at one time. Each of the S&L Class indoor units is designed to be
used with up to 50 other indoor units with a three modual outdoor unit
system. These connected indoor units need not be the same models--there
are 64 different indoor models that can be combined in a multitude of
different combinations to address customer needs. The testing
laboratories will not physically be able to test many of the S&L Class
system combinations because of the inability to test products with so
many indoor units.
Additionally, there are millions of potential combinations that can
be created with the various S&L Class models. It is not practical to
test all of the potentially available combinations, of which there are
more than one million. Finally, the S&L Class models have the ability
to connect multiple outdoor units together to create larger capacity
systems. This unique feature increases the number of potential
combinations significantly. Therefore, the same design characteristics
that prevent testing of the basic R22, R410A, WR2 and WY CITY MULTI
models also prevent testing of the S&L Class CITY MULTI models.
As shown above, the S&L Class products cannot be tested according
to the prescribed test procedures. MEUS also believes that the
requested waiver is supported on the grounds that the test procedures
``may evaluate the basic model in a manner so unrepresentative of its
true energy consumption characteristics * * * as to provide materially
inaccurate comparative data.'' \16\ In particular, the benefits of
variable refrigerant control and distribution, zoning diversity, part
load operation and simultaneous heating and cooling, as described
above, are not credited under the current test procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ 10 CFR 431.201(a)(1) (2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The October 2007 Final Rule provides a test procedure to test and
rate multi-split residential systems that can be configured in many
different potential combinations. No such test procedure exists for
multi-split commercial products, however. DOE has not adopted a similar
test procedure to test and rate multi-split commercial products. The
currently-effective test procedure for commercial products cannot
accurately test and rate multi-split commercial products that can be
configured into millions of combinations.
[[Page 75415]]
VI. Outdoor Unit Combinations
As described above, one of the unique features of the S&L Class is
the ability to combine outdoor units to create larger capacity systems.
For example, if three of the Y-Series PUHY 120,000 Btu/h outdoor units
are combined, the resulting outdoor unit will have a nominal cooling
capacity of 360,000 Btu/h. This unique capability gives these systems
tremendous flexibility to meet the customer's specific demands. DOE's
test procedures do not provide any direction on how to test and rate
products that have the capability to connect outdoor units.
MEUS proposes that, until such a time that test procedures
expressly address this issue, MEUS may make representations about the
efficiency of systems using combinations of outdoor units based on: (1)
The results of testing such combinations pursuant to the alternate test
procedure outlined below; or (2) the capacity-weighted average of the
efficiency ratings of the individual outdoor units, as determined
pursuant to the alternate test procedure, that make up the combined
system.
VII. Alternate Test Procedures
Currently, there are no standard test procedures known to MEUS that
can accurately evaluate these products. AHRI is currently in the
process of developing a test procedure that will be able to accurately
test and rate all multi-split systems, including commercial-sized
systems, which have the ability to be combined to create numerous
potential system combinations. The test procedure, AHRI Draft Standard
1230, will next be submitted for a vote to the members of the Ductless
Split-System Production Section. After it is approved by that Section,
it will be submitted to the General Standards Committee for final
approval by AHRI. After it is approved by AHRI, the test procedure will
be submitted to DOE to be incorporated into 10 CFR Part 431. MEUS's
requested waiver would only be valid in the interim until AHRI Standard
1230, or another test procedure that will accurately test and rate
commercial multi-split air conditioning equipment, is approved and
incorporated into DOE's regulations.
While the requested waiver is in effect, MEUS proposes that DOE
impose an alternate test procedure that can be applied practicably to
these products. In response to MEUS's petition for waiver for the R410A
products, DOE adopted an alternate test procedure to provide a
conservative basis from which manufacturers covered by a test procedure
waiver for commercial VRFZ products can test and make valid energy
efficiency representations, for compliance, marketing, or other
purposes, regarding these products.\17\ DOE adopted a similar test
procedure for residential products in the October 2007 Final Rule. MEUS
requests that DOE apply the alternate test procedure provided in the
R410A Waiver to the S&L Class in order to allow MEUS to test and make
energy efficiency representations regarding these products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ R410A Waiver at 17530.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manufacturers face restrictions with respect to making
representations about the energy consumption and energy consumption
costs of products covered by EPCA.\18\ As DOE acknowledged in the R410A
Waiver, ``the ability of a manufacturer to make representations about
the energy efficiency of its products is important, for instance, to
determine compliance with state and local energy codes and regulatory
requirements. Energy efficiency representations also provide valuable
consumer purchasing information.'' \19\ Therefore, MEUS respectfully
requests that DOE apply the alternate test procedure outlined in the
R410A Waiver to the S&L Class.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See 42 U.S.C. 6314(d); 42 U.S.C. 6293(c).
\19\ R410A Waiver at 17530.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The alternate test procedure outlined in the R410A Waiver has two
basic components. First, it will permit MEUS to designate a ``tested
combination'' for each model of outdoor unit. The indoor units
designated as part of the tested combination must meet specific
requirements. This tested combination must be tested according to the
applicable DOE test procedures. Second, the alternate test procedure
will permit MEUS to represent the energy efficiency for a non-tested
combination in two ways. MEUS may represent the energy efficiency of a
non-tested combination: (1) At an energy efficiency level determined
under a DOE-approved alternate rating method; or if that option is not
available, then (2) at the efficiency level of the tested combination
utilizing the same outdoor unit. Pursuant to the alternate test
procedure provided in the R410A Waiver, until an alternative rating
method is developed, all combinations with a particular outdoor unit
may use the rating of the combination tested with that outdoor unit.
According to DOE:
Allowing MEUS to make energy efficiency representations for non-
tested combinations as described above is reasonable because the
outdoor unit is the principal efficiency driver. The current test
procedure tends to rate these products conservatively. This is
because the current test procedure does not account for the
product's simultaneous heating and cooling capability, which is more
efficient than requiring all zones to be either heated or cooled.
Further, the multi-zoning feature of these products, which enables
them to cool only those portions of the building that require
cooling, can use less energy than if the unit is operated to cool
the entire home or a comparatively larger area of a commercial
building in response to a single thermostat. Additionally, the
current test procedure for commercial equipment requires full load
testing, which disadvantages these products because they are
optimized for best efficiency when operating with less than full
loads. In fact, these products normally operate at part-load
conditions. Therefore * * * the alternate test procedure will
provide a conservative basis for assessing the energy efficiency for
such products.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ R410A Waiver at 17530.
MEUS proposes that representations about the efficiency of the S&L
Class combinations that have combined individual outdoor units to
create larger capacity VFRZ systems would be permitted based on: (1)
The results of testing of such combinations pursuant to the alternate
test procedure; or (2) the capacity-weighted average of the efficiency
ratings of the individual outdoor units that make up the combined
system.
Attached to this Application, as Appendix 1, is a proposed
alternate test procedure for the S&L Class products. The proposed
alternate test procedure is based on the alternate test procedure
provided in the R410A Waiver, except for new provisions relating to the
treatment of systems that combine individual outdoor units to create
larger capacity VFRZ systems.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ MEUS proposes two other minor deviations from the alternate
test procedure approved in the R410A Waiver. First, MEUS proposes
that the tested combination consist of one outdoor unit that is
matched with between 2 and 8 indoor units. In the alternate test
procedure provided in the R410A Waiver, a tested combination
consisted of one outdoor unit that is matched with between 2 and 5
indoor units. MEUS is proposing to increase the maximum number of
indoor units in a tested combination from 5 to 8 to account for the
fact that the S&L Class products that have combined outdoor units
can accommodate a greater number of indoor units. Second, MEUS is
proposing a clarification of the prior language concerning the
capacities of the outdoor and indoor units to specify that
references to capacities are references to the nominal cooling
capacities of the units. Since cooling and heating capacities of
units may differ, MEUS would like to clarify these references to
avoid any confusion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VIII. Similar Products
To the best of our knowledge, models similar to MEUS's S&L Class
products, which have the ability to combine multiple outdoor units to
create larger capacity systems, are also offered in the
[[Page 75416]]
United States by Daikin AC (Americas), Inc. and LG Electronics U.S.A.,
Inc.
IX. Application for Interim Waiver
Pursuant to 10 CFR 431.401(a)(2), MEUS also submits an application
for interim waiver of the applicable test procedures for the S&L Class
CITY MULTI models listed above. DOE's regulations contain provisions
allowing DOE to grant an interim waiver from the test procedure
requirements to manufacturers that have petitioned the Department for a
waiver of such prescribed test procedures.\22\ As DOE has previously
stated, ``an Interim Waiver may be granted if it is determined that the
applicant will experience economic hardship if the Application for
Interim Waiver is denied, if it appears likely that the Petition for
Waiver will be granted, and/or the Assistant Secretary determines that
it would be desirable for public policy reasons to grant immediate
relief pending a determination on the Petition for Waiver.'' \23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ 10 CFR 431.401(a)(2).
\23\ WR2/WY Interim Waiver at 17535, citing 10 CFR
431.401(e)(3). See also Energy Conservation Program for Consumer
Products: Publication of the Petition for Waiver and Granting of the
Application for Interim Waiver of Mitsubishi Electric From the DOE
Residential and Commercial Package Air Conditioner and Heat Pump
Test Procedures (Case No. CAC-012), 71 FR 14858 at 14860 (Mar. 24,
2006); and Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products:
Publication of the Petition for Waiver and Granting of the
Application for Interim Waiver of Samsung Air Conditioning From the
DOE Residential and Commercial Package Air Conditioner and Heat Pump
Test Procedures (Case No. CAC-009), 70 FR 9629 at 9630 (Feb. 28,
2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
MEUS will experience economic hardship if the application for
interim waiver is denied. Additionally, precedent indicates that DOE
will likely grant MEUS's petition for waiver. Finally, it is in the
public interest to grant an interim waiver. Therefore, MEUS
respectfully requests DOE to grant the application for interim waiver.
MEUS plans to introduce the new S&L Class products into the U.S.
market in September 2008. The procedure for granting a petition for
waiver can be a time-consuming process--DOE must publish the petition
in the Federal Register, allow time for public comment, and then
consider any comments before it makes a decision. Thus, the process
typically takes a number of months. If an interim waiver is not
granted, MEUS will suffer economic hardship because MEUS will be
required to delay its introduction of these products to U.S. customers.
In addition, DOE will likely grant MEUS's petition for waiver. As
described above, the design characteristics which prevented testing of
the basic R22, R410A, WR2 and WY products are present for the new S&L
Class models as well. The best evidence that DOE is likely to grant
this waiver petition is the fact that it granted similar petitions in
the R22 Waiver and R410A Waiver. In addition, DOE granted an interim
waiver for the WR2 and WY products based on the fact that the
``identical testing problems [made] it likely that MEUS' Petition for
Waiver will be granted.'' \24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ WR2/WY Interim Waiver at 17535.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, DOE's regulations state that the Assistant Secretary may
grant an interim waiver if he determines that it would be desirable for
public policy reasons to grant immediate relief pending a determination
for the Petition for Waiver. In response to MEUS's Application for
Interim Waiver for its WR2 and WY products, DOE stated that ``in those
instances where the likely success of the Petition for Waiver has been
demonstrated, based upon DOE having granted a waiver for a similar
product design, it is in the public interest to have similar products
tested and rated for energy consumption on a comparable basis.'' \25\
MEUS's S&L Class CITY MULTI products are similar to the R22, R410A, WR2
and WY CITY MULTI products. Thus, it would be in the public interest to
grant the requested interim waiver to allow MEUS to test and rate
similar products on a comparable basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ WR2/WY Interim Waiver at 17535.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
X. Conclusion
MEUS seeks a waiver of the applicable test procedures for the
products listed in Section IV above. Such a waiver is necessary because
the basic S&L Class CITY MULTI models ``contain[] one or more design
characteristics which * * * prevent testing of the basic model
according to the prescribed test procedures.'' \26\ MEUS respectfully
asks the Department of Energy to grant a waiver from the test
procedures until such time as an appropriate test procedure is
developed and adopted for this class of commercial products. MEUS
expects to continue working with AHRI and DOE to develop appropriate
test procedures. MEUS further requests DOE to grant its request for an
interim waiver while its Petition for Waiver is pending.
If you have any questions or would like to discuss this request,
please contact Paul Doppel at (678) 376-2923 or Douglas Smith at (202)
298-1902. We greatly appreciate your attention to this matter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ 10 CFR 431.201(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sincerely,
William Rau
Senior Vice President and General Manager
HVAC Advanced Products Division
Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA, Inc.
4300 Lawrenceville-Suwanee Road
Suwanee, GA 30024.
CERTIFICATE
I hereby certify that I have this day served the foregoing
Petition for Waiver and Application for Interim Waiver upon the
following companies known to Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA,
Inc. to currently market systems in the United States which appear
to be similar to the S&L CITY MULTI VRFZ system design. I have
notified this manufacturer that the Assistant Secretary for Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy will receive and consider timely
written comments on the Application for Interim Waiver.
Daikin AC (Americas), Inc.
1645 Wallace Drive, Suite 110
Carrollton, TX 75006
Attn: Mike Bregenzer, VP and GM
LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc.
1000 Sylvan Avenue
Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632
Attn: Mark O'Donnell
Dated this 28th day of March 2008.
William Rau
Senior Vice President and General Manager
HVAC Advanced Products Division
Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA, Inc.
3400 Lawrenceville-Suwanee Road
Suwanee, GA 30024
APPENDIX 1--PROPOSED ALTERNATE TEST PROCEDURE
(A) MEUS shall be required to test the S&L Class products listed
above according to those test procedures for central air conditioners
and heat pumps prescribed by DOE at 10 CFR Part 431, except that:
(i) For each S&L Class outdoor unit, MEUS shall test a tested
combination selected in accordance with the provisions of subparagraph
(B) of this paragraph.
(ii) For every other system combination using the same outdoor unit
as the tested combination, MEUS shall make representations concerning
the S&L Class products covered in this waiver according to the
provisions of subparagraph (C) below.
(B) Tested combination. The term ``tested combination'' means a
sample basic model comprised of units that are production units, or are
representative of production units, of the basic model being tested.
For the purposes of this waiver, the tested combination shall have the
following features:
(i) The basic model of a variable refrigerant flow system used as a
tested combination shall consist of one outdoor unit that is matched
with between 2 and 8 indoor units.
(ii) The indoor units shall--
[[Page 75417]]
(a) Represent the highest sales volume type models;
(b) Together, have a nominal cooling capacity between 95% and 105%
of the nominal cooling capacity of the outdoor unit;
(c) Not, individually, have a nominal cooling capacity greater than
50% of the nominal cooling capacity of the outdoor unit;
(d) Have a fan speed that is consistent with the manufacturer's
specifications; and
(e) All have the same external static pressure.
(C) Representations. MEUS may make representations about the energy
efficiency of the S&L Class, for compliance, marketing, or other
purposes, only to the extent that such representations are made
consistent with the provisions outlined below:
(i) For S&L Class combinations utilizing a single outdoor unit that
has been tested in accordance with this alternate test procedure, MEUS
may make representations based on these test results.
(ii) For S&L Class combinations utilizing a single outdoor unit
that has not been tested, MEUS may make representations which are based
on the testing results for the tested combination and which are
consistent with either of the two following methods, except that only
method (a) may be used, if available:
(a) Representation of non-tested combinations according to an
Alternative Rating Method (``ARM'') approved by DOE.
(b) Representation of non-tested combinations at the same energy
efficiency level as the tested combination with the same outdoor unit.
(iii) For S&L Class combinations utilizing multiple outdoor units
that have been tested in accordance with this alternate test procedure,
MEUS may make representations based on those test results.
(iv) For S&L Class combinations utilizing multiple outdoor units
that have not been tested, MEUS may make representations which are
consistent with either of the two following methods, except that only
method (a) may be used, if available:
(a) Representation of non-tested combinations according to an
Alternative Rating Method (``ARM'') approved by DOE.
(b) Representation of non-tested combinations based on the
capacity-weighted average of the efficiency ratings for the tested
combinations for each of the individual outdoor units used in the
system, as determined in accordance with the provisions of this
alternate test procedure.
[FR Doc. E8-29335 Filed 12-10-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P