[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 226 (Wednesday, November 24, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 71596-71613]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-29210]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 431
[Docket No. EERE-2010-BT-TP-0034]
RIN 1904-AC40
Energy Efficiency Program for Certain Commercial and Industrial
Equipment: Test Procedures for Commercial Refrigeration Equipment
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking and public meeting.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) proposes amendments to its
test procedure for commercial refrigeration equipment (CRE). The
amendments would update the referenced industry test procedures to the
most current version, incorporate methods to evaluate the energy
impacts resulting from the use of night curtains and lighting occupancy
sensors, and allow testing of certain commercial refrigerators at their
lowest application product temperature. These test procedures will
apply to commercial refrigerators, freezers, and refrigerator-freezers,
as defined in the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA), as
amended. Use of any amended test procedures will be required on the
compliance date of any standards developed in the associated energy
conservation standard rulemaking. DOE will hold a public meeting to
receive and discuss comments on the proposal.
DATES: DOE will hold a public meeting in Washington, DC on Thursday,
January 6, 2011, from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. Additionally, DOE plans to
conduct the public meeting via webinar. DOE will accept comments, data,
and other information regarding this notice of proposed rulemaking
(NOPR) before or after the public meeting, but no later than January
24, 2011. See section V, ``Public Participation,'' of this NOPR for
details.
You can attend the public meeting via webinar, and registration
information, participant instructions, and information about the
capabilities available to webinar participants will be published on the
following Web site: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/638471849.
Participants are responsible for ensuring their systems are compatible
with the webinar software.
The purpose of the meeting is to receive comments and to help DOE
understand potential issues associated with this proposed rulemaking.
DOE must receive requests to speak at the meeting before 4 p.m.,
Thursday, December 22, 2010. DOE must receive a signed original and an
electronic copy of statements to be given at the public meeting before
4 p.m., Thursday, December 29, 2010.
ADDRESSES: The public meeting will be held at the U.S. Department of
Energy, Forrestal Building, Room 1E-245, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20585-0121. Please note that foreign nationals planning
to participate in the public meeting are subject to advance security
screening procedures which require advance notice of 30 days prior to
attendance of the public meeting. If a foreign national wishes to
participate in the public meeting, please inform DOE of this fact as
soon as possible by contacting Ms. Brenda Edwards at (202) 586-2945 so
that the necessary procedures can be completed.
Interested parties may submit comments, identified by docket number
EERE-2010-BT-TP-0034 or Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) 1904-AC40,
by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
E-mail: [email protected]. Include the docket
number EERE-2010-BT-TP-0034 and/or RIN 1904-AC40 in the subject line of
the message.
Postal Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of
Energy, Building Technologies Program, Mailstop EE-2J, 1000
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Please submit one
signed paper original.
Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department
of Energy, Building Technologies Program, 6th Floor, 950 L'Enfant
Plaza, SW., Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: (202) 586-2945. Please
submit one signed paper original.
Written comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other
aspects of the collection-of-information requirements contained in this
proposed rule may be submitted to Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy through the methods listed above and by e-mail to
[email protected].
Instructions: All submissions must include the docket number or RIN
for this rulemaking. For detailed instructions on submitting comments
and additional information on the rulemaking process, see section V,
``Public Participation,'' of this document.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, visit the U.S. Department of Energy, 6th Floor, 950
L'Enfant Plaza, SW., Washington, DC 20024, (202) 586-2945, between 9
a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Please
call Ms. Brenda Edwards at (202) 586-2945 for additional information
regarding visiting the Resource Room.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Charles Llenza, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building
Technologies, EE-2J, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC
20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-2192, [email protected]. In
the Office of General Council contact Mr.
[[Page 71597]]
Michael Kido, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of General Counsel, GC-
71, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121, (202)
586-8145, [email protected]; or Ms. Elizabeth Kohl, U.S.
Department of Energy, Office of General Counsel, GC-71, 1000
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121, (202) 586-7796,
[email protected].
For information on how to submit or review public comments and on
how to participate in the public meeting, contact Ms. Brenda Edwards,
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) 586-2945. E-mail:
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Authority and Background
A. Authority
B. Background
C. Standby Mode and Off Mode
II. Summary of the Proposed Rule
III. Discussion
A. Framework Comment Summary and DOE Responses
1. Coordination With Other Programs
2. Coordination With the Air-Conditioning, Heating and
Refrigeration Institute
3. Burden of Testing
4. Testing of Transient Technologies and at Variable
Refrigeration Load
5. Rating Temperatures
6. Energy Efficiency Features
B. Summary of the Test Procedure Revisions
1. Update References to Industry Test Procedures to Most Current
Versions
2. Include Method for Determining Energy Savings Due to the Use
of Night Curtains on Open Cases
3. Include Calculation for Determining Energy Savings Due to Use
of Lighting Occupancy Sensors or Controls
4. Include Provision for Testing at Lowest Application Product
Temperature.
IV. Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
B. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act
C. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act
E. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
F. Review Under the Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act, 1999
G. Review Under Executive Order 13132
H. Review Under Executive Order 12988
I. Review Under the Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act, 2001
J. Review Under Executive Order 13211
K. Review Under Executive Order 12630
L. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration
Act of 1974
V. Public Participation
A. Attendance at Public Meeting
B. Procedure for Submitting Requests to Speak
C. Conduct of Public Meeting
D. Submission of Comments
E. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment
VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
I. Authority and Background
A. Authority
Title III of EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6291 et seq.) as amended by the Energy
Policy Act of 2005 (EPACT 2005) establishes an energy conservation
program for certain commercial and industrial equipment (42 U.S.C.
6311-6317). EPCA prescribes energy conservation standards for certain
self-contained commercial refrigerators, freezers, and refrigerator-
freezers with solid or transparent doors and designed for a pull-down
or holding temperature application. (42 U.S.C. 6313(c)(2)-(3)) EPCA
also requires DOE to develop standards for ice-cream freezers; self-
contained commercial refrigerators, freezers, and refrigerator-freezers
without doors; and remote condensing commercial refrigerators,
freezers, and refrigerator-freezers. (42 U.S.C. 6313(c)(4)(A)) DOE
published a final rule establishing standards for these equipment
classes on January 9, 2009. 74 FR 1091.
Manufacturers of covered equipment, including commercial
refrigeration equipment, must use prescribed test procedures to measure
energy efficiency or use and certify to DOE that equipment complies
with energy conservation standards. (42 U.S.C. 6311(3) and (4)) The
current test procedures for commercial refrigeration equipment appear
under Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 431,
subpart C.
EPCA requires DOE to conduct an evaluation of each class of covered
equipment at least once every 7 years to determine whether to, among
other things, amend the test procedures for such equipment. Any amended
test procedures must be reasonably designed to produce test results
that reflect energy efficiency, energy use, and estimated operating
costs during a representative average use cycle and must not be unduly
burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2))
In addition, EPCA contains specific provisions relating to test
procedures for commercial refrigeration equipment. Test procedures for
commercial refrigerators, freezers, and refrigerator-freezers must be:
(1) The test procedures determined to be generally accepted industry
testing procedures; or (2) rating procedures developed or recognized by
the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning
Engineers (ASHRAE) or by the American National Standards Institute
(ANSI). (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(6)(A)(i)) EPCA also establishes initial test
procedures for self-contained refrigerators, freezers, and
refrigerator-freezers with doors. These test procedures are the ASHRAE
117 test procedures that went into effect on January 1, 2005. (42
U.S.C. 6314(a)(6)(A)(ii))
If ASHRAE 117 is amended, however, the Secretary must, by rule,
amend the DOE test procedure to ensure consistency with the amended
ASHRAE 117 unless certain findings are made by clear and convincing
evidence. In addition, if a test procedure other than ASHRAE 117 is
approved by ANSI, the Secretary must review the relative strengths and
weaknesses of the new test procedure relative to the ASHRAE 117 test
procedure and, based on that review, adopt one new test procedure for
use in the standards program. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(6)(E)-(F))
In 2006 DOE published a final rule that adopted ANSI/Air-
Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute (ARI) Standard 1200-2006
(hereafter referenced as ARI Standard 1200-2006) as the referenced test
procedure for measuring energy consumption and ANSI/Association of Home
Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM) Standard HRF-1-2004 (hereafter referred
to as AHAM HRF-1-2004) for measuring refrigerated compartment volume.
71 FR 71370. These industry standards for commercial refrigeration
equipment have since been updated from the procedures currently
referenced in the regulations. As stated previously, EPCA authorizes
DOE to review the merits of the updated industry test procedures. If
DOE determines that a test procedure amendment is warranted, DOE must
publish proposed test procedures and offer the public an opportunity to
present oral and written comments on the amendment. (42 U.S.C. 6314(b))
B. Background
ASHRAE Standard 117-2002, ``Method of Testing Closed
Refrigerators,'' was the test procedure for commercial refrigeration
equipment for which standards were specified in EPACT 2005. EPACT 2005
mandated use of the ASHRAE 117 standard in effect on January 1, 2005.
(42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(6)(A)(ii)) Subsequently, ASHRAE amended this test
procedure and adopted ASHRAE Standard 72-2005, ``Method of Testing
Commercial Refrigerators and Freezers,'' which was approved by ANSI on
July 29, 2005. DOE reviewed ASHRAE Standard 72-2005, as well as ARI
Standard 1200-2006, which was approved by ANSI on August 28, 2006. (42
U.S.C.
[[Page 71598]]
6314(a)(6)(E)-(F)) DOE determined that ARI Standard 1200-2006 includes
the test procedures in ASHRAE Standard 72-2005 as well as the rating
temperatures prescribed in EPACT 2005. As a result, DOE published a
final rule on December 8, 2006 in which it adopted ARI Standard 1200-
2006, ``Performance Rating of Commercial Refrigerated Display
Merchandisers and Storage Cabinets,'' as the DOE test procedure for
commercial refrigeration equipment. 71 FR 71370; 10 CFR 431.63-431.64.
ARI Standard 1200-2006 contains rating temperature specifications of 38
degrees Fahrenheit ([deg]F) (2 [deg]F) for commercial
refrigerators and refrigerator compartments, 0 [deg]F (2
[deg]F) for commercial freezers and freezer compartments, and -5 [deg]F
(2 [deg]F) for commercial ice-cream freezers. In the test
procedure final rule, DOE adopted a -15 [deg]F (2 [deg]F)
rating temperature for commercial ice-cream freezers, rather than the -
5 [deg]F (2 [deg]F) prescribed in the ARI Standard 1200-
2006. During the 2006 test procedure rulemaking, DOE determined that
testing at a -15 [deg]F (2 [deg]F) rating temperature was
more representative of the actual energy consumption of commercial
freezers specifically designed for ice cream application. 71 FR 71357.
In addition, DOE adopted AHAM Standard HRF-1-2004, ``Energy,
Performance and Capacity of Household Refrigerators, Refrigerator-
Freezers and Freezers,'' for measuring compartment volumes for
equipment covered under this rule. 71 FR 71370 (Dec. 8, 2006).
Since the publication of the final rule, ARI has merged with the
Gas Appliance Manufacturers Association (GAMA) to form the Air-
Conditioning, Heating and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) and updated
its test procedure, the most recent version of which is AHRI Standard
1200-2010. AHRI Standard 1200-2010 includes changes to the equipment
class nomenclature used in the test procedure, the method of
normalizing equipment energy consumption, the ice-cream freezer test
temperature, and other minor differences. These changes aligned the
AHRI test procedure with the nomenclature and methodology used in DOE's
2009 standards rulemaking on commercial refrigeration equipment. DOE
proposes to reference AHRI 1200-2010, the test procedure currently used
in industry.
Similarly, AHAM has updated Standard HRF-1-2004 to the most recent
version, AHAM HRF-1-2008. The changes to this standard are mostly
editorial and involved reorganizing some of the sections for simplicity
and usability. As part of the reorganization, the HRF-1-2004 section
numbers that are referenced within the DOE test procedure were updated
to the structure in HRF-1-2008. However, the content of those sections
was not substantially changed. The newly updated AHRI Standard 1200-
2010 references the most recent version of the AHAM standard, AHAM HRF-
1-2008. As such, DOE proposes to update the referenced test procedure
to adopt AHAM HRF-1-2008 as the prescribed method for determining
refrigerated compartment volume.
DOE also proposes changes to the test procedure to better address
certain energy efficiency features for which the current test procedure
cannot account. During the 2009 energy conservation standards
rulemaking, DOE screened out several energy efficiency technologies
because their effects were not captured by the current test procedure.
72 FR 41162, 41179-80 (July 26, 2007). DOE proposes modifications to
its test procedure to better address some of these technologies.
Specific changes include provisions for measuring the impact of night
curtains and lighting occupancy sensors and controls.
On May 18, 2010, DOE held a public meeting (the May 2010 Framework
public meeting) to discuss the rulemaking framework for the concurrent
commercial refrigeration equipment (CRE) energy conservation standard
(docket number EERE-2010-BT-STD-0003). During this May 2010 Framework
public meeting, DOE received comments from several interested parties
that additional rating temperatures should be considered in the test
procedure. Some equipment is designed for storing goods such as wine,
candy, and flowers at temperatures that are held constant, but are
higher than the temperatures typically used in commercial
refrigerators. The commenters stated that some covered refrigeration
equipment designed for operation at higher temperatures is not able to
be tested at the prescribed 38 [deg]F, and they suggested that DOE
consider this in the test procedures and standards rulemakings.
Consequently, DOE proposes provisions for testing commercial
refrigeration equipment that is designed to operate at temperatures
higher than 38 [deg]F at the lowest possible application product
temperature.
C. Standby Mode and Off Mode
The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007; Pub.
L. 110-140) amended EPCA to require DOE, for each covered product for
which current test procedures do not account for standby and off mode
energy consumption, to modify the test procedures to integrate such
energy consumption into the energy descriptor(s) for that product, if
technically feasible. Otherwise, DOE must prescribe a separate standby
and off mode energy use test procedure, if technically feasible. (42
U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A)) EISA 2007 also requires any final rule to
establish or revise a standard for a covered product, adopted after
July 1, 2010, to incorporate standby mode and off mode energy use into
a single amended or new standard, if feasible. (42 U.S.C.
6295(gg)(3)(A)) DOE currently believes that the ``off mode'' and
``standby mode'' conditions of operation do not apply to the equipment
covered by this rulemaking because the provision within EISA which
stipulates that off mode and standby mode energy usage must be
quantified only appears in relation to consumer products and is not
required for commercial equipment. Additionally, commercial
refrigeration equipment, whether in retail, foodservice, or other
applications, operates 24 hours a day, 7 days a week to maintain
product at the necessary temperature for safe storage or retailing.
Therefore, standby and off modes will not be considered for commercial
refrigeration equipment.
II. Summary of the Proposed Rule
DOE is considering modifications to its test procedure to
incorporate the current industry-accepted test procedures, address
certain energy efficiency features that currently are not accounted for
in the test procedure (light occupancy sensors and night curtains), and
allow testing of commercial refrigeration equipment that cannot be
tested at one of the three currently specified product test
temperatures.
EPCA prescribes that if any rulemaking amends a test procedure, DOE
must determine ``to what extent, if any, the proposed test procedure
would alter the measured energy efficiency * * * of any covered product
as determined under the existing test procedure.'' (42 U.S.C.
6293(e)(1); 6314(a)(6)) Further, if DOE determines that the amended
test procedure would alter the measured efficiency of a covered
product, DOE must amend the applicable energy conservation standard
accordingly. (42 U.S.C. 6293(e)(2); 6314(a)(6)) DOE recognizes that the
proposed test procedure amendments would affect the measured energy use
of commercial refrigeration equipment. DOE is considering amending the
standards currently in effect for commercial refrigeration equipment in
a concurrent rulemaking. DOE will
[[Page 71599]]
consider these proposed test procedure amendments as any final energy
conservation standards are developed.
DOE also proposes to require use of any amended test procedures to
be consistent with the compliance date of any revised energy
conservation standards. DOE would add language to any final test
procedure amendments to the effect that the amendments need not be
performed at that time to determine compliance with the current energy
conservation standards. Instead, manufacturers would be required to use
the amended test procedures to demonstrate compliance with DOE's energy
conservation standards on the compliance date of any final rule
establishing amended energy conservation standards for commercial
refrigeration equipment.
Further clarification would also be provided that, as of 360 days
after publication of any test procedure final rule, representations as
to the energy consumption of any covered products would need to be
based on results generated using the amended test procedure. (42 U.S.C.
6314(d))
III. Discussion
As part of the current rulemaking on the energy conservation
standard for commercial refrigeration equipment, DOE held a public
meeting on May 18, 2010 to present its framework document (http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/commercial/pdfs/cre_framework_04-30-10.pdf and to receive comments from interested
parties. DOE considered the comments received as a result of the
framework document public meeting and incorporated recommendations,
where appropriate, that applied to the test procedure.
In Section 0, DOE provides responses to comments in the following
subject areas:
1. Coordination With Other Programs;
2. Coordination with AHRI;
3. Burden of Testing;
4. Transient Testing;
5. Rating Temperatures; and
6. Energy Efficiency Features.
Section III.B provides a summary of the proposed revisions to the
test procedure at 10 CFR part 431, subpart C, ``Uniform test method for
measuring the energy consumption of commercial refrigerators, freezers,
and refrigerator-freezers.'' These proposed revisions include:
1. Update References to Industry Test Procedures to Most Current
Version;
2. Include Method for Determining Energy Savings Due to the Use of
Night Curtains on Open Cases;
3. Include Calculation for Determining Energy Savings Due to Use of
Lighting Occupancy Sensors or Controls;
4. Include Provision for Testing at Lowest Application Product
Temperature.
Comments relevant to these subject areas are also addressed in
section III.B.
A. Framework Comment Summary and DOE Responses
1. Coordination With Other Programs
During the Framework public meeting, DOE received several comments
regarding the potential overlap between testing performed for the
purposes of compliance with DOE standards and testing performed for
certification for voluntary energy efficiency programs. Continental
stated that testing requirements should be unified between ENERGY
STAR[supreg] and DOE standards. (Continental, No. 1.2.006 at p. 190
\1\) Continental also stated that a common database of certified
equipment should be shared between DOE and the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency ENERGY STAR program. (Continental, No. 1.2.006 at pp.
190-191)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In the following discussion, comments will be presented
along with a notation in the form ``Continental, No. 1.2.006 at p.
190,'' which identifies a written comment DOE received and included
in the docket of this rulemaking. DOE refers to comments based on
when the comment was submitted in the rulemaking process. Section
1.1.XXX refers to Federal Register documents, section 1.2.XXX refers
public meeting support documents, and 1.3.XXX refers to comments
submitted by interested parties. This particular notation refers to
a comment (1) By Continental, (2) in document number 6 in the public
meeting support materials, and (3) appearing on page 190.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The use of common test procedures, reporting, and test data
repository pertains to many commercial and residential products,
including commercial refrigeration equipment. ENERGY STAR currently
requires testing according to ASHRAE Standard 72-2005. ASHRAE Standard
72-2005 is referenced as the method of test in ARI Standard 1200-2006,
DOE's current referenced test procedure, as well as AHRI Standard 1200-
2010, which DOE proposes to incorporate by reference in today's test
procedure. As a result, DOE believes that testing according to ARI
standard 1200-2006 or 1200-2010 would be sufficient for purposes of
ENERGY STAR certification.
DOE acknowledges that manufacturers may have to submit separate
reports for showing compliance with ENERGY STAR and DOE energy
conservation standards. Reporting requirements for the purposes of
certification and compliance with DOE energy conservation standards are
currently being addressed under a separate rulemaking (docket number
EERE-2010-BT-STD-0003). DOE believes that further analysis or effort to
coordinate a common database or other aspects with the ENERGY STAR
program pertain to many covered products, both commercial and
residential, and should be addressed in the context of that rulemaking
rather than this test procedure rulemaking.
2. Coordination with the Air-Conditioning, Heating and Refrigeration
Institute
Many interested parties provided DOE with comments regarding
coordination between DOE and AHRI in the development of test
procedures. AHRI reminded stakeholders that AHRI Standard 1200, which
is referenced in the DOE test procedure, is under constant review, and
invited interested parties, including DOE, to participate in this
review. (AHRI, No. 1.2.006 at p. 71, No. 1.3.008 at p. 3) AHRI also
expressed support for DOE's plan to adopt the 2008 version of AHRI
Standard 1200. (AHRI, No. 1.3.008 at p. 3) Similarly, DOE was
encouraged to participate in the ASHRAE and AHRI standards revision
processes to ensure continuity between Federal and industry standards.
(True, No. 1.2.006 at p. 72) California Codes and Standards likewise
agreed that DOE should coordinate with AHRI to update AHRI Standard
1200. (California Codes and Standards, No. 1.3.005 at pp. 2-3) A joint
comment submitted by the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance and the
Northwest Power and Conservation Council (Northwest Joint Comment)
agreed with the use of AHRI Standard 1200 as the basis for testing, but
urged DOE to begin updating its own test procedure in parallel with its
efforts to clarify equipment classes. (Adjuvant Consulting, No. 1.3.003
at p. 3) Further, the Northwest Joint Comment stated that AHRI Standard
1200 will need updating for this rulemaking because it excludes some
equipment classes, may not have universally applicable test conditions,
and is unable to quantify the effects of some technology options. The
Northwest Joint Comment also stated that AHRI Standard 1200 should be
modified to capture the impacts of all technologies considered by DOE
in the rulemaking and appropriate operating regimes. (Adjuvant
Consulting, No. 1.3.003 at pp. 2-3)
During the development of these proposed test procedures
amendments, DOE closely followed the activities of engineering
committees that oversee AHRI Standard 1200 and ASHRAE
[[Page 71600]]
Standard 72 and will continue to stay abreast of AHRI and ASHRAE
efforts to revise and update their respective test procedures and
standards. In the interest of coordinating with AHRI, DOE proposes to
update the references in the DOE test procedure to the most recent
version of AHRI Standard 1200, AHRI Standard 1200-2010. DOE also
proposes to amend aspects of this testing protocol as part of the DOE
procedure to capture the performance of certain energy efficiency
features, as described in section III.B. Regarding equipment classes
that may be excluded from AHRI Standard 1200, DOE believes that all
equipment classes for which DOE intends to set standards are able to be
tested using AHRI Standard 1200-2010. Also, DOE believes the test
conditions currently prescribed in AHRI Standard 1200-2010 are
applicable to all commercial refrigeration equipment covered under this
rulemaking with the exception of equipment that cannot be tested at the
38 [deg]F integrated average product temperature, see further
discussion in sections III.A.5 and III.B.4.
3. Burden of Testing
During the Framework public meeting, and in written comments,
several interested parties expressed concern regarding the burden of
testing. Master-Bilt stated that transitioning to a system of third-
party testing would more than double its testing costs. (Master-Bilt,
No. 1.2.006 at p. 200) Zero Zone commented that changes to the test
procedure would make existing test data invalid, would possibly require
multiple tests at different configurations, and would increase costs.
(Zero Zone, No. 1.3.007 at p. 1) True expressed a concern that there is
a learning curve associated with how to test equipment at standard
conditions (True, No. 1.2.006 at pp. 133-134) and that introducing
additional test conditions would significantly increase the cost and
burden of testing. (True, No. 1.2.006 at pp. 131-132)
DOE understands that amending test procedures or including
additional provisions in those test procedures could increase the
burden on manufacturers to quantify the performance of their equipment.
EPCA requires that the test procedures promulgated by DOE be reasonably
designed to produce test results that reflect energy efficiency, energy
use, and estimated operating costs of the covered equipment during a
representative average use cycle. It also requires that the test
procedure not be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2))
DOE has analyzed the expected incremental cost of the proposed test
procedure changes and its impact on manufacturers. The proposed changes
to the test procedure consist of: Updating the referenced industry test
procedures to the most current versions; testing requirements for units
sold with night curtains and lighting occupancy sensors or controls
installed; and provisions for testing units that cannot operate at the
specified 38 [deg]F integrated average product temperature.
All commercial refrigeration equipment for which standards were set
in EPACT 2005 are currently required to be tested using the DOE test
procedure to show compliance with the EPACT 2005 standard levels.
Equipment for which standards were set in the 2009 final rule will
similarly be required to test units using the DOE test procedure to
show compliance with the 2009 standards levels beginning January 1,
2012. The current DOE test procedure references AHRI Standard 1200-2006
and AHAM HRF-1-2004. This test procedure consists of one 24-hour test
at standard rating conditions to determine daily energy consumption.
The updated versions of AHRI Standard 1200-2010 and AHAM HRF-1-2008
do not vary substantially from the previously referenced versions.
Aligning the DOE test procedure with the most recent industry test
procedures currently in use--AHRI standard 1200-2010 and AHAM HRF-1-
2008--will simplify testing requirements and reduce the burden of
testing for both small and large manufacturers.
For equipment that could be sold with night curtains installed, the
current test procedure requires one 24-hour test without the night
curtain installed. To minimize the additional burden of test on
manufacturers, under the proposed revisions, if a unit is tested and
shows compliance with the relevant energy conservation standard without
night curtains installed, that unit can also be sold with night
curtains installed without additional testing. In addition, if a
manufacturer chose to sell cases only with night curtains installed,
only one 24-hour test would be required. If, however, a piece of
equipment does not meet DOE's energy conservation standards without
night curtains installed, DOE proposes to allow the unit to be tested a
second time with night curtains installed. In this instance, assuming
the energy conservation standard is met, the case would also be
required to be sold with night curtains installed. This would require
an increased burden of test on only those units that cannot show
compliance with DOE energy conservation standards without night
curtains installed. As DOE proposes to incorporate provisions for
testing a unit with night curtains installed into the same 24-hour
test, the burden of conducting the test with and without night curtains
is approximately the same.
For units sold with lighting occupancy sensors and scheduled
controls installed, no additional testing or measurements will be
required. Manufacturers will use a calculation method to determine the
energy savings due to lighting occupancy sensors and scheduled
controls. DOE believes that additional calculations will only require a
few additional minutes of testing time, which represents approximately
a 25-percent increase in the calculation intensity of the test. When
compared to the physical testing segment of the procedure, which takes,
a minimum of 24 hours, the additional calculations required by the
lighting occupancy sensor and scheduled control requirements would
increase the total burden of the test by less than an estimated 0.01
percent. In addition, this additional burden would be required only for
units that cannot comply with the energy conservation standard with
lighting occupancy sensors or controls installed. Thus, DOE believes
that the proposed additional calculations for lighting occupancy
sensors and controls would not significantly increase the burden of
test for manufacturers of covered products.
For equipment that cannot be tested at the 38 [deg]F integrated
average product temperature, manufacturers are currently required to
test the unit using AHRI Standard 1200 at the 38 [deg]F test
temperature. Under the proposed revisions, these manufacturers would be
allowed to test units that cannot meet the 38 [deg]F test temperature
to be tested at the lowest application product temperature, with the
only difference being the integrated average product temperature. Since
the same test is being performed in both cases, DOE believes that this
will not increase the burden of test for those manufacturers and is
likely to lead to more representative energy consumption values. DOE
notes that AHRI Standard 1200-2010 test is often already performed by a
manufacturer for participation in voluntary programs, independent
collection of energy consumption information, or other reasons.
The proposed changes to the test procedure for commercial
refrigeration equipment were chosen to help minimize the impact of
additional testing while updating industry standards to reflect the
most current
[[Page 71601]]
versions, capture new energy efficiency technologies, and provide more
accurate test procedures for equipment that cannot be tested at the
currently prescribed integrated average product temperature. For the
reasons stated above, DOE believes that the proposed test procedures
would not be unduly burdensome to conduct.
For further discussion of the economic impact of additional testing
on the small CRE manufacturers, as the entities that would be the most
impacted from additional testing requirements, please see section IV.C
of today's NOPR.
DOE requests comment on its conclusion that the proposed test
procedure changes would not be unduly burdensome to conduct.
4. Testing of Transient Technologies and at Variable Refrigeration Load
During the Framework public meeting and comment period, several
interested parties commented on incorporating provisions into the test
procedure to capture the effects of features that operate to reduce
energy consumption at variable refrigeration load or at variable time
periods. California Codes and Standards stated that ASHRAE Standard 72
is only a steady-state test, and that the test would not capture a
number of transient measures that may produce significant energy
savings in the field. (California Codes and Standards, No. 1.2.006 at
p. 13) The American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE)
emphasized that it believes that a single metric is not adequate to
describe CRE operation and that DOE should at least look at part-load
and full-load metrics. (ACEEE, No. 1.2.006 at pp. 69-70) California
Codes and Standards also stated that test methods should be developed
for the purpose of measuring the maximum possible energy savings, and
that this should include a part-load test. (California Codes and
Standards, No. 1.3.005 at p. 1)
DOE finds that there are two types of transient technologies: Those
that operate as a function of variable ambient conditions and those
that operate at variable times to reduce refrigeration load. DOE
discussed the technologies that operate at variable times (night
curtains and occupancy sensors) in section A.3 above; a discussion of
the technologies that operate as a function of variable ambient
conditions is provided below.
Technologies that operate as a function of variable ambient
conditions can reduce annual energy consumption of commercial
refrigeration equipment by adapting to changes in refrigeration load
that result from changes in ambient conditions. These variable load, or
part-load, technologies include higher efficiency expansion valves,
condenser fan motor controllers, and anti-sweat heater controllers.
ASHRAE Standard 72-2005 calls for testing at a single ambient
temperature and relative humidity, so technologies that are designed to
reduce energy use under variable ambient conditions will not affect the
measured combined daily energy consumption (CDEC) per the existing test
procedure.
An independent test to quantify the performance of technologies
that decrease energy use at variable refrigeration load would most
likely involve testing a unit at different ambient conditions,
including lower temperatures and humidities. However, section 342 of
EPCA requires that test procedures ``shall be reasonably designed to
produce test results which reflect energy efficiency, energy use, and
estimated operating costs of a type of industrial equipment (or class
thereof) during a representative average cycle of use (as determined by
the Secretary), and shall not be unduly burdensome to conduct.'' (42
U.S.C. 6314(2))
It is DOE's understanding that, although ASHRAE Standard 72-2005 is
a steady-state test, some variation in refrigeration load is
experienced in display cases with doors as part of the door opening
requirement included in that test. When the doors are opened, the
refrigeration load increases because warm ambient air has entered the
case. If the equipment being tested has more efficient operation at
variable refrigeration load, the case will use less energy overall. In
this way, the effects of variable load, or part-load, features are
already captured to some degree in the current test procedure for
commercial refrigeration equipment with doors. Similarly, if the test
procedure is altered to capture decreased energy consumption as a
result of night curtain use, the efficacy of many part-load
technologies in open cases will also be captured.
Further, additional independent or explicit part-load testing will
result in increased cost and burden for manufacturers of covered
products. During the May 2010 Framework public meeting, True expressed
a concern that there is a learning curve associated with how to test
equipment at standard conditions (True, No. 1.2.006 at pp. 133-134) and
that introducing additional test conditions would significantly
increase the cost and burden of testing. (True, No. 1.2.006 at pp. 131-
132) From conversations with manufacturers, DOE estimates that part-
load testing at additional rating conditions could more than double the
cost and burden of testing for all commercial refrigeration equipment.
DOE believes that explicit testing at multiple sets of conditions is
not justified because of this increased burden. Thus, the DOE test
procedure will continue to rely on one standard rating condition,
relying on the transient effects inherent in the proposed test
procedure to capture part-load performance.
5. Rating Temperatures
During the Framework public meeting, True stated that the current
standard only directly addresses a standard ambient test condition of
75 [deg]F and 55 percent relative humidity, but that the Food and Drug
Administration and NSF standards also include an 80 [deg]F ambient
condition. (NSF International was founded in 1944 as the National
Sanitation Foundation; the organization's name is now simply NSF.) True
also stated that higher real-world operating temperatures will impact
the energy use of commercial refrigeration equipment in some
applications. (True, No. 1.2.006 at p. 38) California Codes and
Standards added that it is important to verify that systems operating
under extreme ambient conditions can perform safely at those
temperatures and humidities. (California Codes and Standards, No.
1.2.006 at p. 133) True further asserted that equipment tested at 75
[deg]F and 55 percent relative humidity will perform differently than
if operated at 95 [deg]F and 95 percent relative humidity. (True, No.
1.2.006 at p. 129) ACEEE added that perhaps there should be an adverse
temperature and humidity rating condition to ensure that equipment will
operate effectively in those scenarios. (ACEEE, No. 1.2.006 at p. 131)
Southern Store Fixtures commented that if additional test conditions
are used, equipment that operates outside of these conditions should be
exempt. (Southern Store Fixtures, No. 1.2.006 at p. 133) Zero Zone,
however, stated that testing at a variety of ambient conditions could
become burdensome and the 75/55 condition is a sound compromise. (Zero
Zone, No. 1.2.006 at p. 130)
DOE received similar comments on the 2009 CRE energy conservation
standard NOPR. Those comments encouraged DOE to differentiate between
NSF Type I equipment, which is tested at standard test conditions, and
NSF Type II equipment, which is tested at 80 [deg]F. DOE found that the
relative difference between Type I equipment designed to be operated at
the standard
[[Page 71602]]
test condition of 75 [deg]F and Type II equipment designed to operate
at 80 [deg]F would not significantly impact the energy use of the
equipment as tested at the 75 [deg]F test condition. Thus, DOE
concluded it was unnecessary to institute a distinction between Type I
and Type II commercial refrigeration equipment. 74 FR 1092, 1117 (Jan.
9, 2009).
The current DOE test procedure requires that energy consumption
testing for all commercial refrigeration equipment covered in these
rulemakings be conducted according to ASHRAE Standard 72-2005, which
prescribes specific ambient conditions. DOE believes that equipment
classified as NSF Type II can be tested at the standard rating
conditions prescribed in the DOE test procedure without any significant
additional burden on manufacturers. Accordingly, DOE proposes to
continue to rate all commercial refrigeration equipment at the standard
rating condition prescribed in the referenced industry test procedure.
DOE requests comment on the burden to manufacturers associated with
testing NSF Type II equipment at the standard test condition.
6. Energy Efficiency Features
DOE received a number of comments from stakeholders concerning
energy efficiency features that exist for the explicit purpose of
lowering energy consumption, such as lighting occupancy sensors and
controls, night curtains, higher efficiency expansion valves, condenser
fan motor controllers, and anti-sweat heater controllers. The Northwest
Joint Comment stated that the current test procedure does not have the
capacity to test all of the equipment classes and technology options
that are likely to be within the scope of coverage for this rulemaking.
(Adjuvant Consulting, No. 1.3.003 at pp. 1-2) True commented that the
test procedure should represent a baseline level of energy consumption
with no energy efficiency devices enabled. (True, No. 1.2.006 at pp.
63-64) Southern Store Fixtures commented that some of these devices,
such as night curtains, may not be used by 24-hour stores (Southern
Store Fixtures, No. 1.2.006 at pp. 66-67), and also suggested that DOE
consult with end users of these energy efficiency features before
considering them. (Southern Store Fixtures, No. 1.2.006 at p. 67) True
stated that energy controls have a variety of different features and
energy conservation levels, and that they are sometimes already tested
by manufacturers. (True, No. 1.2.006 at p. 65) The Northwest Joint
Comment added that a percent time off assumption or scaling factor
might not be adequate to capture the effects of all time-dependent
technology options. (Adjuvant Consulting, No. 1.3.003 at p. 3)
As part of this rulemaking effort, DOE has evaluated technology
options suggested by interested parties and has developed provisions to
quantify the performance of those options that can be specifically
addressed while still meeting the statutory requirements of a test
procedure. Specific proposed changes include provisions for measuring
the energy impacts of lighting occupancy sensors and controls, and
night curtains. Other technologies, such as higher efficiency expansion
valves, condenser fan motor controllers, and anti-sweat heater
controllers, are technologies that function to reduce energy
consumption at part-load conditions. As discussed in section III.A.4,
``Testing of Transient Technologies and at Variable Refrigeration
Load,'' the energy saving potential of these technologies is already
captured to some degree in the current test procedure. Further, DOE
believes that explicit testing for these energy efficiency technologies
that reduce energy consumption at part load is not justified because it
would significantly increase the testing burden.
DOE requests comment on the burden to test energy efficiency
technologies other than those explicitly accounted for in this test
procedure revision, namely night curtains and lighting occupancy
sensors and scheduled control.
B. Summary of the Test Procedure Revisions
Today's proposed rule contains the following proposed changes to
the test procedure in 10 CFR part 431, subpart C.
1. Update References to Industry Test Procedures to Most Current
Versions
The current DOE test procedure for commercial refrigeration
equipment adopted ARI Standard 1200-2006, with additional provisions
for testing ice-cream freezers at -15 [deg]F, as the test procedure
used to measure the energy consumption of a piece of commercial
refrigeration equipment to establish compliance with the applicable
energy conservation standard. Since the publication of the 2006 test
procedure final rule, AHRI has released an updated version of the test
procedure, AHRI Standard 1200-2010. The updated test procedure includes
both editorial and technical changes to the equipment class
nomenclature used within the test procedure, the test product
temperature for ice-cream freezers, and the method of normalizing and
reporting units for equipment energy consumption. These changes align
the test procedure with the nomenclature and methodology used in the
2009 DOE energy conservation standard final rule. AHRI Standard 1200-
2010 is the test procedure currently used in industry, and DOE proposes
to adopt it as the DOE test procedure.
The current DOE test procedure also references AHAM HRF-1-2004 as
the protocol for determining refrigerated compartment volume. AHAM has
also updated its Standard HRF-1-2004. The most recent version is AHAM
HRF-1-2008, which makes editorial changes including reorganizing some
of the sections for simplicity and usability. The newly updated AHRI
1200-2010 also references AHAM HRF-1-2008. For consistency, DOE
proposes to adopt the more recent AHAM HRF-1-2008 for measuring
refrigerated compartment volume.
DOE requests comment on updating the referenced industry test
procedures to the most current versions.
2. Include Method for Determining Energy Savings Due to the Use of
Night Curtains on Open Cases
The current test procedure, ARI Standard 1200-2006, and method of
test, ASHRAE Standard 72-2005, do not account for potential energy
savings resulting from the use of night curtains on open cases. Night
curtains are devices made of an insulating material, typically
insulated aluminum fabric, designed to be pulled down over the open
front of the case (similar to the way a window shade operates) when the
merchandizing establishment is closed or the customer traffic is
significantly decreased. The insulating shield, or night curtain,
decreases infiltration and mixing of the cool air inside the case with
the relatively warm, humid air in the store interior. It also reduces
conductive and radiative heat transfer into the case. This can reduce
compressor loads and defrost cycles, significantly decreasing energy
use. A 1997 study by the Southern California Edison Refrigeration
Technology and Test Center found that, when used for 6 hours per day,
night curtains reduce total energy use of the case by approximately 8
percent.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Southern California Edison, Refrigeration and Technology and
Test Center, Energy Efficiency Division. Effects of the Low
Emissivity Shields on Performance and Power Use of a Refrigerated
Display Case. August 1997. Available at http://www.econofrost.com/acrobat/sce_report_long.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To allow manufacturers to account for the possible energy savings
of cases sold
[[Page 71603]]
with night curtains, DOE intends to adopt a standardized physical test
method. A physical test would accurately capture differences in energy
use reduction as a function of similar technologies and case
dimensions. It is important to capture the differences in energy use
reduction from similar technologies because of the large performance
disparities that can exist. For example, night curtains made of low-
emissivity materials, such as aluminum, decrease the radiative losses
from the case and therefore are much more effective at reducing heat
loss than night curtains made of plastic, linoleum, or other non-
reflective materials. In addition, each night curtain may reduce
infiltration differently depending on its insulating characteristics
and design. The case dimensions and default infiltration load also
impact night curtain performance. As such, a physical test will also
accurately capture differences in the energy conservation utility of
night curtains as a function of case dimension.
DOE proposes using the following physical test method, as specified
by ASHRAE Standard 72-2005. This method would be similar to section 7.2
in ASHRAE Standard 72-2005, ``Door-Opening Requirements,'' and would
read as follows:
Night Curtain Requirements. For open display cases sold with
night curtains installed, the night curtain shall be employed
according to manufacturer instructions for a total of 6 hours, 3
hours after the start of a defrost period. Upon the completion of
the 6-hour period, the night curtain shall be raised until the
completion of the 24-hour test period.
DOE proposes a 6-hour test period to approximate the typical usage
of a night curtain. In studies analyzing the effects of night curtain
use, such as the previously cited 1997 study by the Southern California
Edison Refrigeration Technology and Test Center, a similar 6-hour time
period has been used. The test for night curtains would apply only to
cases sold with night curtains installed. The assumptions made in the
testing of night curtains may not reflect their use in the field in all
applications. However, this test would be a standard for all cases sold
with night curtains, regardless of their anticipated use.
DOE requests comment on the proposal for the incorporation of night
curtains into the DOE test procedure.
3. Include Calculation for Determining Energy Savings Due to Use of
Lighting Occupancy Sensors or Controls
The current test procedure, ARI Standard 1200-2006, and method of
test, ASHRAE Standard 72-2005, do not account for potential energy
savings resulting from the use of lighting occupancy sensors and
scheduled controls. The energy savings due to the use of occupancy-
based sensors or schedule-based controls will vary in the field due to
differing environmental and operating conditions. However, studies,
including a demonstration project conducted through the DOE GATEWAY
program, have shown that lighting occupancy sensors or controls could
reduce the total energy use of a typical refrigerated merchandising
unit operating in a grocery store by up to 40 percent.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ U.S. Department of Energy. Demonstration Assessment of
Light-Emitting Diode (LED) Freezer Case Lighting. October 2009.
Prepared by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory for the U.S. DOE
Solid State Lighting Technology Demonstration GATEWAY Program.
Available at http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/publications/pdfs/ssl/gateway_freezer-case.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lighting occupancy sensors and schedule-based control systems are
designed to reduce the amount of time that lights are on within
commercial refrigeration equipment. Lighting occupancy sensors use
passive infrared, ultrasonic, or other motion-sensing technology to
detect the presence of a customer or employee. These sensors turn off
or dim the lights within the equipment when no motion is detected in
the sensor's coverage area. Schedule-based lighting controls allow
lights to be turned off or dimmed at scheduled times throughout the
day. The energy efficiency benefits from reducing case lighting energy
use are two-fold, because both the direct electricity consumption of
the lights and the heat load on the refrigeration system are decreased.
Light-emitting diode technology, used in much of today's new commercial
refrigeration equipment, lends itself to rapid on/off cycling or
dimming, which enables the use of occupancy sensors or scheduled
controls, or both. Lighting occupancy sensors and scheduled controls
can be addressed similarly based on available energy usage data.
DOE proposes using an analytical method similar to equation 4,
section 5.2.3 of AHRI Standard 1200-2010, to calculate the energy use
of lighting within the refrigerated volume. Equation 1 presents a
method to calculate the direct lighting energy consumption (LECsc) with
lighting occupancy sensors and controls deployed for either remote
condensing or self-contained units.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24NO10.364
Where:
LECsc = lighting energy consumption of internal case lights with
lighting occupancy sensors and controls deployed (kilowatt-hours);
Pli = rated power of lights when they are fully on (watts);
Pli(off) = power of lights when they are off (watts);
Pli(dim) = power of lights when they are dimmed (watts);
tsc = time period when lighting is fully on with lighting occupancy
sensors and controls enabled (hours);
toff = time period which the lights are off due to the use of
lighting occupancy sensors or scheduled controls (hours); and
tdim = time period which the lights are dimmed due to the use of
lighting occupancy sensors or scheduled controls (hours).
In equation 1, toff and tdim are determined based on the
sum of any contribution from lighting occupancy sensors and scheduled
controls that turn off or dim lighting, respectively. These values are
summed, as shown in equation 2, to determine the total amount of time
lighting is dimmed or off.
[[Page 71604]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24NO10.365
Where:
toff = time period which the lights are off due to the use of
lighting occupancy sensors or scheduled controls (hours);
tdim = time period which the lights are dim due to the use of
lighting occupancy sensors or scheduled controls (hours);
toff,controls = time case lighting is off due to the use of lighting
controls (hours);
tdim,controls = time case lighting is dimmed due to the use of
lighting controls (hours);
toff,sensors = time case lighting is off due to the use of lighting
occupancy sensors (hours); and
tdim,sensors = time case lighting is dimmed due to the use of
lighting occupancy sensors (hours).
As the test procedure is for 24-hour time period, the sum of
tsc, Toff, and tdim should equal 24 hours. DOE also proposes
that the total time period during which the lights are off or dimmed
shall not exceed 10.8 hours based on the maximum estimated energy
savings from lighting occupancy sensors and controls. This limit is
established to prevent double counting of energy savings in equipment
where both lighting occupancy sensors and schedule based controls are
installed.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24NO10.366
Where:
toff = time period which the lights are off due to the use of
lighting occupancy sensors or scheduled controls (hours);
tdim = time period which the lights are dimmed due to the use of
lighting occupancy sensors or scheduled controls (hours);
tsc= time period when lighting is fully on with lighting occupancy
sensors and controls enabled (hours);
tl = time period when lighting would be on without lighting
occupancy sensors or controls (24 hours);
with the sum of all toff and tdim from both lighting occupancy
sensors and controls not to exceed 10.8 hours.
In equation 2, the time the case lighting is dimmed or off due to
scheduled lighting controls (toff,controls or tdim,controls, as
applicable) will be 8 hours for those cases with lighting controls
installed. This will depend on whether the controls dim or turn off
lights. A time off period of 8 hours was chosen for scheduled controls
to approximate the typical usage of lighting control products based on
comments received during previous DOE rulemakings for this equipment.
Specifically, during the previous rulemaking for commercial
refrigeration equipment, California Utilities commented that 8 hours
reflected the California predicted ``low load'' period. (Docket number
EERE-2006-BT-STD-0126, California Joint Comment, No. 41, at p. 12)
The time the case lighting is off or dimmed due to lighting
occupancy sensors (toff,sensors or tdim,sensors, as applicable) will be
2.8 or 10.8 hours for cases with lighting occupancy sensors installed,
depending on whether scheduled controls are also installed. For
equipment with only lighting occupancy sensors installed toff,sensors
or tdim,sensors, as applicable, will be 10.8 hours. For equipment with
both lighting occupancy sensors and lighting controls installed, the
lighting controls will be assumed to override the occupancy sensor
during the time the lighting control is used to reduce case lighting.
Thus, the time the case lighting is off or dimmed due to lighting
occupancy sensors (toff,sensors or tdim,sensors, as applicable) will be
2.8 hours for equipment with lighting occupancy sensors and lighting
controls installed. The time off period for lighting occupancy sensors
was derived based on the previously cited demonstration project
conducted through the DOE GATEWAY program.
Equations 1, 2, and 3 can be used to calculate the energy use of
CRE whether the equipment utilizes lighting occupancy sensors or
control, and whether the light settings are set at fully on, fully off,
or dimmed. For example, consider a situation in which lighting that is
dimmed throughout the day by occupancy sensors and is turned off
completely by scheduled controls during closing hours. In this example,
tdim for the dimmed occupancy sensor would be 2.8 hours, and toff for
the scheduled lighting control, which turns off the lights, would be 8
hours. The sum of toff and tdim would be equal to the maximum 10.8
hours. In this example, both tdim,controls and toff,sensors would equal
zero.
In addition to conserving energy directly through decreased
lighting electrical load, occupancy sensors also decrease the heat load
from lights that are located inside the refrigerated space on the
refrigeration equipment. Therefore, a second calculation is necessary
to account for these energy impacts. This second calculation quantifies
the reduced compressor energy use, which is then used to calculate
total energy use, as described below.
For remote condensing equipment, the calculation of Alternate
Component Indirect Effect in section 5.4 of AHRI Standard 1200-2010 can
be used to measure the energy impacts on the compressor. Thus, for
remote condensing equipment, equation 4, from AHRI Standard 1200
equations 5.4 and 5.4.2, can be applied to calculate the decreased
compressor power due to use of lighting occupancy sensors and controls.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24NO10.367
Where:
CECA= Alternate Compressor Energy Consumption (kilowatt-hours);
LECsc = lighting energy consumption of internal case lights with
lighting occupancy sensors and controls deployed (kilowatt-hours);
Pli = rated power of lights when they are fully on (watts);
tl = time lighting would be on without lighting occupancy sensors or
controls (24 hours); and
EER = energy efficiency ratio from Table 1 in AHRI Standard 1200-
2010 for remote condensing equipment and the values shown in Table
III.1 of this document for self-contained equipment (British thermal
units/watt).
Table III.1. EER for Self-Contained Commercial Refrigerated Display
Merchandisers and Storage Cabinets
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operating temperature class EER Btu/W
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Medium.................................................. 11.26
Low..................................................... 7.14
[[Page 71605]]
Ice Cream............................................... 4.80
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note:
\1\ EER values for operating temperature classes are calculated based on
the average EER value of all equipment in that class which was
analyzed as part of the previous (2009) rulemaking. This does not
include equipment for which standards were set by Congress in EPACT
2005 (VCT, VCS, HCT, HCS, and SOC at M and L temperatures) or classes
for which standards were set using extension multipliers in the 2009
rulemaking (VOP.SC.L, SVO.SC.L, VOP.SC.I, SVO.SC.I, HZO.SC.I,
VOP.SC.I, SVO.SC.I, HZO.SC.I, HCS.SC.I, SOC.SC.I).
\2\ These values only represent compressor EER and do not include
condenser fan energy use.
The CECA includes a multiplication factor of 0.75 to account for
the fact that not all of the heat produced from the lights will impact
the compressor load. The factor of 0.75 was suggested by manufacturers
during discussions with the AHRI Standard 1200 engineering committee.
For remote condensing commercial refrigerators, freezers, and
refrigerator-freezers with lighting occupancy sensors, controls, or
both installed, the revised compressor energy consumption (CECR) shall
be the CECA added to the compressor energy consumption (CEC) measured
in AHRI Standard 1200-2010, as shown in equation 5.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24NO10.368
Where:
CECR = reduced compressor energy consumption (kilowatt-hours);
CEC = compressor energy consumption as measured by AHRI Standard
1200 (kilowatt-hours); and
CECA = alternate compressor energy consumption (kilowatt-hours).
The CECR and LECsc value would then be substituted for the lighting
energy consumption (LEC) and CEC without controls or sensors in the
calculation of CDEC for remote condensing cases as shown in equation 6.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24NO10.369
Where:
CDEC = combined daily energy consumption (kilowatt-hours);
CECR = reduced compressor energy consumption (kilowatt-hours);
FEC = fan energy consumption (kilowatt-hours);
LECsc = lighting energy consumption with lighting sensors and
controls deployed (kilowatt-hours);
AEC = anti-condensate energy consumption (kilowatt-hours);
DEC = defrost energy consumption (kilowatt-hours); and
PEC = condensate evaporator pan energy consumption (kilowatt-hours).
For self-contained equipment, the CECA and LECsc would be
calculated as above and then used directly with the total daily energy
consumption as measured by AHRI Standard 1200-2010, with the lights
fully on to determine the daily energy consumption used to show
compliance with the DOE energy conservation standard for this equipment
as shown in equation 7. For self-contained equipment:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24NO10.370
Where:
TDECo = total daily energy consumption with lights fully on, as
measured by AHRI Standard 1200-2010 (kilowatt-hours);
Pli = rated power of lights when they are fully on (watts);
tl = time period when lights would be on without lighting occupancy
sensors or controls (24 hours); and
LECsc = lighting energy consumption with lighting occupancy sensors
and controls deployed (kilowatt-hours).
The test procedure modifications to account for lighting occupancy
sensors and controls would only apply to commercial refrigeration
equipment sold with lighting occupancy sensors and controls installed
by the manufacturers. However, this analytical method would place the
least additional burden on manufacturers and would be a standard for
all commercial refrigeration equipment sold with lighting occupancy
sensors and controls, regardless of their anticipated use.
DOE requests comment on the proposed calculation method for
treatment of lighting occupancy sensors and controls in the DOE test
procedure for commercial refrigeration equipment. Specifically, DOE
requests comment on the values assumed for the time period when
lighting is off or reduced due to lighting occupancy sensors or
controls and the factor used to scale the amount of heat produced by
case lighting.
4. Include Provision for Testing at Lowest Application Product
Temperature
During the Framework public meeting and Framework comment period of
the 2009 energy conservation standard rulemaking, DOE received comments
on the inclusion of ``application temperatures'' for commercial
refrigeration equipment. Application temperatures are rating
temperatures other than the standard rating temperatures prescribed by
DOE's test procedures (38 [deg]F for commercial refrigerators, 0 [deg]F
for commercial freezers, and -15 [deg]F for commercial ice-cream
freezers). Interested parties commented that allowing for an
application temperature category is essential because operating
temperature plays a key role in equipment energy consumption. However,
interested parties stated that the application temperature category
should be reserved for equipment that cannot operate at 0 [deg]F or at
38 [deg]F; that DOE should not regulate equipment that has few
shipments; and that appropriate Federal standards and rating
temperatures should be developed for equipment with large numbers of
shipments.
DOE analyzed the shipments data provided by ARI during the
Framework comment period of the 2009 rulemaking. DOE found that,
excluding equipment for which EPACT 2005 amended EPCA to set standards
(self-contained commercial refrigerators and commercial freezers with
doors), only 1.7 percent of units under the previous rulemaking were
equipment that operate at ``application temperatures,'' namely 45
[deg]F, 20 [deg]F, 10 [deg]F, or -30 [deg]F. Of these, units that
operate at 45 [deg]F (typically ``wine chillers'') had the highest
shipments, and these were predominantly remote condensing
[[Page 71606]]
equipment. Given the relatively low shipment volumes of equipment that
operates at application temperatures, DOE did not develop separate
standards for equipment that operates at an application temperature
different than one of the three prescribed rating temperatures. 72 FR
41162, 41168-69 (July 26, 2007).
During the May 2010 Framework public meeting, several parties again
commented that some equipment covered under this rulemaking is designed
to operate at significantly higher temperatures than the designated
temperature for that product class. Specifically, California Codes and
Standards stated that DOE should review test methods for niche
equipment that may require different temperature criteria and
schedules. (California Codes and Standards, No. 1.3.005 at p. 3)
Structural Concepts also stated that some types of equipment, such as
candy and wine cases, operate at 55 or 60 [deg]F, yet would have to be
tested at 38 [deg]F to meet a standard. This is an issue because these
units are not designed to operate at that temperature. (Structural
Concepts, No. 1.2.006 at p. 59).
DOE recognizes that this type of equipment may not be able to
maintain an integrated average temperature of 38 [deg]F, as required by
the current DOE test procedure. DOE also acknowledges that self-
contained commercial refrigerators comprise most of the equipment that
operates at temperatures higher than the 38 [deg]F rating temperature.
However, these equipment classes were not included in the 2009
rulemaking analysis of products that operate at application temperature
because they were not included in the scope of that rulemaking. Because
self-contained refrigerators are included in the current energy
conservation standard rulemaking, the shipment volume of this equipment
that operates at temperatures higher than 38 [deg]F may increase.
AHRI Standard 1200-2010 has provisions for such equipment to be
rated at the application product temperature. For equipment that
operates at a temperature that is not one of the specified rating
temperatures, DOE believes that allowing such equipment to be tested at
its application product temperature could create a loophole that would
allow manufacturers to certify less-efficient equipment. This loophole
would enable a manufacturer to sell equipment that can operate at one
of the prescribed test temperatures, but would not comply with the
standard if tested at that test temperature because that equipment
would comply when tested at the higher application temperature.
However, equipment that operates at temperatures greater than the
38 [deg]F rating temperature may be able to become more efficient if
allowed to be tested at temperatures other than 38 [deg]F and may
represent a large enough shipment volume to warrant a separate rating
temperature. Thus, DOE proposes including a provision for rating
refrigerators that cannot operate at the prescribed 38 [deg]F
integrated average product temperature at the lowest application
product temperature. In the context of this rulemaking, the ``lowest
application product temperature'' would be defined as the lowest
temperature setting that can be maintained for the duration of the
test. In this case, the integrated average product temperature achieved
during the test should be recorded. Equipment tested at the lowest
application product temperature will still be required to comply with
the standard for its respective equipment class.
DOE requests comment on the provision for testing commercial
refrigerators that cannot be tested at 38 [deg]F at the lowest
application product temperature.
IV. Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget has determined that test
procedure rulemakings do not constitute ``significant regulatory
actions'' under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory
Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993). Accordingly, this
proposed action was not subject to review under the Executive Order by
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB).
B. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act
In this proposed rule, DOE proposes amendments to test procedures
that may be used to implement future energy conservation standards for
commercial refrigeration equipment. DOE has determined that this rule
falls into a class of actions that are categorically excluded from
review under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA; 42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). The rule is covered by Categorical Exclusion A5,
for rulemakings that interpret or amend an existing rule without
changing the environmental effect, as set forth in DOE's NEPA
regulations in appendix A to subpart D, 10 CFR part 1021. This rule
will not affect the quality or distribution of energy usage and
therefore will not result in any environmental impacts. Accordingly,
neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact
statement is required.
C. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires
preparation of an initial regulatory flexibility analysis for any rule
proposed for public comment, unless the agency certifies that the rule,
if promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. As required by Executive Order
13272, ``Proper Consideration of Small Entities in Agency Rulemaking,''
67 FR 53461 (August 16, 2002), DOE published procedures and policies on
February 19, 2003, so that the potential impacts of its rules on small
entities are properly considered during the rulemaking process. 68 FR
7990 (February 12, 2003). DOE has made its procedures and policies
available on the Office of the General Counsel's Web site: http://www.gc.doe.gov.
DOE reviewed today's proposed rule, which would amend the test
procedures for commercial refrigeration equipment, under the provisions
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act and the procedures and policies
published on February 19, 2003. DOE tentatively concludes and certifies
that the proposed rule, if adopted, would not result in a significant
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The factual basis for
this certification is set forth below.
DOE used the small business size standards published on January 31,
1996, as amended, by the SBA to determine whether any small entities
would be required to comply with the rule. 61 FR 3286; see also 65 FR
30836, 30848 (May 15, 2000), as amended at 65 FR 53533, 53544
(September 5, 2000). The size standards are codified at 13 CFR part
121. The standards are listed by NAICS code and industry description
and are available at http://www.sba.gov/idc/groups/public/documents/sba_homepage/serv_sstd_tablepdf.pdf. Commercial refrigeration
equipment manufacturing is classified under NAICS 333415, ``Air-
Conditioning and Warm Air Heating Equipment and Commercial and
Industrial Refrigeration Equipment Manufacturing.'' 70 FR 12395 (March
11, 2005). Small entities within this industry description are those
with 750 employees or fewer.
Analysis of the manufacturers in the commercial refrigeration
equipment market identified 22 small manufacturers that will be
directly
[[Page 71607]]
regulated by this rule. DOE seeks comment on its estimate of the number
of small businesses in the CRE market.
The proposed changes to the test procedure consist of updating the
referenced industry test procedures to the most current versions;
testing requirements for units sold with night curtains and lighting
occupancy sensors or controls installed; and provisions for testing
units that cannot operate at the specified 38 [deg]F integrated average
product temperature.
All commercial refrigeration equipment for which standards were set
in EPACT 2005 are currently required to be tested using the DOE test
procedure to show compliance with the EPACT 2005 standard levels.
Manufacturers of equipment for which standards were set in the 2009
final rule will similarly be required to test units using the DOE test
procedure to show compliance with the 2009 standards levels beginning
January 1, 2012. The current DOE test procedure references AHRI
Standard 1200-2006 and AHAM HRF-1-2004. This test procedure consists of
one 24-hour test at standard rating conditions to determine daily
energy consumption. Aligning the DOE test procedure with the most
recent industry test procedures currently in use--AHRI standard 1200-
2010 and AHAM HRF-1-2008--will simplify testing requirements and reduce
the burden of testing for both small and large manufacturers.
For equipment that could be sold with night curtains installed, the
current test procedure requires one 24-hour test without the night
curtain installed. To minimize the additional burden of test on
manufacturers, under the proposed revisions, if a unit is tested and
shows compliance with the relevant energy conservation standard without
night curtains installed, that unit can also be sold with night
curtains installed without additional testing. In addition, if a
manufacturer chose to sell cases only with night curtains installed,
only one 24-hour test would be required. If, however, a piece of
equipment does not meet DOE's energy conservation standards without
night curtains installed, DOE proposes to allow the unit to be tested a
second time with night curtains installed. In this instance, assuming
the energy conservation standard is met, the case would also be
required to be sold with night curtains installed. This would require
an increased burden of test on only those units that cannot show
compliance with DOE energy conservation standards without night
curtains installed. As DOE proposes to incorporate provisions for
testing a unit with night curtains installed into the same 24-hour
test, the burden of conducting the test with and without night curtains
is approximately the same.
DOE estimates that testing a single unit in accordance with the
current DOE test procedure takes 1 week of laboratory time and costs
approximately $5,000. If two tests are required, there will be an
increase of approximately $5,000 per unit tested. This estimate is
based on information from manufacturers and private testing services
quoted on behalf of DOE in the last 2 years for completing a test
according to AHRI Standard 1200-2006 on commercial refrigerators,
freezers, and refrigerator-freezers.
DOE also researched the number of CRE manufacturers that sell open
cases, which would potentially be sold with a night curtain. DOE found
that larger manufacturers typically offer more unique individual basic
models than smaller manufacturers. DOE also found that the larger
manufacturers sell more open cases than smaller manufacturers. DOE
estimates that for both small and large manufacturers who offer open
cases, open cases that could be sold with night curtains comprised
about 20 percent of total models, or approximately between 1 and 50
models. While testing with and without night curtains will not be
required for all these models, at this time DOE cannot predict the
number of cases that will require two tests because the standards with
which this test procedure will be used to show compliance have not been
established. Therefore, assuming conservatively that half of the open
cases that could be sold with night curtains will not meet the new
energy conservation standards and will require two tests, DOE's
analysis found that the incremental cost of running the extra tests
ranged from approximately $2,500 to $125,000. Further, DOE identified
that a single small manufacturer produces the majority of all open
cases produced by small manufacturers. In fact, many small
manufacturers identified by DOE did not sell open cases at all.
DOE understands, however, that small manufacturers have less
expendable capital available and may be more affected by the additional
cost of testing. To estimate the additional cost of testing due to
night curtains for small manufacturers, DOE estimated the average cost
of additional testing for all open cases compared to the average annual
value added statistic. The average value added statistic is
representative of an entity's annual gross operating margin and is
calculated by subtracting the cost of materials, supplies, containers,
fuel, purchased electricity, and contract work from the value of
shipments. DOE analyzed the impact on the smallest manufacturers of
commercial refrigeration equipment since these manufacturers would
likely be the most vulnerable to cost increases. For CRE manufacturers,
the two smallest entities were in the 25 to 49 and 50 to 99 employee
size category in NAICS 333415 as reported by the U.S. Census.\4\ The
average annual value added for manufacturers in these size ranges from
the census data was $2.97 to $6.38 million in 2001$, per the 2002
Economic Census, or approximately $3.56 to $7.64 million per year in
2010$ after adjusting for inflation using the implicit price deflator
for gross domestic product.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ U.S. Bureau of the Census, American Factfinder, 2002
Economic Census, Manufacturing, Industry Series, Industry Statistics
by Employment Size, available at http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/IBQTable?_bm=y&-ds_name=EC0231I4&-ib_type=NAICS2002&-NAICS2002=333415&-geo_id=&-_industry=333415&-NAICS2002sector=8699171&-_lang=en&-fds_name=EC0200A1.
\5\ U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Economic Analysis,
available at http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/SelectTable.asp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE also examined the average value added statistic provided by
Census for all manufacturers with between 100 and 249 employees in this
NAICS classification as the most representative value from the 2002
Economic Census data of the CRE manufacturers. More than half (13
manufacturers) of the identified small manufacturers fell into this
category, including the manufacturer that has the greatest percentage
of open cases that could be sold with night curtains. The average
annual value added statistic for all small manufacturers with between
100 and 249 employees was $16.3 million (2010$).
Given this data, and assuming the estimate of $5,000 for the
additional testing costs is accurate, DOE concluded that the additional
costs for testing under the proposed requirements would be
approximately 0.4 percent of annual value added for the two smallest
firms. The additional costs would be approximately 0.3 percent of the
average annual value added for representative small CRE manufacturers
with between 100 and 249 employees. For the manufacturer that sells the
greatest percentage of open cases that could be sold with a night
curtain, 56 percent, DOE estimates the additional cost of testing would
equal $80,000, or 0.6 percent of the average annual value added.
The requirements for units sold with lighting occupancy sensors and
controls will not include additional testing.
[[Page 71608]]
Instead, DOE proposes incorporating a calculation method that will
determine the energy impact of lighting occupancy sensors and controls.
Again, manufacturers will only be required to show compliance of a unit
with lighting occupancy sensors or controls installed if the equivalent
unit without lighting occupancy sensors and controls does not comply
with the applicable energy conservation standard. DOE believes that
additional calculations will only require a few additional minutes of
testing time, which represents about a 15 percent increase in the
calculation intensity of the test. However, the physical test
requirements are the far more burdensome and time-intensive portion of
the test. When including the time of physical testing, a minimum of 24
hours, DOE estimates that the additional calculations required by the
lighting occupancy sensor and scheduled control requirements would
increase the total burden of test by less than 0.01 percent. Assuming
the current cost of testing would be $5,000 and a 0.01 increase cost in
testing, this would represent an addition $50 per unit. If additional
calculation is required for a conservative 50 percent of units, the
total incremental increase in cost of testing will range from $50 to
$6,500 and will be less 0.0005 percent of the annual average value
added for all CRE manufacturers, including small manufacturers.
For equipment that cannot be tested at the 38 [deg]F integrated
average product temperature, manufacturers currently are required to
test the unit using AHRI Standard 1200 at the 38 [deg]F test
temperature. Under the proposed revisions, these manufacturers would be
allowed to test units that cannot meet the 38 [deg]F test temperature
to be tested at the lowest application product temperature, with the
only difference being the integrated average product temperature. Since
the same test is being performed in both cases, DOE believes that this
will not increase the burden of test for those manufacturers and, in
fact, will lead to more representative energy consumption values. In
addition, the provision for testing units that cannot operate at the
specified 38 [deg]F integrated average product temperate will affect
only a small percentage of units. DOE believes there would not be an
incremental increase in testing burden, for small or large
manufacturers, due to this provision.
DOE believes that the total increase in testing burden resulting
from the test procedure amendments proposed in this NOPR are almost
exclusively due to the provisions for testing night curtains. DOE
estimates that the total increase in testing burden does not exceed 0.6
percent of average annual value added for any manufacturer of
commercial refrigeration equipment, small or large. As the average
value added statistic is representative of an entities annual gross
operating margin, DOE concludes that 0.6 percent of this value is not a
significant economic impact. Further, 0.6 percent of annual average
value added was found for only the most impacted small manufacturer.
DOE believes that one does not represent a substantial number.
Based on the factual basis stated above, DOE believes that the
proposed test procedure amendments would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, and the
preparation of a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required. DOE
will transmit the certification and supporting statement of factual
basis to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration for review under 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
DOE seeks comment on its certification that the proposed test
procedure changes will not have a significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
D. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act
Manufacturers of commercial refrigeration equipment must certify to
DOE that their equipment complies with any applicable energy
conservation standard. In certifying compliance, manufacturers must
test their equipment according to the DOE test procedure for commercial
refrigeration equipment, including any amendments adopted for that test
procedure. DOE has proposed regulations for the certification and
recordkeeping requirements for all covered consumer products and
commercial equipment, including commercial refrigeration equipment. 75
FR 56796 (Sept. 16, 2010). The collection-of-information requirement
for the certification and recordkeeping is subject to review and
approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). This
requirement has been submitted to OMB for approval. Public reporting
burden for the certification is estimated to average 20 hours per
response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching
existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and
completing and reviewing the collection of information.
Public comment is sought regarding: Whether this proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall
have practical utility; the accuracy of the burden estimate; ways to
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be
collected; and ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information, including through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. Send comments on
these or any other aspects of the collection of information to Charlie
Llenza (see ADDRESSES) and by e-mail to [email protected].
Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is
required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty
for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the PRA, unless that collection of information displays
a currently valid OMB Control Number.
E. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA; Pub. L.
104-4) requires each Federal agency to assess the effects of Federal
regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal governments and the
private sector. For proposed regulatory actions likely to result in a
rule that may cause expenditures by State, local, and Tribal
governments in the aggregate or by the private sector of $100 million
or more in any one year (adjusted annually for inflation), section 202
of UMRA requires a Federal agency to publish estimates of the resulting
costs, benefits, and other effects on the national economy. (2 U.S.C.
1532(a),(b)) The UMRA also requires a Federal agency to develop an
effective process to permit timely input by elected officers of State,
local, and Tribal governments on a proposed ``significant
intergovernmental mandate'' and requires an agency plan for giving
notice and opportunity for timely input to potentially affected small
governments before establishing any requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. On March 18, 1997,
DOE published a statement of policy on its process for
intergovernmental consultation under UMRA. 62 FR 12820. (This policy is
also available at http://www.gc.doe.gov/.) DOE reviewed today's
proposed rule pursuant to UMRA and its policy and determined that the
rule contains neither an intergovernmental mandate nor a mandate that
may result in the expenditure of $100 million or more in any year, so
these requirements do not apply.
[[Page 71609]]
F. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act,
1999
Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105-277) requires Federal agencies to issue a Family
Policymaking Assessment for any proposed rule that may affect family
well-being. Today's proposed rule would not have any impact on the
autonomy or integrity of the family as an institution. Accordingly, DOE
has concluded that it is unnecessary to prepare a Family Policymaking
Assessment.
G. Review Under Executive Order 13132
Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism,'' 64 FR 43255 (August 4, 1999)
imposes certain requirements on agencies formulating and implementing
policies or regulations that preempt State law or that have federalism
implications. The Executive Order requires agencies to examine the
constitutional and statutory authority supporting any action that would
limit the policymaking discretion of the States and to carefully assess
the necessity for such actions. The Executive Order also requires
agencies to have an accountable process to ensure meaningful and timely
input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have federalism implications. On March 14, 2000, DOE
published a statement of policy describing the intergovernmental
consultation process it will follow in the development of such
regulations. 65 FR 13735. DOE has examined today's proposed rule and
has determined that it does not preempt State law and does not have a
substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government. EPCA
governs and prescribes Federal preemption of State regulations as to
energy conservation for the equipment that is the subject of today's
proposed rule. States can petition DOE for a waiver of such preemption
to the extent, and based on criteria, set forth in EPCA. (42 U.S.C.
6297) No further action is required by Executive Order 13132.
H. Review Under Executive Order 12988
With respect to the review of existing regulations and the
promulgation of new regulations, section 3(a) of Executive Order 12988,
``Civil Justice Reform,'' 61 FR 4729 (February 7, 1996), imposes on
Federal agencies the general duty to adhere to the following
requirements: (1) Eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity; (2) write
regulations to minimize litigation; (3) provide a clear legal standard
for affected conduct rather than a general standard; and (4) promote
simplification and burden reduction. Section 3(b) of Executive Order
12988 specifically requires that Executive agencies make every
reasonable effort so that the regulation: (1) Clearly specifies the
preemptive effect, if any; (2) clearly specifies any effect on existing
Federal law or regulation; (3) provides a clear legal standard for
affected conduct while promoting simplification and burden reduction;
(4) specifies the retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately defines
key terms; and (6) addresses other important issues affecting clarity
and general draftsmanship under any guidelines issued by the Attorney
General. Section 3(c) of Executive Order 12988 requires Executive
agencies to review regulations in light of applicable standards in
sections 3(a) and 3(b) to determine whether they are met or it is
unreasonable to meet one or more of them. DOE has completed the
required review and determined that, to the extent permitted by law,
the proposed rule meets the relevant standards of Executive Order
12988.
I. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act,
2001
Section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C. 3516, note) provides for agencies to review most
disseminations of information to the public under guidelines
established by each agency pursuant to general guidelines issued by
OMB. The OMB's guidelines were published in 67 FR 8452 (February 22,
2002), and DOE's guidelines were published in 67 FR 62446 (October 7,
2002). DOE has reviewed today's proposed rule under the OMB and DOE
guidelines and has concluded that it is consistent with applicable
policies in those guidelines.
J. Review Under Executive Order 13211
Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,'' 66 FR 28355
(May 22, 2001), requires Federal agencies to prepare and submit to the
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), Office of
Management and Budget, a Statement of Energy Effects for any proposed
significant energy action. A ``significant energy action'' is defined
as any action by an agency that promulgated or is expected to lead to
promulgation of a final rule, and that (1) is a significant regulatory
action under Executive Order 12866, or any successor order; and (2) is
likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy; or (3) is designated by the
Administrator of OIRA as a significant energy action. For any proposed
significant energy action, the agency must give a detailed statement of
any adverse effects on energy supply, distribution, or use should the
proposal be implemented, and of reasonable alternatives to the action
and their expected benefits on energy supply, distribution, and use.
Today's regulatory action would not have a significant adverse effect
on the supply, distribution, or use of energy and therefore it is not a
significant energy action. Accordingly, DOE has not prepared a
Statement of Energy Effects.
K. Review Under Executive Order 12630
DOE has determined, under Executive Order 12630, ``Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights,'' 53 FR 8859 (March 15, 1988), that this proposed regulation,
if promulgated as a final rule, would not result in any takings that
might require compensation under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S.
Constitution.
L. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration Act of
1974
Under section 301 of the Department of Energy Organization Act
(Pub. L. 95-91), DOE must comply with section 32 of the Federal Energy
Administration Act of 1974 (Pub. L. 93-275), as amended by the Federal
Energy Administration Authorization Act of 1977. When a proposed rule
contains or involves use of commercial standards, the rulemaking must
inform the public of the use and background of such standards. (15
U.S.C. 788 32)
The proposed rule incorporates testing methods contained in the
following commercial standards: (1) ARI Standard 1200-2010
``Performance Rating of Commercial Refrigerated Display Merchandisers
and Storage Cabinets;'' and (2) AHAM Standard HRF-1-2008, ``Energy,
Performance and Capacity of Household Refrigerators, Refrigerator-
Freezers and Freezers'' section 3.21, ``Volume,'' and sections 4.1
through 4.3, ``Method for Computing Refrigerated Volume of
Refrigerators, Refrigerator-Freezers, Wine Chillers, and Freezers.''
DOE has evaluated these standards and is unable to conclude whether
they fully comply with the requirements of section 323(b) of the
Federal Energy Administration Act (i.e., whether they were developed in
a
[[Page 71610]]
manner that fully provides for public participation, comment, and
review).
As required by section 32(c) of the Federal Energy Administration
Act of 1974 as amended, DOE will consult with the Attorney General and
the Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission about the impact on
competition of using the methods contained in these standards before
prescribing a final rule.
V. Public Participation
A. Attendance at Public Meeting
The time and date of the public meeting are listed in the DATES and
ADDRESSES sections at the beginning of this NOPR. The public meeting
will be held at the U.S. Department of Energy, Forrestal Building, Room
1E-245, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. To
attend the public meeting, please notify Ms. Brenda Edwards at (202)
586-2945. Any foreign national wishing to participate in the meeting
should advise DOE of this fact as soon as possible by contacting Ms.
Brenda Edwards to initiate the necessary procedures.
B. Procedure for Submitting Requests to Speak
Any person who has an interest in today's notice or who is a
representative of a group or class of persons that has an interest in
these issues may request an opportunity to make an oral presentation.
Such persons may hand-deliver requests to speak, along with a computer
diskette or CD in WordPerfect, Microsoft Word, PDF, or text (ASCII)
file format to the address shown in the ADDRESSES section at the
beginning of this NOPR between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m. Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. Requests may also be sent by mail or e-mail to
[email protected].
Persons requesting to speak should briefly describe the nature of
their interest in this rulemaking and provide a telephone number for
contact. DOE requests persons selected to be heard to submit an advance
copy of their statements at least two weeks before the public meeting.
At its discretion, DOE may permit any person who cannot supply an
advance copy of their statement to participate, if that person has made
advance alternative arrangements with the Building Technologies
Program. The request to give an oral presentation should ask for such
alternative arrangements.
C. Conduct of Public Meeting
DOE will designate a DOE official to preside at the public meeting
and may also employ a professional facilitator to aid discussion. The
meeting will not be a judicial or evidentiary-type public hearing, but
DOE will conduct it in accordance with section 336 of EPCA. (42 U.S.C.
6306) A court reporter will record the proceedings and prepare a
transcript. DOE reserves the right to schedule the order of
presentations and to establish the procedures governing the conduct of
the public meeting. After the public meeting, interested parties may
submit further comments on the proceedings as well as on any aspect of
the rulemaking until the end of the comment period.
The public meeting will be conducted in an informal conference
style. DOE will present summaries of comments received before the
public meeting, allow time for presentations by participants, and
encourage all interested parties to share their views on issues
affecting this rulemaking. Each participant will be allowed to make a
prepared general statement (within DOE-determined time limits) prior to
the discussion of specific topics. DOE will permit other participants
to comment briefly on any general statements.
At the end of all prepared statements on a topic, DOE will permit
participants to clarify their statements briefly and comment on
statements made by others. Participants should be prepared to answer
questions from DOE and other participants concerning these issues. DOE
representatives may also ask questions of participants concerning other
matters relevant to this rulemaking. The official conducting the public
meeting will accept additional comments or questions from those
attending, as time permits. The presiding official will announce any
further procedural rules or modification of the above procedures that
may be needed for the proper conduct of the public meeting.
DOE will make the entire record of this proposed rulemaking,
including the transcript from the public meeting, available for
inspection at the U.S. Department of Energy, 6th Floor, 950 L'Enfant
Plaza, SW., Washington, DC 20024, (202) 586-2945, between 9 a.m. and 4
p.m. Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The transcript
will also be available on DOE's Web site at: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/commercial/refrigeration_equipment.html.
D. Submission of Comments
DOE will accept comments, data, and other information regarding the
proposed rule before or after the public meeting, but no later than the
date provided at the beginning of this NOPR. Please submit comments,
data, and other information electronically to [email protected]. Submit electronic comments in WordPerfect, Microsoft
Word, PDF, or text (ASCII) file format and avoid the use of special
characters or any form of encryption. Comments in electronic format
should be identified by the docket number EERE-2010-BT-TP-0034 and/or
RIN 1904-AC40 and wherever possible carry the electronic signature of
the author. No telefacsimiles (faxes) will be accepted.
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 as to 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) a date upon which such information might lose
its confidential nature due to the passage of time; and (7) why
disclosure of the information would be contrary to the public interest.
E. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment
Although comments are welcome on all aspects of this rulemaking,
DOE is particularly interested in receiving comments on following
issues:
1. DOE's conclusion that the proposed test procedure changes would
not be unduly burdensome to conduct.
2. The burden to manufacturers associated with testing NSF Type II
equipment at the standard test condition.
3. The burden to test other energy efficiency technologies other
than those explicitly accounted for in this test procedure revision,
namely night curtains and lighting occupancy sensors and scheduled
control.
[[Page 71611]]
4. Updating the referenced industry test procedures to the most
current version.
5. The proposal for the incorporation of night curtains into the
DOE test procedure.
6. The proposed calculation method for treatment of lighting
occupancy sensors and controls in the DOE test procedure for commercial
refrigeration equipment. Specifically, DOE requests comment on the
values assumed for the time period when lighting is off or reduced due
to lighting occupancy sensors or controls and the factor used to scale
the amount of heat produced by case lighting.
7. The provision for testing commercial refrigerators that cannot
be tested at 38 [deg]F at the lowest application product temperature.
8. The number of small businesses in the CRE market.
9. The certification that the proposed test procedure changes will
not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of this NOPR.
List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 431
Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business
information, Energy conservation test procedures, Incorporation by
reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Issued in Washington, DC, on November 10, 2010.
Cathy Zoi,
Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, DOE proposes to amend
part 431 of title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, to read as follows:
PART 431--ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAM FOR CERTAIN COMMERCIAL AND
INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT
1. The authority citation for part 431 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291-6317.
2. Section 431.62 is amended by adding in alphabetical order the
definitions of ``lighting control'', ``lighting occupancy sensor'',
``lowest application product temperature'', and ``night curtain'' to
read as follows'':
Sec. 431.62 Definitions concerning commercial refrigerators, freezers
and refrigerator-freezers.
* * * * *
Lighting control means an electronic device that automatically
adjusts the lighting in a display case at scheduled times throughout
the day.
Lighting occupancy sensor means an electronic device that uses
passive infrared, ultrasonic, or other motion-sensing technology to
detect the presence of a customer or employee, allowing the lights
within the equipment to be turned off or dimmed when no motion is
detected in the sensor's coverage area.
Lowest application product temperature means the lowest integrated
average product temperature achievable and maintainable within 2 [deg]F for the duration of the test.
Night curtain means a device that is temporarily employed to
decrease air exchange and heat transfer between the refrigerated case
and the surrounding environment.
* * * * *
3. Section 431.63 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(1), (c)
introductory text, and (c)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 431.63 Materials incorporated by reference.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-2008, (``HRF-1-2008''), Energy and Internal
Volume of Refrigerating Appliances, including errata issued November
17, 2009, IBR approved for Sec. 431.64.
* * * * *
(c) AHRI. Air-Conditioning, Heating and Refrigeration Institute,
2111 Wilson Blvd, Suite 500, Arlington, VA 22201, (703) 524-8800,
[email protected], or http://www.ahrinet.org/Content/StandardsProgram_20.aspx.
(1) AHRI Standard 1200-2010 (``AHRI Standard 1200-2010''),
Performance Rating of Commercial Refrigerated Display Merchandisers and
Storage Cabinets, 2010, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 431.64 and 431.66.
* * * * *
4. Section 431.64 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as
follows:
Sec. 431.64 Uniform test method for the measurement of energy
consumption of commercial refrigerators, freezers, and refrigerator-
freezers.
* * * * *
(b) Testing and calculations. Determine the daily energy
consumption of each covered commercial refrigerator, freezer, or
refrigerator-freezer by conducting the test procedure set forth in the
Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute (ARI) Standard 1200-2010,
``Performance Rating of Commercial Refrigerated Display Merchandisers
and Storage Cabinets,'' section 3, ``Definitions,'' section 4, ``Test
Requirements,'' and section 7, ``Symbols and Subscripts.''
(Incorporated by reference, see Sec. 431.63) For each commercial
refrigerator, freezer, or refrigerator-freezer with a self-contained
condensing unit, also use ARI Standard 1200-2010, section 6, ``Rating
Requirements for Self-contained Commercial Refrigerated Display
Merchandisers and Storage Cabinets.'' (Incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 431.63) For each commercial refrigerator, freezer, or
refrigerator-freezer with a remote condensing unit, also use ARI
Standard 1200-2006, section 5, ``Rating Requirements for Remote
Commercial Refrigerated Display Merchandisers and Storage Cabinets.''
(Incorporated by reference, see Sec. 431.63)
(1) For open display cases sold with night curtains installed, the
night curtain shall be employed for 6 hours, 3 hours after the start of
a defrost period. Upon the completion of the 6-hour period, the night
curtain shall be raised until the completion of the 24-hour test
period.
(2) For commercial refrigerators, freezers, and refrigerator-
freezers sold with lighting occupancy sensors, scheduled lighting
controls, or lighting occupancy sensors and scheduled lighting controls
installed on the unit, the effect on daily energy consumption will be
calculated using the variables that are defined as:
CECA is the Alternate Compressor Energy Consumption (kilowatt-
hours);
LECsc is the lighting energy consumption of internal case lights
with lighting occupancy sensors and controls deployed (kilowatt-hours);
Pli is the rated power of lights when they are fully on (watts);
Pli(off) is the power of lights when they are off (watts);
Pli(dim) is the power of lights when they are dimmed (watts);
`TDECo is the total daily energy consumption with lights fully on,
as measured by AHRI Standard 1200-2010 (kilowatt-hours);
tdim is the time period which the lights are dimmed due to the use
of lighting occupancy sensors or scheduled controls (hours);
tdim,controls is the time case lighting is dimmed due to the use of
lighting controls (hours);
tdim,sensors is the time case lighting is dimmed due to the use of
lighting occupancy sensors (hours);
tl is the time period when lights would be on without lighting
occupancy sensors or controls (24 hours);
[[Page 71612]]
toff is the time period which the lights are off due to the use of
lighting occupancy sensors or scheduled controls (hours);
toff,controls is the time case lighting is off due to the use of
lighting controls (hours);
toff,sensors is the time case lighting is off due to the
use of lighting occupancy sensors (hours); and
tsc is the time period when lighting is fully on with lighting
occupancy sensors and controls enabled (hours).
(i) For both self-contained and remote condensing commercial
refrigerators, freezers, and refrigerator-freezers--
(A) Calculate the LECsc using the following equation:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24NO10.371
In the equation toff and tdim are determined
based on the sum of any contribution from lighting occupancy sensors
and scheduled controls which dim or turn off lighting, respectively, as
shown in the following equation:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24NO10.372
The sum of tsc, toff, and tdim should
equal 24 hours and the total time period during which the lights are
off or dimmed shall not exceed 10.8 hours. The time the case lighting
is off or dimmed due to scheduled lighting controls
(toff,controls or tdim,controls, as applicable)
will be 8 hours for those cases with lighting controls installed. The
time the case lighting is off or dimmed due to lighting occupancy
sensors (toff,sensors or tdim,sensors, as
applicable) will be 10.8 hours for cases with lighting occupancy
sensors installed. For cases with lighting occupancy sensors and
scheduled lighting controls installed, the time the case lighting is
off or dimmed due to lighting occupancy sensors
(toff,sensors or tdim,sensors, as applicable)
will be 2.8 hours and the time the case lighting is off or dimmed due
to scheduled lighting controls (toff,controls or
tdim,controls, as applicable) will be 8 hours.
(B) Calculate the CECA using the following equation:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24NO10.373
Where EER represents the energy efficiency ratio from Table 1 in AHRI
Standard 1200-2010 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 431.63) for
remote condensing equipment or the values shown in the following table
for self-contained equipment:
EER for Self-Contained Commercial Refrigerated Display Merchandisers and
Storage Cabinets
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operating temperature class EER Btu/W
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Medium.................................................. 11.26
Low..................................................... 7.14
Ice Cream............................................... 4.80
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note:
\1\ EER values for operating temperature classes are calculated based on
the average EER value of all equipment in that class which was
analyzed as part of the previous (2009) rulemaking. This does not
include equipment for which standards were set by Congress in EPACT
2005 (VCT, VCS, HCT, HCS, and SOC at M and L temperatures) or classes
for which standards were set using extension multipliers in the 2009
rulemaking (VOP.SC.L, SVO.SC.L, VOP.SC.I, SVO.SC.I, HZO.SC.I,
VOP.SC.I, SVO.SC.I, HZO.SC.I, HCS.SC.I, SOC.SC.I).
\2\ These values only represent compressor EER and do not include
condenser fan energy use.
(ii) For remote condensing commercial refrigerators, freezers, and
refrigerator-freezers with lighting occupancy sensors, controls, or
lighting occupancy sensors and controls installed, the revised
compressor energy consumption (CECR) shall be the
CECA added to the compressor energy consumption (CEC)
measured in AHRI Standard 1200-2010. (Incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 431.63) The CDEC for the entire case shall be the sum of the
CECR and LECsc (as calculated above) and the fan
energy consumption (FEC), anti-condensate energy consumption (AEC),
defrost energy consumption (DEC), and condensate evaporator pan energy
consumption (PEC) (as measured in AHRI Standard 1200-2010).
(iii) For self-contained commercial refrigerators, freezers, and
refrigerator-freezers with lighting occupancy sensors, controls, or
lighting occupancy sensors and controls installed, the TDEC for the
entire case shall be the sum of total daily energy consumption as
measured by the AHRI Standard 1200-2010 (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 431.63) test with the lights fully on (TDECo) and
CECA, less the decrease in lighting energy use due to
occupancy sensors and controls, as shown in the following equation.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24NO10.374
(3) Conduct the testing required in paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of
this section, and determine the daily energy consumption, at the
applicable integrated average temperature in the following table. The
integrated average temperature is determined using the required test
method. If a refrigerator or medium temperature unit is not able to be
tested at the specified integrated average temperature of 38 [deg]F,
the unit may be tested at the lowest application product temperature,
as defined in Sec. 431.61.
[[Page 71613]]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Integrated average
Category Test procedure temperatures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) Refrigerator with Solid ARI Standard 1200- 38 [deg]F (2 [deg]F).
(ii) Refrigerator with ARI Standard 1200- 38 [deg]F (2 [deg]F).
(iii) Freezer with Solid Door(s) ARI Standard 1200- 0 [deg]F (2 [deg]F).
(iv) Freezer with Transparent ARI Standard 1200- 0 [deg]F (2 [deg]F).
(v) Refrigerator-Freezer with ARI Standard 1200- 38 [deg]F (2 [deg]F)
for refrigerator
compartment.
0 [deg]F (2 [deg]F)
for freezer
compartment.
(vi) Commercial Refrigerator ARI Standard 1200- 38 [deg]F (2 [deg]F).
Condensing Unit Designed for
Pull-Down Temperature
Applications and Transparent
Doors.
(vii) Ice-Cream Freezer......... ARI Standard 1200- -15.0 [deg]F
2010* (2
[deg]F).
(viii) Commercial Refrigerator, ARI Standard 1200- (A) For low
Freezer, and Refrigerator- 2010* temperature
Freezer with a Self-Contained applications, the
Condensing Unit and without integrated
Doors. average
temperature of
all test package
averages shall be
0 [deg]F (2 [deg]F).
(B) For medium
temperature
applications, the
integrated
average
temperature of
all test package
averages shall be
38.0 [deg]F
(2
[deg]F).
(ix) Commercial Refrigerator, ARI Standard 1200- (A) For low
Freezer, and Refrigerator- 2010*. temperature
Freezer with a Remote applications, the
Condensing Unit. integrated
average
temperature of
all test package
averages shall be
0 [deg]F (2 [deg]F).
(B) For medium
temperature
applications, the
integrated
average
temperature of
all test package
averages shall be
38.0 [deg]F
(2
[deg]F).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Incorporated by reference, see Sec. 431.63.
(4) Determine the volume of each covered commercial refrigerator,
freezer, or refrigerator-freezer using the methodology set forth in the
AHAM HRF-1-2008, ``Energy and Internal Volume of Refrigerating
Appliances,'' (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 431.63) section
3.30, ``Volume,'' and sections 4.1 through 4.3, ``Method for Computing
Refrigerated Volume of Refrigerators, Refrigerator-Freezers, Wine
Chillers and Freezers.''
[FR Doc. 2010-29210 Filed 11-23-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P