### 50224 Federal Register

Office of Conservation and Renewable Energy

[Case No. F-0181

Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products ; Decision and Order Granting Waiver From Furnace Test Procedures to Lennox Industries

AGENCY. Office of Conservation and Renewable Energy, DOE. 

### ACTION : Decision and order. Vol. 55, No. 234 / Wednesday, December 5, 1990 / Notices

consumption of certain consumer products, including furnaces. The intent of the test procedures is to provide a comparable measure of energy consumption that will assist consumers in making purchasing decisions. These test procedures appear at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B. DOE has amended the prescribed test procedures by adding 10 CFR 430.27 to create the waiver process. 45 FR 64108, September 26, 1980. Thereafter, DOE further amended its appliance test procedure waiver process to allow the Assistant Secretary for Conservation and Renewable Energy (Assistant Secretary) to grant an interim waiver from test procedure requirements to manufacturers that have petitioned DOE for a waiver of such prescribed test procedures. 51 FR 42823, November 26, 1986. The waiver process allows the Assistant Secretary to waive temporarily test procedures for a particular basic model when a petitioner shows that the basic model contains one or more design characteristics which prevent testing according to the prescribed test procedures or when the prescribed test procedures may evaluate the basic model in a manner so unrepresentative of its true energy consumption as to provide materially inadequate comparative data. Waivers general remain in effect until final test procedure amendments become effective, resolving the problem that is the subject of the waiver. The interim waiver provisions, added by the 1986 amendment, allows the Assistant Secretary to grant an interim waiver when it is determined that the applicant will experience economic hardship if the application for interim waiver is denied, if it appears likely that the petition for waiver will be granted and/or the Assistant Secretary determines that it would be desirable for public policy reasons to grant immediate relief pending a determination on the petition for waiver. An interim waiver remains in effect for a period of 180 days or until DOE issues its determination on the petition for waiver, and may be extended for an additional 180 days, if

necessary. Pursuant to § 430.27(g), the Assistant Secretary shall publish in the Federal Register notice of each waiver granted, and any limiting conditions of each waiver. SUMMARY : Notice is given of the Decision and Order (Case No. F-018) granting Lennox Industries, Inc. a waiver for its G20 and G20R series atmospheric furnaces from existing DOE test procedures.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Car', E. Adams, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Conservation and Renewable Energy, Forrestal Building, Mail Station, CE-43, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586-9127. Eugene Margolis, Esq., U.S. Department of Energy, Office of General Counsel, Mail Station, GC-i2, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586-9507 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with 10 CFR 430.27(g), notice is hereby given of the issuance of the Decision and Order as set out below. In the Decision and Order, Lennox Industries has been granted a waiver for its G20 and G20R series atmospheric furnaces permitting the company to use an alternate test method. Today's alternate test method is a modified version of the test method requested by Lennox and produces furnace efficiencies slightly lower than the Lennox requested method. Issued in Washington, DC. November 30, 1990. 1. Michael Davis, Assistant Secretary, Conservation and Renewable Energy.

Decision and Order The Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products (other than automobiles) was established pursuantto the Energy Policy and ConservationAct (EPCA). Public Law 94-163, 89 Stat. 917, as amended by the National Energy Conservation Policy Act (NECPA), Public Law 95-619, 92 Stat. 3266, the National Appliance Energy Conservation Act of 1987 (NAECA), Public Law 100-12, and the National Appliance Energy Conservation Amendment of 1988 (NAECA 1988), Public Law 100-357, and requires DOE to prescribe standardized test procedures to measure the energy Background On August 1, 1989, Lennox Industries (Lennox) filed a "Petition for Waiver" and an "Application for Interim Waiver" regarding (a) Blower time delay and (b) determination of the off-cycle draft factor, DF, in accordance with § 430.27 of 10 CFR part 430. DOE published in the Federal Register the Lennox petition and solicited comments, data, and information respecting the petition and granted the requested Interim Waiver in its entirety. 54 FR 50525 (December 7, 1989). Comments were received from-the American Gas Association (AGA), Energen Corporation (Energen), Southern Gas Association (SGA), Oklahoma Natural Gas Company (Oklahoma), Laclede Gas Company (Laclede), Lone Star Gas Company (Lone Star), Entex, and Michigan Furnace Company (Michigan) all of whom supported the waiver in its entirety. Comments were received from Amana, Snyder General Corporation (Snyder General), Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), Heil-Quaker Corporation (Heil-Quaker), Carrier Corporation (Carrier), Rheem Manufacturing Company (Rheem), and the California Energy Commission (CEC), all of whom opposed the waiver regarding the determination of DF. All comments received were sent to Lennox for its rebuttal. DOE consulted with the Federal Trade Commission on September 20, 1990, concerning the Lennox petition.

Assertions and Determinations

Blower delay. Lennox seeks a waiver from the DOE test provisions that require 1.5 minute delay between the ignition of the burner and the starting of the circulating air blower. Instead, Lennox requests the allowance to test using a 45 second blower time delay when testing its G20 and G20R series gas furnaces. Lennox states that since the 45 second delay is indicative of how these models actually operate and since such a delay results in an improvement in efficiency of approximately 0.7 percent, the waiver should be granted. Previous waivers for this type of timed blower delay control have been granted by DOE to the Coleman Company. 50 FR 2710, January 18. 1985; the Magic Chef Company, 50 FR 41553, October 11, 1985; the Rheem Manufacturing Company, 53 FR 48574, December 1, 1988, and 55 FR 3253, January 31; 1990 ; the Trane Company, 54 FR 19226, May 4,1989; DMO Industries,55 FR 4004, February 8, 1990; the HeilQuaker Corporation, 55 FR 13184, April 9, 1990; the Carrier Corporation, 55 FR 13182, April 9, 1990; and the Rheem Manufacturing Company, 55 FR 37521, September 12, 1990. Since DOE did not receive any negative comments on this issue, the Lennox petition has provided the basis

HeinOnline -- 55 Fed. Reg. 50224 1990

### Federal Register / Vol. 55, No. 234 / Wednesday, December 5, 1990 / Notices

for DOE's review of the blower delay procedure. Based on the information provided by the Petitioner and DOE's review, DOE concluded that the existing test procedure does not give comparable results for the Lennox G20 and G20R series gas furnaces and therefore DOE is granting Lennox's request for an alternate blower delay test procedure. Determination of D. Lennox also seeks a waiver from the DOE test procedure that requires the use of an assigned theoretical value of 1.0 for the Dp of an atmospheric furnace. Lennox states that the G20 and G20R series of atmospheric furnaces incorporate an electro-mechanical burner box damper system that greatly restricts the flow through the heat exchanger when the damper is closed during the off-cycle and that the damper restriction is similar to that caused by a power burner during the off-cycle. Thus, Lennox claims it should be allowed to test to determine the DF value, as allowed for power burners. A resulting lower Dp value will result in a higher Annual Fuel Utilization Efficiency (AFUE). Lennox states that the current test method does not give credit for the energy savings due to the reduced flow and, as a result , provides materially inaccurate comparative data. To be able to take credit for the energy savings resulting from the reduced flow, Lennox requests a waiver from the furnace test procedure to allow Dp to be determined by tracer gas test measurements and to use the calculations set forth in the test procedures for power burners. Lennox claims that this results in an AFUE for its G20 furnace which averages at least 4.0 percent higher than when tested under the current method of test for atmospheric furnaces using the specified value of 1.0 for D. All of the comments in favor of this portion of Lennox's petition essentially state that allowing atmospheric furnaces with burner box dampers to use a tracer gas test to measure D. would result in higher AFUE's and thereby meet the 1992 NAECA standard. If this occurs, it would result in lower cost equipment basically for reasons of simplicity, i.e., no power burner or spark ignition, and therefore result in the elimination of the power burner as the anticipated basic model. Oklahoma and Lone Star both stated that because of draft dilution associated with atmospheric furnaces, the units would also be more compatible with existing vent systems than power burners are, which also means lower costs for many retrofit installations. However, the draft dilution associated with atmospheric furnaces was a major issue raised by all of the comments opposed to this portion of the Lennox waiver. Those comments essentially state that most of these furnaces will be installed indoors, as opposed to installed as isolated combustion systems as they are rated. The draft dilution becomes a large infiltration loss when installed indoors that is not recognized by the test procedure and is not incurred by similarly rated power burner units. Thus, the Lennox unit would operate at a lower efficiency than its rated efficiency whereas a similarly rated power burner unit would operate at a higher efficiency when installed indoors. These comments further claim that if the waiver is granted, the majority of consumers who install these atmospheric furnaces indoors will be misled by the labeled efficiency; that the comparison of this furnace to a power burner unit will be unfair; and that the result will be an increase in energy

usage . There were also several comments stating that this waiver is contracy to their understanding of NAECA in that the furnace standard was set to a level so as to effectively preclude atmospheric furnaces. After review of the comments, DOEagrees that some furnaces with low offperiod losses which utilize unrestricted draft dilution will operate at lower efficiencies when installed indoors as compared to when installed as an isolated combustion system. Lennox points out in its rebuttal that there are also some furnaces with power burners that had indoor ratings higher, as measured by the earlier 1988 test procedure, than their current ICS ratings . While this result, for the Lennox furnace and others, may be contrary to the intent of NAECA, DOE has determined that such result is not germane to the decision at hand. NAECA clearly states that AFUE is to be determined assuming an isolated combustion system installation and this Decision and Order is based on the technical aspects of the test procedure to produce accurate and comparable results for the Lennox G20 series furnace when tested as an isolated combustion system. However, DOE is concerned about the possible degradation of performance of furnaces with draft dilution when installed indoors relative to their ICS rated performance, especially in the absence of stack dampers which no longer receive performance credit, and, as a result, DOE will explore the possibility of having the legislated definition of AFUE changed to an indoor rating. 

### AGA, Energen, SGA, and Entex all commented that the tracer gas test to 50225

determine DI, is allowed for other types of furnaces including power burners and vented heaters, and supported its use inthis instance. However, Amana, HeilQuaker, Carrier, and CEC question the accuracy of the tracer gas test for Lennox's burner box damper design with Heil-Quaker and Carrier conducting tracer gas tests on some of their atmospheric units to which theyhad fitted burner box dampers. HeilQuaker and Carrier both claimed that the tracer gas tests with the burner box damper open yielded DF values of less than 1.0 and that they could only 'duplicate Lennox's low Dp with the burner box damper closed by sealing the draft diverter. They maintain that Lennox should not be allowed to test with the draft diverter sealed because it will always be open in the field. They maintain that the open draft diverter allows the possibility of draft relief air from the draft diverter entering the heat exchanger which would lower the effect of the burner box damper. Because of the questions raised by the potential precedental effect on industry product design and manufacturing in the event the waiver should be granted, DOE decided that more testing was necessary. Accordingly, DOE contracted with the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) to conduct efficiency tests of q Lennox furnace using tracer gas tests to determine DF. As stated above, Lennox claimed in its Petition for Waiver that its G20 Furnace, when tested using tracer gas tests to determine DF, would perform with an AFUE improventent which would average at least 4 .0 percent. Additionally, Lennox had rated the G20 furnace tested by NIST at an AFUE of 78.0 percent when tested using the test procedure required by Lennox. The result of the NIST test, using the Lennox procedure, was a somewhat lower AFUE of 77.3 percent. This result showed that the Lennox furnace design did increase ICS performance, which the current test procedure did not measure, although not by as much as Lennox claimed. However, the NIST test also showed that the tracer gas test did yield a DF of less than 1.0 with the burner box open as Heil-Quaker and Carrier claimed. This would automatically result in an increase in the AFUE, caused solely by utilizing testing to obtain Di, and not by the Lennox design feature. Further, the test showed that the entry and recirculation of draft diverter air into the heat exchanger did occur as Heil-Quaker and Carrier claimed. NIST also found that with the draft diverter open, the tracer gas test is difficult, if not impossible, to perform when the

HeinOnline -- 55 Fed. Reg. 50225 1990

### 50226 Federal Register / Vol. 55, No. 234 / Wednesday, December 5, 1990 / Notices

tracer gas is injected into the burner box. Based on the above results, DOE has determined that a waiver is warranted but that the waiver should be a modified version of the Interim Waiver previously granted. The test procedure the today's Decision and Order reflects these findings. DOE believes that the waiver should account only for the effect of the burner box damper and should not allow any improvement of DF (and resulting AFUE) due to the allowance of testing for DF. Therefore, today's Decision and Order requires that the tracer gas test for DF be performed with the burner box damper open and closed-thus only the relative improvement in the DF value is allowed. The NIST test also found that the entry and recirculation of draft relief air in the heat exchanger with the draft diverter open did occur but that it made little difference in the AFUE of the Lennox furnace. However, because DOE believes that other manufacturers may introduce similar designs in which an open draft diverter might make a greater difference and because the draft diverter is always open in the field, today's Decision and Order requires the

tracer gas test be performed with the draft diverter open. During its testing, NIST found the tracer gas test difficult to perform and, therefore, today's Decision and Order contains some other modifications from the Interim Waiver to simplify the test. Today's Decision and Order requires the tracer gas to be injected and sampled in the stack as opposed to in the heat exchanger. Today's Decision and Order also requires the ratio of Qs,oFF, measured with the damper closed, to QS.OFF' measured with the damper open, (where Qs.orr is the integrated value of the'off-cycle sensible heat loss over a one minute period between the minutes 5 and 6 into the cool-down period), to be used as the effective DF. The losses, Qs.oFF with damper open and closed, are measured over a one minute period instead of using the off-cycle sensible heat losses measured and integrated over the whole off-cycle period of 13.3 minutes because the latter proved difficult to measure using current tracer gas techniques. The net result of all these changes from the Interim Waiver was an AFUE of 76.8 percent which is 0.5 AFUE points lower than NIST obtained using the, Interim Waiver procedure and 1.2 AFUE points lower than Lennox currently rates the unit. Because of the complexities in the flue gas measurements and to validate the integrity of the test procedure which is the subject to today's Decision and Order, the Lennox furnace tested by NIST was shipped to an independent testing laboratory, ETL Testing Laboratories, to test using today's test procedure. The results of the ETL conducted test was an AFUE of 76.6 which DOE considers to be in reasonably good agreement with the - NIST results.



### Conclusion

It is therefore ordered that: (1) The "Petition for Waiver" filed by Lennox Industries (F-018) is hereby granted as set forth in paragraph (2) below, subject to the provisions of paragraph (3), (4) and (5). (2) Notwithstanding any contrary provisions of appendix N of 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, Lennox Industries shall be permitted to test its G20 and G20R series gas furnaces on the basis of the test procedure specified in 10 CFR part 430, with the modifications set forth below: (i)_Section 9.3.1 in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 103-1982 is deleted and replaced with the following paragraph:

Gas- and oil fueled central furnaces. After equilibrium conditions are achieved following the cool-down test and the required measurements performed, turn on the furnace and measure the flue gas temperature, using the thermocouple grid described above, at 0.5 (TF.ox(t,)) and 2.5 (TF.oN(ce)) minutes after the main burner(s) come on. After the burner start-up, delay the blower start-up by 1.5 minutes ( t-), unless: (1) The furnace employs a single motor to drive the power burner and the indoor air circulating blower, in which case the burner and blower shall be started together; or (2) the furnace is designed to operate using an unvarying delay titte that is other than 1.5 minutes; or (3) the delay time results in the activation of a temperature safety device which shuts off the burner, in which case the fan control shall be permitted to start the blower. In the latter case, if the fan control is adjustable

, set it to start the blower at the highest temperature. If the fan control is permitted to start the blower, measure time delay, (t-), using a stop watch. Record the measured temperatures

. During the heat-up test for oil -fueled furnaces, maintain the draft in the flue pipe within #0.01 in. of water gauge of the manufacturer's recommended on-period draft. (ii)(1) The title of section 8.9 in ANSI/ ASHRAE Standard 103-1982 is deleted and replaced with the following title: 8.9 Methods for Determining Draft Factors OF, DF, and Ds and Off-Cycle Loss Factor KL. (2) Section 8.9.2 in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 103-1982 is deleted and replaced with the following: 8.9.2 Optional Methods for Determining Draft Factors Dp, DF, and Ds for Systems Equipped with Power Burners or Draft Inducers, and Method for Determining Off-Cycle Loss Factor K,, for Atmospheric Systems with an Integral Draft Diverter and with an Electra-mechanical Device at the burner air inlet that Restricts the Flow Through the Heat Exchanger in the. Off-Cycle. Draft factors Or, DF, and Ds are to be determined as described in 9.4 and loss factor Kr, are to be determined as described in 9.6. The tracer gas chosen for task should have a density which is less or approximately equal to the density of air. Use a gas that is of a different chemical species or different concentration from the flue gas to be measured and unreactive with the environment to be encountered. (3) Add the following section 8.9.2.3 in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 103-1982: 8.9.2.3 On atmospheric systems withan integral draft diverter and an electromechanical device at the burner air inlet that.restricts the flow through the heat exchanger in the off-Cycle, determine KL (the ratio of off-cycle sensible heat loss tested with the electro-mechanical device closed during the off cycle to the off-cycle sensible heat loss tested with the electro-mechanical device held open during the off-cycle) during two additional 10- minute duration cooldown tests. Conduct these two additional cool-down tests after the cool-down and heat-up tests described in 9.2 and 9.3 are completed. During a short burner off period, before the two additional cool-down tests but after the completion of the heat-up tests described in 9.3, remove the blocking over the draft relief opening and the restriction over the test stack outlet but keep the insulation over the rest of the draft diverter surface on (see 9.1.1.6). Conduct the first additional cool-down test by first running the unit until steady-state conditions are reached, (see 9 .1.) and then shutting the unit off with the electro-mechanical device adjusted or bypassed so that the deviceis held open during the resulting cooldown period. After the cool-down period, conduct the second additional cool-down test by again running the unit until steady- state conditions are reached, and then shutting the unit off but with the electro-mechanical device operating as designed during the resulting cool-down period. Measure the stack gas mass flow rate (ms,opF) and the stack gas temperature during the two additional cool-down periods described above starting at five minutes into the cool-down period using the procedure described in 9.6 .5, and compute (as described in 11.4.4) the off-cycle sensible heat losses over the one minute interval between five and six minutes into the cool-down period using 9.6.

HeinOnline -- 55 Fed. Reg. 50226 1990

### Federal Register / Vol. 55, No. 234 / Wednesday, December 5, 1990 / Notices

(4) Section 9.2.1.1 in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 103-1982 is deleted and replaced with the following: 9.2.1.1 Turn off the main burner after steady- state testing is completed, and

measure the flue gas temperature by

means of the thermocouple grid described in 7.5 at 1.5 (T,,. OFF (t3)) and 9.0 minutes (TF, OFF ( t4)) after burner shut off. Bypass the damper control in units employing stack dampers and integral draft diverter or draft hood so that the damper remains open during the cooldown test

. On atmospheric systems with an integral draft diverter and equipped with an electro

-mechanical device at the burner air inlet that restricts the now through the heat exchanger in the offcycle, bypass or adjust the control for the device electrically or mechanically so that the device remains open during the cool-down test. (5) Add the following sections 9.6, and 9.6.1. to 9 .6.8 ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 103-1982: 9.6 Tracer Gas Test Procedures for Determining Off-Cycle Loss Factor KL for Atmospheric Systems with Intergral Draft Diverter and Equipped with an Electro

-Mechanical Device at the Burner Air Inlet that Restricts the Flow Through the Heat Exchanger in the Off-Cycle. 9.6.1 As described in 9.4.1. 9.6.2 After the completion of the heatup test in 9.3, turn the burner off and remove the blocking over the draft diverter and the restriction in the test stack that are installed during the steady- state test in 9

. 1.1.6. Do not remove the insulation covering the draft diverter surfaces (see 9 .1.1.6). In the meantime, sample and feed the ambient air to the tracer gas analyzer and record the background concentration CB of the tracer gas to be used for the test (one data point is generally enough). 9.6.3 Turn the burner on until steadystate conditions are again achieved as specified in 9.1 .1.1. Turn the burner off for a 10-minute cool-down period. Adjust or bypass the electro

-mechanical device so that it remains open during the cool-down period. Within one minute after the unit is shut off to start the cooldown test

, begin feeding a tracer gas with a known and certified concentraction CTm at a constant flow rate VT into the lower part of the test stack just above the test plane where the stack thermocouple grid is located (see 8 .2,1.5.1). Periodically measure the value of VT with an instantaneously reading flow meter having an accuracy of ± 3 percent of the quantity measured and maintain that value of tracer gas now rate at less than one percent of the air flow rate through the test stack. 9.6.4 Within one minute after the tracer gas flow is started

, connect the tracer gas sampling line to the sampling probe located at a plane inside and near the top exit of the test stack. Measure the transport delay time which is equal to the time between the connecting of the sampling line and the initial

response of the tracer gas analyzer. Add to this transport time the time required for the analyser to reach 90% of its steady-state value as specified in the analyzer's operation manual. The sum of these two values is the tracer gas delay time tnSLAV

, needed to match the concentration measurement to the temperature measurement in the offperiod loss calculation

. Make sure that a well mixed sample is collected by using a multi-hole sampling probe as recommended in appendix D, section B. 9.6.5 At five minutes after the unit is shut off to start the cool

-down test, measure and record the percent volumetric concentration of tracer gas present in the stack gas sample, CT, at the location specified in 9.6 .4. At the same time

, measure the stack gas temperature , Ts, oFF, using the thermocouple grid in the test plan (see 8.2.1.5 .1). The data measurement and recording should be done at a time interval

, At, of five second for the next two to three minutes. The exact length of time required for the data measurement is equal to the tracer gas sample delay time ( see 9.6.4) plus one minute. (Even though only one minute of data is required for the computation of the off-cycle loss, the longer time is needed to take into account the time delay between the concentration data and the temperature data). Stop the tracer gas injection and sampling after the required data are measured and recorded. Disconnect the tracer gas sampling line from the sample probe and sample the ambient air to clean the line. 9.6.7 At the end of the 10-minute cooldown period, turn on the burner until steady

-state conditions are again achieve as specified in 9.1.1.1. Turn the burner off for another 10-minute cooldown period . Let the electro-mechanical device close the way it is designed to. Repeat the test steps of 9.6 .3 through 9.6.6 except that the electro

-mechanical device is to remain closed . Note that the tracer gas feeding rate , VT, may have to be adjusted to a lower rate to keep the sample concentration within the range of the gas analyzer used. 9.6.8 The rate of the stack gas flow through the stack

, the off

- cycle sensible loss rate, and the loss factor KL are calculated by the equations in 11.4.4. (6) Add the following section 11.4.4 in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 103-1982: 11.4.4 Tracer gas procedure for determining the off-cycle loss factor KL for atmospheric furnaces with integral 

### 5fl22.7

draft diverter and equipped with an electro-mechanical device at the burner air inlet that restricts the flow through the heat exchanger during the off-cycle. Calculate the off-cycle loss factor, KL, defined as the ratio of the off-cycle sensible heat loss with the electromechanical device closed during the offcycle to the off-cycle sensible heat loss with the electro-mechanical device held open during the off-cycle.

KL=(Q,,afr with device cloned)/(Q,,orr with device open)

where Q..on=1 ( qe., ) • (At/60) = One minute sum-total of the measured ga.oa * At (At = timestep in seconds when data are recorded) over a cre minute interval starting at five minutes into the cool-down period At = time interval between measurements as defined in 9.6.5, seconds 60 = unit conversion factor to convert time in seconds to minutes and where

gs.oFF = CF * Ms.0FF * (TS,oFF - Tp, ) gs.oFF = off

-cycle sensible loss rate, Btu/min C. = specific heat capacity of the stack gas. . Btu/lb,, "°F TS.OFF = measured stack temperature at time t as defined in 9.6.5, T. TaA = room ambient temperature as defined in 11.2.4, °F

mS.oFF = ICTm - CT)/(CT -CB) l * PF a VT Ms.orF = mass flow rate at time t of the stack gas during the off-cycle, Ibm/min CT, = concentration of measurable tracer gas in a certified standard tracer gas mixture, percent CT = concentration by volume of tracer gas present in the stack gas sample, measured at time t + tosuY, in accordance with 8

.9, percent tDELAY = tracer gas sample delay time as defined in 9.6.4, seconds CB = room background concentration by volume of the tracer gas used as defined in 9.6.2, percent VT = flow rate of tracer gas through the stack measured in accordance with 8.9

, ft3/min pF = density of the stack gas as defined in 11.4.1, lbm/ft3 (7) Add the following section in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 103-1982: 11.7 Additional Requirements for Atmospheric Furnaces with Integral Draft Diverter and Equipped with an Electro-Mechanical Device at the Burner Air Inlet that Restricts the Flow Through the Heat Exchanger in the Off-Cycle. For furnaces with an integral draft diverter and equipped with an electromechanical device at the burner air inlet and installed as an isolated combustion system (ICS), the System Number and the draft factor DF are defined as: System Number=10 DF=KL

where KL=off-cycle loss factor

, as defined in 11.4.4

HeinOnline -- 55 Fed. Reg. 50227 1990

### 50228 Federal Register / Vol. 55, No. 234 / Wednesday, December 5, 1990 / Notices

(iii)'With the exception of the modification set forth in subparagraph (i) and (ii) above, Lennox Industries shall comply in all respects with the test procedures specified in appendix N of 10 CFR part 430, subpart B. ' (3) The waiver shall remain in effect until the Department of Energy prescribes final test procedures appropriate to the G20 and G20R series 

### furnace manufactured by Lennox - Industries. (4) This waiver is based upon the presumed validity of statements, allegations, and documentary materials submitted by the petitioner. This waiver may be revoked or modified at any time upon a determination that the factual ,basis underlying the petition is incorrect. (5) This Waiver supersedes the Interim Waiver granted to Lennox Industries on November 30, 1989 (54 FR 50525, Dec. 7, 1989) and extended on July 12, 1990 (55 FR 30265, July 25, 1990). Issued in Washington, DC., November 30, l :ago. J. Michael Davis, /assistant Secretary, Conservation and Renewable Energy. IFR Doc. 90-28514 Filed 11-30-00; 2:25 panj

BILLING CODE 6450.01-M



### Office of Energy Research

[Notice 91-3]

Special Research Grants; Computer Hardware, Advanced Mathematics and Model Physics (CHAMMP) Program

AGENCY: Office of Energy Research, DOE.

ACTION : Notice inviting grant applications.

SUMMARY: The Office of Health and Environmental Research (OHER) of the Department of Energy (DOE) hereby announces its interest in receiving applications for Special Research Grants to support the development of advanced climate models in conjunction with the Atmospheric and Climate Research Division's (ACRD). Computer Hardware, Advanced Mathematics and Model Physics (CHAMMP) Program. This notice requests applications for grants to support research in the following areas: (1) The theoretical limits to the prediction of climate and climate change on decade to century time scales and regional (100-1000 km) spatial scales using climate models, e.g. general circulation models (GCMs) of the atmosphere, ocean, and coupled atmosphere-ocean system. (2) The development of new mathematical techniques, algorithms and computer software to efficiently use highly parallel computers, i.e. those that typically have 50-1000 processors, for climate models. (3) The use of the current and next generations of supercomputing systems to dramatically increase the throughput of climate simulations. (4) The development of improved representations of key climate processes (surface processes, convective transport, etc.) within climate models that properly scale with model resolution. Applicants may apply for any combination or all of (1), (2), (3), and (4) above. Collaborative proposals among several investigators and/or organizations that cover two or more of the above areas are encouraged. It is anticipated that up to 20 grants will be awarded. Allocation among (1), (2), (3), and (4) above will depend on the number and quality of the proposals received. Grant awards will generally be for a 3 year period beginning in the spring of 1991. DATES: Applications should be sent to the address below by 4.30 p.m.; February 12, 1991. The project description portion of the application should not exceed 25 double spaced pages. Lengthy appendices are discouraged. ADDRESSES : Completed applications referencing 91-3, as well as requests for the application and guide for the Special Research Grant Program 10 CFR part 605, should be forwarded to: U.S. Department of Energy, Division of Acquisition and Assistance Management, Office of Energy Research, ER-64, Mail Stop G-236, Washington, DC 20585. Telephone requests for application kits may be made by calling (302)353-3281. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Ari Patrinos; Atmospheric and Climate Research Division, Office of Health and Environmental Research,. ER-76, Washington, DC 20585, (301) 353- 4375. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: One of the major scientific objectives of the Atmospheric and Climate Research Division is to improve the performance bf predictive models of the Earth's climate and to thereby make predictions of the response of the climate system to increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases. This directly supports the ' National Energy Strategy and the, U.S. Global Change Research'Program. The CHAMMP research program is a multi-year program to accelerate and improve climate prediction on global and regional scales. Its emphasis is on the integration of improved modeling methods with state-of

-the-science4and next generation high performance computing systems to increase both the throughput and'accuracy of comnute^ climate model 'predictions. Successful applicants for grants in support of ( 1) above will conduct research into the capability of climate models for permforming decade to century scale climate predictions for regions encompassing 10°--109 kmz. These applicants must demonstrate the role of their research in defining the limits of predictability for advanced climate models, because these models will be used to determine the role of various factors, both natural and anthropogenic

, in climate change. These studies may include, but are not limited to, both theoretical and modeling investigations of internal climate variability: Successful applicants for grants in support of (2) above'will conduct research for the development of new mathematical techniques and numerical algorithms that can be incorporated into climate models running on highly parallel computer systems of the type envisioned to be the next generation of supercomputers

. These algorithms may. deal with any or all of the climate system process representations that will comprise advanced climate models. These processes include, but are not. limited to, atmospheric and oceanic dynamics and transport ; surface energy and mass exchange ; and atmospheric radiative transfer. Successful applicants for grants in support of (3) above will conductresearch into integrating state-of-thescience climate models with the currentand next generations of state-of-thescience supercomputers to dramatically improve the throughput of model simulations on these systems. Successful applicants for grants in support of (4) above will conduct research to improve the representations of climate system processes for inclusion into advanced climate models. These studies will explore methods for incorporating the results of the U.S. Global Climate Change Research Program' s experimental and observational programs into modules that describe these processes correctly through a range of scales within advanced climate models. To ensure that the program meets the broadest needs of the research community and the specific needs of-the ACRD, the successful applicants will participate as members of the CHAMMP Science Team along with selected scientists from other ACRD programs • •

HeinOnline -- 55 Fed. Reg. 50228 1990