CAS-RM-79-102 COMMENT 07

Tuesday 

October 7, 1986 

Part II . 

.... 

Department of 

Energy 

Office of Conservation and Renewable 

Energy 

10 CFR Part 430 

Energy Conservation Program for 

Consumer Products; Test Procedures for 

Central Air Conditioners, Including Heat 

Pumps; Proposed Rule and Public 

Hearing 
CAS-RM-79-102 COMMENT 07

35736 Federal Register I Vol. 51. No. 194 I Tuesday. October 7. 1986 I Proposed Rules 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Office of Conservation and 

Renewable Energy 

10 CFA Part 430 

(Docket No. CAS-RM-7I-102) 

Energy Conservation Program for 

Consumer Products; Proposed 

Rulemaklng and Public Hearing 

Regarding T .. t Procedu,.. for Centra. 

Air Conditioners, Including Heat 

Pump. 

AGENCY: Office of Conservation and 

Renewable Energy. DOE. 

ACTION: Proposed rule and public 

hearing. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy 

(DOE) hereby proposes to amend the 

test procedures for central air ' 

conditioners. including heat pumps. Test 

procedures are one part of the energy 

conservation program for consumer products established pursuant to the 

Energy Policy and Conservation Act. as amended by the National Energy 

Conservation Policy Act. Among other 

program elements. the legislation 

requires that standard methods of 

testing be prescribed for covered 

products. 

The purpose of today's notice is 

'hreefold. First, to incorporate. by 

reference. three commercial standards 

into the test procedures. The standards are the American National Standards 

Institute (ANSI) and American Society 

of Heating. Refrigerating, and AirConditioning Engineers. Inc. (ASHRAE) 

Standard 116-1983. the Air-Conditioning 

and Refrigeration Institute (ARI) 

Standard 210/240-84. and the ANSI/ARI 

Standard 325-85. Second. to prescribe a rating procedure for estimating 

efficiency ratings for untested 

combinations of split-system central air 

conditioners in lieu of laboratory testing. 

Third. to expand the coverage of the test 

procedures to address innovative 

designs, including ground water-source 

heat pumps. earth-coupled heat pumps. 

split-type ductless systems and variablespeed central air conditioners. 

DATES: Written comments (7 copies) in 

response to this notice must be received 

. by December 8.1986; requests to speak 

at the public hearing must be received 

by November 7. 1986; statements (7 

copies) must be submitted by November 

10. 1986; the public hearing will be held 

on November 12,1986, at 9:30 a.m. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments. requests 

to speak at the public hearing. and 

copies of statements of each speaker are ~ be submitted to: U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of Conservation and 

Renewable Energy. Office of Hearinga 

and Dockets. Central Air Conditioner 

Test Procedures. Docket No. CA8-RM79-102. Room 68-025. Forrestal Building. 

1000 Independence Avenue. SW •• 

Washington. DC 20585. (202) 252-8319. 

The public hearing will be held at 

Room 1E-24S. Forrestal Building. 1000 

Independence Avenue. SW •• 

Washington. DC 20585. 

Copies of the transcript of the public 

hearing. the technical support 

documents and the public comments 

received may be obtained at the DOE 

Freedom of Information Reading Room. 

Room 1E-190. 1000 Independence 

Avenue. SW .• Washington. DC 20585. 

(202) 252-5969. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael J. McCabe. U.S. Department of 

Energy. Office of Conservation and 

Renewable Energy. Forrestal Building. 

Mail Station, CE-132. 1000 

Independence Avenue. SW •• Washington. DC 20585. (202) 252-9127 

Eugene Margolis. Esq .• U.S. Department 

of Energy. Office of General Counsel, 

Forrestal Building. Mail Station. GC12. 1000 Independence Avenue. SW .• Washington. DC 20585, (202) 252-9513 

U.S. Department of Energy. Office of 

Hearings and Dockets. Forrestal 

Building, Room 6b-025. 1000 

Independence Avenue. SW .• 

Washington. DC 20585. (202) 252-9319. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

The energy conservation program for consumer products was established 

pursuant to Title Ill. Part B of the Energy 

Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) 

(Pub. L. 94-163). Subsequently. EPCA 

was amended by the National Energy 

Conservation Policy Act (NECPA) (Pub. 

L. 95-619). Among other program 

elements. section 323 of the EPCA as amended requires that standard 

methods of testing be prescribed for 

covered products. including central air 

conditioners and heat pumps. Test 

procedures appear at 10 CFR Part 430. 

Subpart B. 

Test procedures for evaluating the 

cooling performance of air-source 

central air conditioners were initially 

issued by DOE on November 21. 1977 (42 

FR 60150, November 27. 1977). A 

correction notice amending this notice 

was issued by DOE on May 31, 1978 (43 

FR 24268, June 5, 1978). Test procedures 

for evaluating the heating performance 

of air-source heat pumps as well as 

amending the test procedures for central 

air conditioners were issued by DOE on 

December 10. 1979 (44 FR 76700. 

December 27, 1979). On March 15. 1985. 

DOE issued a Notice of Inquiry to solicit 

comments conceming a rating method 

for determining efficiency ratings for 

untested combinations of split-system 

central air conditioners in lieu of 

laboratory testing of the units (50 FR 

13042. April 2, 1985). 

There are three purposes for today's 

notice. Firat. to incorporate three 

commercial standards into the central 

air conditioner test procedures. The 

standards are ANSI/ ASHRAE Standard 

116-1983. ARI Standard 210/240-84 and 

ANSI/ ARI Standard 325-85. Second. to 

prescribe a rating method for estimating 

efficiency ratings for untested . 

combinations of split-system central air 

conditioners in lieu of laboratory testing. 

Lastly. DOE is proposing to expand the 

coverage of the test procedures to 

address innovative designs. including 

ground water-source heat pumps. earthcoupled heat pumps. split-type ductless 

systems and variable-speed central air 

conditioners. 

This third area includes variablespeed central air conditioners and 

addresses the 1981 exception from the 

central air conditioner test procedures 

granted by the DOE Office of Hearings 

and Appeals (OHA) to York Division 

Unitary Products (York) for its variablespeed heat pump. Federal Energy 

Guidelines. 7 DOE ~ 81.209. In 1983, 

OHA extended the exception to BorgWarner Central Environmental Systems 

(Borg-Warner), formerly York. Federal 

Energy Guidelines. 10 DOE ~ 81.206. The 

two exceptions specify an alternative 

test procedure for evaluating variablespeed heat pumps. In 1986. the Carrier 

Corporation (Carrier) petitioned the 

Department for a test procedure waiver 

for its variable-speed heat pump 

(February 14, 1986. 51 FR 5587). Carrier. 

in its petition. proposed as alternative 

test procedure which was different from 

the Borg-Warner approach. Today's 

notice proposes alternative test 

procedures for variable-speed heat 

pumps based upon the exception 

granted to Borg-Warner and the waiver 

granted to Carrier. 

II. Discussion 

The central air conditioner is a 

consumer product which utilizes the 

mechanical refrigerator cycle to provide 

heating and/or cooling. The central air 

conditioner consists of a compressor(s). 

an indoor conditioning coil and 

refrigerant-to-outdoor-air heat 

exchanger. The current test procedure 

provides for a controlled laboratory 

environment for measuring energy 

consumption of air-source central air 

conditioners. including heat pumps. The 

current test method for cooling 

performance consists of two steady-
CAS-RM-79-102 COMMENT 07

Federal Register I Vol. 51. No. 194 I Tuesday. October 7. 1986 I Proposed Rules 35737 

state wet~coil tests. and two cyclic drycoil tests for determining cyclic 

performance. 111e current test method 

for beating performance consists of four 

tests to evaluate: the steady-state 

efficiency. energy lost due to defrosting. 

the effect of cycling the unit and the 

efficiency at low temperatures. 111e 

cycling tests require simulating the 

cyclic behavior of central air 

conditioners. Because the cyclic tests 

are difficult to perform. the current test 

procedures provide for an assigned 

degradation coefficent. CD. which may 

be used in lieu of conducting the cyclic 

tests. 111e assigned coefficient is 0.25 for 

both heating and cooling. Furthermore. 

the current test procedure provides for 

the use of computer simulation or 

engineering analysis of the efficiency of 

condensor-evaporator coil combinations 

other than the combination likely to 

have the highest sales volume of retail 

sales. See 1 430.23(m). Manufacturers 

who chose to use computer simulation 

or engineering analysis must submit to 

DOE a written document describing the 

method used. 

111e current test procedure applies to 

air-source central air conditioners. and 

does not address ground water-source 

heat pumps. earth-coupled heat pumps. 

split-type ductless systems and variablespeed central air conditioners. At DOE's 

request, the National Bureau of 

Standards (NBS) evaluated existing test 

methods for "measuring energy 

consumption of central air conditioners. 

Based upon NBS recommendations, 

DOE is proposing to add Appendix Ml 

to the test procedures for central air 

conditioners. The new Appendix is 

based on ANSI! ASHRAE Standard 116-

1983 and ARI Standard 210/24~. A 

rating method for estimating efficiency 

ratings for untested combinations of 

split-system central air conditioners is 

included in section 4.6.1 of Appendix Ml 

of today's proposal. Appendix M will 

remain in effect for 2 years allowing 

currently tested units to continue to be 

rated without having to retest. 

Under today's notice, central air 

conditioners could be tested during a 

transition period of 24 months by using 

either Appendix M or Appendix M1. 

After that period, only Appendix Ml 

would be used for testing central air 

conditioners. Further details of the 

transition period are discussed in 

paragraph h of today's notice. 

Ratings for untested combinations of 

split-system central air conditioners 

would be determined by the 

standardized rating method in section 

4.6.1 of Appendix M1 of today's notice. 

No other method would be used unless a 

manufacturer received DOE's approval 

to use an alternative rating method 

under 1430.23 (m)(S). Further details 

concerning alternative rating methods 

are discussed later in this notice. " 

111e test procedures proposed today 

incorporate in part. three commercial 

standards to measure the efficiency and 

capacity of central air conditioners. 111e 

three commercial standards are: ANSI! 

ASHRAE Standard 116-1983. ARI 

Standard 210/240-84 and ANSI/ ARI 

Standard 325-63. 

Pursuant to section 301 of the " 

Department of Energy Organization Act 

(Pub. L 95-91). DOE is required to " 

comply with section 32 of the Federal 

Energy Administration Act of 1974 (FEA 

Act) (Pub. L 93-275). as amended by 

section 9 of the Federal Energy 

Administration Authorization Act of 

1977 (Pub. L 95-70). 

Sections 32 (a). (b). and (cJ of the FEA 

Act provide that: 

(aJ If any proposed rule by the 

Secretary contains any commercial 

standards, or specifically authorizes or 

requires the use of any such standards. 

then any general notice of the proposed 

rulemaking shaIl-

(1) Identify. by name. the organization 

which promulgated such standards; and 

(2) State whether or not, in the 

judgment of the Secretary, such 

organization complied with the 

requirements of subsection (b) in the 

promulgation of such standards. 

(b) An organization complied with the 

requirements of this subsection in 

promulgating any commercial standards 

if-

(1) It gives interested persons 

adequate notice of the proposed 

promulgation of the standards and an 

opportunity to participate in the 

promulgation process through the 

presentation of their views in hearing or 

meetings which are open to the public: 

(2) The membership of the 

organization at the time of the 

promulgation of the standards is 

sufficiently balanced so as to allow for 

the effective representation of all 

interested persons: 

(3) Before promulgating such standard, 

it makes available to the public any 

records or proceedings of the 

organization, and any documents. 

letters, memorandums, and materials 

relating to such standards: and 

(A) Obtain a reconsideration of any 

action taken by the organization relating 

to the promulgation of such standards, 

and 

(B) Obtain a review of the standards 

(including a review of the basis or 

adequacy of such standards). 

(c) The Secretary shall not incorporate 

within any rule, nor prescribe any rule 

specifically authorizing or requiring the 

use of. any commercial standards unless 

be has consulted with the Attorney 

General and the Chairman of the 

Federal Trade Commission concerning 

the impact of such standards on 

competition and neither such individual 

recommends against such incorporation 

"or use. 

111e findings required of DOE by 

section 32 of the FEA Act serve to alert 

the public and DOE regarding the use 

and background of commercial 

standards in a proposal and. through the 

" rulemaking process. allow interested 

persons to make known their views 

regarding the appropriateness of the use 

of any particular commercial standard 

in a proposed rulemaking. 

DOE has evaluated ANSI/ ASHRAE 

"Standard 11&-1983. ARI Standard 2101 

240-84 and ANSI/ ARI Standard 325-83 

with regard to compliance with section 

32(b). It is the judgment of DOE that 

these three standards do not fully 

comply with the requirements of section 

32(b), in that these standards were not 

developed in a manner which fully 

provided for public participation, 

comment and review 

Furthermore, as required by section 

32(c) of the FEA Act, DOE will consult 

with the Attorney General and the 

Chairman of the Federal Trade 

Commission concerning the impact of 

these standards on competition, prior to 

prescribing final test procedures. 

a. ANSI/ASHRA.E Standard 116-1983. 

ARI Standard 210/240-84 and ANSI! 

ARI Standard 325-83 

Subsequent to DOE's 1979 final rule, 

manufacturers identified a number of 

problems with the test procedure. As a 

result. ASHRAE established a Standard 

Project Committee (SPC) for the purpose 

of developing an industry consensus test 

method which addressed these 

problems. The most significant change 

was to revise the test method for 

measuring the degradation effect caused 

by cycling of the unit. 

The DOE test procedure prescribes a 

damper method. while the ASHRAE 

procedure prescribes a continuous air 

method. The continuous air method is a 

more repeatable test because the test 

initiates each cycle with no temperature 

differential across the indoor coil. See 

"Seasonal Performance of Air 

Conditioners-Experimental Analysis of 

the DOE Test Procedures Set Up 

Measurement Errors for Unitary Air 

Conditioners and Heat Pumps", HL 82-

2T, Purdue University, May 1982. The 

damper method results in a temperature 

differential across the indoor coil that 

can vary from cycle to cycle, which 
CAS-RM-79-102 COMMENT 07

35738 Federal Register I Vol. 51, No. 194 I Tuesday. October 7. 1986 I Proposed Rules 

results in greater variability in test 

results. For these reaions:NBS 

recommended using the continuous air 

method. DOE has reviewed these 

recommendations and agrees that the 

continuous air method is a more 

repeatable test and results in less 

variability in ratings. There are 

additional advantages in the continuous _ air method. including a simpler test setup since no damper arrangement is 

required and less chance of having 

testing conditions drift over time due to 

cracks and openings in the damper. 

Consequently. DOE is proposing that the 

continuous air method, as prescribed in 

ANSI/ ASHRAE Standard 11~1983 be 

used in conducting Test D. 

One issue in proposing the continuous 

air method is to determine appropriate 

times for measuring the output capacity 

and input power during the cyclic tests. 

As with the existing DOE procedures, 

the ARI Standard 210/240-84 specifies 

that these tests be conducted by 

cyc1ying the unit 6 minutes on and 24 

minutes ofC. According to the ARI 

standard, the power shall be measured 

for six minutes while the capacity shall 

be measured Cor eight minutes. DOE 

believes that the ARI method of 

measuring power and capacity oC 

different time periods does not 

accurately describe the perCormance 

observed in the field. Consequently. 

DOE is proposing that both power and 

capacity should be measured for six 

minutes. See 3.1.1 of Appendix Ml of 

todav's notice. 

Al~o. ANSI! ASHRAE Standard 11~ 1983 uses a bin method for determining 

the SEER for single-speed units. The 

DOE test procedure specifies a simpler 

but less accurate approach. consisting oC 

a single equation Cor determining the 

SEER for single-speed units. The simpler 

approach was prescribp.d by DOE to 

reduce testing burden. The current DOE 

test procedure specifies a bin method for 

all other types of central air 

conditioners. including two speed units. 

DOE believes that results from the bin 

approach are more accurate. and are not 

burdensome. Therefore. DOE is 

proposing that the SEER for single-speed 

units should be determined by the bin 

methods prescribed in ASHRAE 

Standard 11~1983. 

Finally. the ANSI/ ASHRAE Standard 11~1983 differs from the existing 

procedures by not including 

enhancement credit for "demand 

defrost" control systems. Where the 

existing procedures assign a fixed credit 

for units with this type of control system 

no such credit is available in the ANSI/ 

ASHRAE Standard 11~1983 procedures. 

The existing procedures assigned this 

credit to compelUlate for improved 

performance Dot meaBUred in the Frost 

Accumulation Test, SpecficalJy. the 

system capacity measured during the 

Frost Accumulation Test is increased by 

seven percent to account for the 

seasonal performance improvemenL The 

introduction of this enhancement factor 

improves HSPF by approximately four 

percent which agreed with the available 

field data at the time the procedures 

were prescribed. 

DOE believes it appropriate to 

continue enhancement credit for 

"demand defrost" control systems and is 

therefore, including such a credit in 

today's proposal. However, today's 

proposed credit differs from that in the 

existing procedures, where in lieu of a 

single seven percent capacity 

enhancement credit, today's proposal 

would include an HSPF enhancement 

credit which is prorated linearly based 

on the number of defrost cycles saved 

by the control. This improved method 

would result in the same enhancement 

for units that were the basis of the 

existing procedures (e.g., single speed, 

poor frosting performance, etc.); 

however, higher efficiency units (e.g. 

variable speed, improved frosting 

performance. etc.) would receive less 

enhancement. DOE believes this 

adjustment is appropriate since much of 

the improved performance due to 

demand defrost controls on high 

efficiency units is measured in the Frost 

Accumulation Test. In fact, if the unit 

does not defrost during laboratory 

testing, the maximum improvement for 

defrost controls is reflected in the test 

procedures and no further enhancement 

is deserved. In such a case, today's 

proposal would assign an enhancement 

factor of unity (Le. no additional credit 

for demand defrost controls). 

h. Degradation Coefficient 

The test procedure included tests for 

measuring the degradation effect caused 

by cycling of the unit (cyclic tests). In 

order to reduce the burden of testing on 

manufacturers with limited capability 

for testing. an assigned degradation 

coefficient. CDo may be used in lieu of 

conducting the cyclic tests. 

For cooling, the DOE test procedures 

permits manufacturers to conduct 

cycling tests (Tests C and D) to 

determine the actual value of the Cn or 

to use an assigned value of 0.25. In the 

1979 final rule, DOE stated that setting 

the assigned value for Cn at 0.25 gives 

manufac'turers incentive to test units 

with improved cycling performance; 

while at the same time, not severely 

penalizing manufacturers that elects to 

use the assigned value. 

When DOE prescribed test procedures 

for heat pumps in 1919, the assigned 

value for the degradation coefficient for 

heating was alBo set at 0.25. This value 

was selected because little information 

was known concerning the heating 

degradation coefficienf and it was 

pnerally believed that the assigned 

values for cooling and heating . 

degradation coefficient should be the 

l8Dle. 

Since 1919, DOE bas become aware of 

information indicating that many heat 

pumps are rated using the assigned 

value for the degradation coefficient 

because the assigned value typically 

was lower (i. e. better) than the tested 

value. Using the assigned value instead 

of the actual value results in an unfair 

advantage in HSPF. when the assigned 

value is lower than the actual value. 

Purdue reported that the actual value 

averaged about 0.24. See "Analysis of 

Heat Pump Test Data and Industry's 

Response", HL81-37, Purdue University, 

February 1982. This implies that about 

one-half of all heat pumps could obtain 

an unfair advantage in HSPF by using 

the assigned value of 0.25. DOE 

proposes to correct this problem by 

changing the assigned value for Co for 

heating to 0.35. Setting the assigned 

value for CD at 0.35 would give 

manufacturers incentive to develop 

units with improved cycling 

performance. while not providing an 

unfair advantage to manufacturers that 

elect to use the assigned value. This 

philosophy is constant with the 

rationale used in the 1979 final rule. See 

3.1.1 of Appendix M1 of today's rule. 

c. Part-Load Factors 

The DOE test procedures specify that 

SEER and HSPF shall be determined 

based on several variables, one of 

which is the part-load factor. The partload factor is an expression of the 

degradation of a central air conditioner 

operating at various heating or cooling 

loads. The DOE test procedures assume 

that the degradation coefficient is linear. 

about a single cyclic test point. In 

reality, the degradation is non-linear 

and a series of cyclic tests at various 

load conditions should be conducted. 

However. in order to reduce testing 

burden. the DOE test procedure 

specifies the cyclic tests at one load 

condition and assumes linearity for 

other loadings. 

Recent studies have shown that the 

part-load factor can be expressed more 

accurately as an exponential function of 

the cooling or heating load factor. See 

"Field Performance of Three Residential 

Heat Pumps in the Cooling Mode". 

NBSIR 85-3107. March 1985 and "Field-
CAS-RM-79-102 COMMENT 07

Federal Register I Vol. 51, No. 194 I Tuesday, October 7, 1986 I Proposed Rules 35739 

Measured Cycling. Fro~ting. and 

Defrosting Losses for a High Efficiency 

Air-Source Heat Pump", ASHRAE 

Transactions 1985, Volume 91, Part 2-

DOE has reviewed these studies to 

determine that the part-load factor can 

be expressed more accurately by an 

exponential equation consisting of the 

cooling or heating load factor and the 

degradation determined by a single 

cyclic test in each mode (i.e. beating and 

cooling). This method involves no 

additional testing and is based on 

results from the already prescribed 

cycling tests. Since the exponential 

approach requires no additional testing 

and should potentially result in more 

accurate ratings, DOE is today 

proposing that the part-load factors be 

determined by the exponential method. 

See t 4.1.1 and 4.2.1 of Appendix Ml of 

today's notice. 

d. Rating Procedure for Untested 

Combinations of Split-System Central 

Air Conditioners 

The December 1979 final rule stated 

that laboratory testing of every 

combination of a split-system central air 

conditioner (i.e .• a separate condensing 

unit and evaporator coil combination) 

would unduly burden test procedures 

users. Coil manufacturers stressed the 

impossibility of laboratory testing all 

combinations that they offer for sale. 

Condensing unit manufacturers favored 

an alternative to laboratory testing as 

long as it resulted in equal accuracy for 

their combinations. Consequently. in the 

December 1979 final rule. the 

Department allowed the use of computer 

simulation or engineering analysis to 

predict the energy performance of 

untested combinations provided that, at 

a minimum, laboratory testing was done 

on the combination representing the 

largest sales volume, and the simulation 

technique demonstrated an acceptable 

level of repeatable accuracy. See 

§ 430.23(m)(5). 

Since 1979, test procedures users have 

reported a high degree of variability 

resulting from the allowance of using 

simulation techniques. For example, 

some utilities with rebate programs for 

the purchase of high efficiency central 

air conditioners have reported receiving 

significantly different ratings for the 

same condenser-evaporator-coil 

combination. 

In response to these issues. DOE 

directed NBS to evaluate various 

simulation techniques to determine the 

level of accuracy and repeatability. 

Concurrent with the NBS research, ARI 

contracted with ETL Testing 

Laboratories. Inc. (ETL), a private 

testing laboratory, to conduct a testing 

program which would compare results 

of simulation techniques in use with 

actual test results. These efforts 

indicated that although some simulation 

techniques appear to have reasonable 

accuracy.otbertechniques 

demonstrated significant variability of 

results. In the interest of improving this 

situation. NBS. working in conjunction 

with ARI. ETL. condensing unit 

manufacturers, coil manufacturers and 

consulting engineers, has developed a 

standardized rating method for untested 

combinations of split-systems. DOE 

published the standardized rating 

method as a Notice of Inquiry (NOI) on 

March 15, 1985, to receive comments 

and data concerning the accuracy and 

workability of the method. 50 FR 13042. 

April 2. 1985. DOE and NBS have 

reviewed the 24 comments received 

regarding the standardized rating 

method. See "Rating Procedure for 

. Mixed Air Source Unitary Air 

Conditioners and Heat Pumps Operating 

in the Cooling Mode". NBSIR 86-3301, 

February 1986. 

The standardized rating procedure for 

untested combinations that was 

published in the NOI was developed by 

NBS. The NOI procedure required 

knowledge of the following factors: (1) 

Capacity of the matched system; (2) 

indoor fan power of the mixed and 

matched systems; (3) coil capacity of the 

mixed and matched coils: (4) the type of 

expansion device on the mixed and 

matched systems; and the physical 

geometry of the expansion device on the 

mixed and matched systems. With these 

data the user could calculate the energy 

performance of an untested central air 

conditioner using the NOr rating 

procedure. Below is a discussion of the 

comments that DOE received on the 

NO! rating procedure. 

1. Comments Supporting the 

Standardized Rating Method 

DOE received five comments 

supporting using the standardized rating 

method for all untested combinations of 

central air conditioners. Georgia Power 

Company commented that a 

standardized rating method is superior 

to allowing multiple procedures and 

would simplify the rating process. 

(Georgia Power Company, No.1. at 1.)1 

Texas Utilities Electric Company 

commented that even though laboratory 

testing is the best approach for rating 

central air conditioners, they 

recommended using a standardized 

rating method for all untested 

1 Comments on tRe NOl were gillen docket 

numbers in which the citations provide the name of 

the orgsoizatioo. tbe docket number assigned to tbe 

comment. and the page in which the comment is 

found in the commenter's submittal. 

combinations of central air conditioners. 

(Texas Utilities Electric Company. No. 

12, at 4.) Tennessee Valley Authority 

(TV A) commented that the standardized 

rating method should be adopted since it 

appears to conservatively estimate 

energy efficiency ratings without much 

risk of overstating system performance 

and since the input parameters are 

readily available. (TVA. No. 20. at 1.) 

Magna Flow Industries. Inc. (Magna 

Flow) supported using a single rating 

method which would allow real and 

meaningful comparisons in the 

marketplace. (Magna Flow. No. 21, at 2.) 

Airmax. Inc. (Airmax) agreed with using 

a standardized rating method that would 

eliminate the disparity between ratings 

done by different coil manufacturers on 

the same condensing unit and similar 

coils. (Airmax. No. 22. at 1.) 

2. Comments Opposing a Standardized 

Rating Method 

Seven commenters opposed adoption 

of a standardized rating method. ETL 

commented that actual laboratory 

testing should be the only acceptable 

approach for rating central air 

conditioners. (ETL. No.8, at 1.). Six coil 

manufacturers. Red T Coil ( a division of 

the Coleman Co., Inc.), Superior Coils, 

Inc, International Environmental 

Corporation. First Company. Magic Aire 

Division of United Electric Co .. and 

Texas Coil Company, all opposed using 

a standardized rating method because it 

would result in lower ratings and would 

require proprietary information. (Red T 

Coil, No. 10, at 1; Superior Coils, Inc., 

No. 13, at 1; International Environmental 

Corporation, No. 14, at 2; First Company. 

No. 16, at 2-5; Magic Aire, No. 17, at 1; 

and Texas Coil Company. No. 19. at 1.) 

The NOI stated that the standardized 

rating method could result in lower 

(conservative) ratings. According to 

research by NBS and others, the ratings 

from today's proposed standardized 

rating method. which includes some 

improvements in preciSion discussed 

below. appear to be closer to the ratings 

determined by laboratory testing and 

typically exhibit less scatter than ratings 

from the rating procedures NBS 

examined. Consequently, DOE believes 

that using the standardized rating 

method would result in more accurate 

ratings than other rating methods and 

would not necessarily result in lower 

(conservative) ratings. 

The six coil manufacturers cited 

above also commented that the 

standardized rating method uses 

proprietary information from condensing 

unit manufacturers and that this 

information is not readily available. One 

objective that NBS had in developing 
CAS-RM-79-102 COMMENT 07

35740 Federal Register / Vol. 51. No. 194 /Tuesday. October 7. 1986 / Proposed Rules 

the standardized rating method was that 

it did not require proprietary data. 

l.fowever. in its research, NBS 

determined that to achieve an 

acceptable level of accuracy in the 

ratings. certain types of information are 

required and that this information 

typically is not reported a8 accurately as 

the information required for the 

standardized rating method. 

Consequently. NBS discovered. at times. 

that the standardized rating method 

could result in unacceptable high 

variations in ratings unless certain 

precautions were taken to ensure that 

the input information was precise. 

Therefore. NBS recommended that the 

power of the indoor fan. the refrigerant 

flow rate through the refrigerant 

expansion device, and the coil capacity 

for both the matched system and the 

mixed system should be determined 

precisely. . In the interest of reducing testing 

burden and to assist manufacturers in 

obtaining this information, DOE has 

directed NBS to develop a. computer 

program for accurately determining coil 

capacities and to develop a test method 

for measuring the refrigerant flow rate 

through a refrigerant expansion device. 

DOE intends to incorporate the coil 

capacity computer program and the 

refrigerant flow rate test method into the 

'est procedures once NBS completes 

Jevelopment of these procedures. 

During the interim period before they 

are available. manufacturers can use 

industry-wide. currently acceptable 

means for determining coil capacities 

and refrigerant flow rates (i.e .• coil 

capacity catalog data and physically 

measuring expansion devices for 

determining refrigerant flow rates). 

3. Voluntary Certification and 

Enforcement Programs 

Seven commenters recommended that 

central air conditioners subject to the 

ARI certification program for unitary 

air-conditioning and air-source heat 

pump equipment should not be required 

to use the standardized rating procedure 

for rating untested combinations. In the 

ARI certification program. participating 

manufacturers must file certification 

data with ARIon all models subject to 

the program. Participating 

manufacturers include ARI members 

and is open to non-ARI members. The 

data are carefully reviewed by ARI and 

laboratory tests are conducted by an 

independent testing laboratory to verify 

the data when the data is questionable. 

In addition. ARI conducts random 

testing of all models and participating 

"anufacturers may request additional ~sting of competitor's models if the 

participating manufacturer questions the 

competitor's ratings. Consequently. the 

commenters contend that rating certified 

by ARI cannot exhibit the high degree of 

variability mentioned previously in 

today's notice. These commenters 

further contend that manufacturers 

subject to the ARI certification program 

should not be required to use the 

standardized rating method since the 

rating methods used in the ARI program 

could. potentially. be more accurate 

than the standardized rating method. 

These commenters also recommended 

that the standardized rating procedure 

should be required for untested systems 

not covered by the ARI certification 

program. (Bard. No.2. at 1; ARI. No.3. at 

2; Aspen. No.4. at 1; Rheem. No.5. at 1; 

Trane. No.7. at 2; Borg-Warner. No. 15. 

at 2; and Snyder General. No. 18. page 

1.) 

DOE agrees that if a manufacturer has 

an alternative rating method which is 

more accurate than the standardized 

rating method, the manufacturer should 

be allowed to use the alternative rating 

method. However. before a 

manufacturer can use the alternative 

method. he must obtain approval by 

DOE in accordance with I 430.23(m)(5) 

of the proposal. The Department 

believes that all alternative rating 

methods must be reviewed in order to 

maintain integrity in the ratings. 

Consequently. manufacturers who have 

previously received approval by DOE to 

use an alternative method must resubmit 

that method to DOE before it can 

continue to use the alternative method 

for rating central air conditioners. The 

process for obtaining approval is more 

structured than the current process. 

primarily to maintain more control over 

manufacturers who elect to use 

alternative methods and to better ensure 

that the alternative methods result in 

fair ratings. 

One critical part of the approval 

process is that the manufacturer must 

submit sufficient information in its 

request in order for DOE to be able to 

make a determination concerning 

whether the alternative method is more 

accurate than the standardized method. 

At a minimum. this would require that 

the rating procedure is traceable to 

actual test data. a complete 

documentation of the alternative 

method. including the computer code 

when a computer model is used; ratings 

for two complete lines of coil families 

for two different condensing units; and 

complete test data, product information 

and related information to allow DOE to 

verify the ratings submitted by the 

manufacturer. 

The rating information submitted by 

the manufacturer for the mixed system 

would include ratings determined by 

testing. by the standardized rating 

method and by the alternative rating 

method. This would allow DOE to 

compare ratings determined by the 

... ting methods to ratings from actual 

testiDg in order to determine whether 

the alternative method is more accurate 

than the standardized method. Another 

provision is that ratings are required for 

two complete lines of coil families for 

two different condensing units and that 

the capacities of the matched system 

using the two condensing units must 

vary by at least a factor of two. DOE is 

proposing these provisions which 

require ratings for different coil lines 

and condensing units to determine 

whether the alternative method can be 

widely used for rating all types. sizes 

and combinations of condensing units 

and coils. DOE believes that the 

information requested must be provided 

in order to make a valid determination. 

Furthermore. DOE is proposing that 

manufacturers who elect to use an 

alternative rating method must have 

their ratings verified by either an 

independent testing program or an 

independent state registered 

professional engineer. In addition. 

today's proposal would require that 

whenever rated values do not agree 

within two percent of the values as 

determined by testing. the actual test 

data shall be used for energy efficiency 

representation. 

4. Rating Procedure Requires Accurate 

Information 

Aspen commented that even with a 

near-perfect standardized rating 

method. results could be meaningless if 

the input information is inaccurate or if 

restrictions specified in the DOE 

procedures are ignored. (Aspen. No.4. at 

2.) DOE is aware that the rating method 

could result in unacceptably high 

variations in ratings if no precautions 

were taken to ensure that the input 

information was precise. For this reason. 

today's notice includes additional 

requirements concerning determining 

the power of the indoor fan. the 

refrigerant flow rate through the 

refrigerant flow device. and the coil 

capacity for both the matched and 

mixed systems. Regarding the comment 

by Aspen that restrictions in the DOE 

test procedures were ignored. DOE 

proposes changes to the rating method 

to better ensure that these restrictions 

are followed. 

5. Credit for TXV Valves 

Aspen and Texas Utilities Electric 

Company both recommended that the 

standardized rating method allow a 
CAS-RM-79-102 COMMENT 07

Federal Register I Vol. 51. No. 194 I Tuesday. Octooor 7, 1986 I Proposed Rules 35741 

credit for mixed systems equipped with 

thermal expansion valves (TXV) when 

the matched system does not have a 

TXV. (Aspen. No.4. Appendix A. at 1 

and Texas Utilities Electric Company. 

No. 12 at 2.) Both companies presented 

test data in which the SEER was 9.0 for 

a matched system and 9.45 mixed 

system. In the example. the matched 

system did not have a TXV while the 

mix~d system did have a TXV. By using 

the rating method published in the NOI. 

the SEER was calculated to be 8.17. 

However, the calculated SEER was 9.22 

with a credit for the TXV. Since the 

rating was closer to the tested value 

when a credit was allowed (the 

difference between the rated value and 

the tested value was 2.4 percent when a credit is allowed and 7.2 percent without a credit). both Aspen and Texas Utilities 

Electric Company recommended a credit 

for TXV·s. 

According to NBS. a TXV generally is a superior expansion device that should 

increase the SEER. However. not aU 

systems would expect the same increase 

in efficiency by using TXV·s. For 

example. based on research conducted 

by NBS. the improvement in SEER is 

expected to be 2.5 percent for TXV's 

with "bleeding" and 5 percent for TXV's 

with "no bleeding" TXV's, where 

bleeding refers to the characteristic of a TXV to relieve pressure differences by 

leaking refrigerant across the device 

during the off-period. TXV's with no 

bleeding which prevent off·cycle 

migration of the refrigerant. generally 

are superior to TXV's with bleeding. 

which allow off-cycle refrigerant 

migration. 

In consideration of the comments by 

Aspen and Texas Utilities Electric 

Company and of the research conducted 

by NBS. DOE is proposing to include a thermostat expansion value factor in the 

standardized rating method for mixed 

systems with TXV·s. This factor is 

based on the 2.5 percent lmprovement 

for TXV's with bJeerling and 5 percent 

improvement for non-bleeding TXV"s 

recommended by r'..'Bs. See Appendix 

M1 to Subpart 430 section 4.1.6.2. 

6. Adjustment for Fan Power 

Aspen recommended that tke ratio of 

the power of the mixed system to the 

matched system at 82 'F {PX!PM)82 be 

adjusted for differences in indoor fan 

power between the matched and mixed 

systems. (Aspen. No.4. Appendix B. at 

1-2.) This ratio is one of the factors used 

in determining the SEER for the mixed 

systems. This adjustment would take 

into account the effect different units 

would have on system efficiency. 

NBS has reviewed the approach 

recommended by Aspen for adjusting 

(Px/P,.ln to determine that the rating 

method would result in more accurate 

ratings when differences in indoor fan 

power are properly considered. In Its 

review. NBS developed a slightly 

qifferent method for correcting for . indoor fan power that the Aspen 

method. T-oday's proposal adjusts (P,,/ 

p •• ln for differences in indoor fan power 

and is based on the NBS recommended 

method. See Appendix Ml to Subpart 

430. eactions 4.1.6.3 'find 4.1.6.4, 

7. Adjustment for Degradation 

Coefficient 

Four commenters, Rheem. Addison. 

Trane and Lennox, stated that the 

standardized rating method does not 

properly account for changes in cycling 

losses by adjusting the degradation 

coefficient. CD' (Rheem. No.5, at 2; 

Addison, No.6. at 1; Trane. No.7, at 2; 

and Lennox, No.9 at 2..) In investigating 

whether adjusting for changes in the 

degradation coefficient between the 

matched and the mixed systems would 

improve the accuracy of ratings. NBS 

determined that there is a relatively 

large allowed experimental tolerance in 

determining the value of the degradation 

coefficient. This was due to allowed 

experimental tolerances in test 

procedure set-up. testing equipment and 

test procedures. NBS also determined 

that the change in the degradation 

coefficient between the matched and 

mixed systems would generally be much 

less than the allowed experimental 

tolerance from testing. This implies that 

most of the difference in the degradation 

coefficients reported by laboratory 

testing between the matched and mixed 

systems would be attributed to the 

testing itself and would not properly 

reflect for differences in cycling losses. 

Consequently. DOE has not changed the 

rating method to account for differences 

in degradation coefficients. 

8. Expansion Device Scaling Factor 

Rheem noted that in the equation for 

the ratio of the capacities of the mixed 

system to the matched system at 82 OF 

(QX/QM}8'2. the exponent for the 

expansion device scaling factor was 0.44 

for capillary tubes end TXV's and was 

0.35 for orifices. Rheem commented that 

the exponent should be the same and 

not dependent on the type of expansion 

device used. (Rheem. No.5. at 3.) This 

ratio is one of the factors used in 

determining the SEER for the mixed 

system. The expansion device scaling 

factor {F.} is the ratio of the refrigerant 

mass flow rates through the mixed and 

matched expansion devices at the same 

operating conditions. 

NBS reviewed Rheem's comment and 

agreed that the exponent should be 8 

constant and recommended 0.35 as the 

value to be used. Today's notice 

. specifies 0.35 as the exponent for the 

expanaion device Icaling factor in the 

equation for determining (Qx/Q..)u. 

In addition. Rheem commented that a 

lower limit of 0.8 and an upper limit of 

1.2 should be placed on the expansion 

device scaling factor because as the 

difference between the refrigerant mass 

Dow rates through the mixed and 

matched expansion devices increases. 

the accuracy decreases. (Rheem. No. 50 

at 3.) 

In the NOI, a lower limit of 0.85 was 

placed on the expansion device scaling 

factor. At that time. no upper limit was 

made because it was not considered to 

be necessary. In consideration of 

Rheem's comment. NBS reviewed data 

for the expansion device scaling factor 

to determine that the method can be 

used if the factor is between 0.85 and 

1.35. 

Today's notice specifies that the 

standardized rating method can be used 

if the expansion device scaling factor is 

between 0.85 and 1.35. DOE believes 

that these values represent the extreme 

of typical scaling factors and the 

Department does not have data on units 

with scaling factors outside this range to 

determine if the standardized rating 

method yield accurate results. For mixed 

systems with expansion device scaling 

factor outside this range. the 

standardized rating meeting can not be 

used for rating purposes. For these 

systems, ratings can only be detennined 

by testing. 

9. Accountability 

Rheem commented that manufacturers 

participating in the ARI certification 

program are held accountable for their 

ratings. implying that manufacturers 

who will use the standardized rating 

method are not held accountable for 

their ratings. [Rheem. No.5, at 3.) 

Manufacturers. whether using the DOE 

test procedures. computer simulation or 

engineering analysis. have always been 

held accountable for their ratings. 

Section 430.23[m)(3) of the DOE test 

procedures states that whenever 

measures of energy consumption 

detennined by computer simulation or 

by engineering analysis do not agree 

with measures of energy consumption 

detennined by actual testing. the values 

determined by actual testing shall be 

used. To continue to ensure that 

manufacturers using the rating method 

are held accountable for their ratings. 

DOE has proposed a similar provision in 

today's notice. See § 430.Z3(m){3). 
CAS-RM-79-102 COMMENT 07

35742 Federal Register I Vol. 51, No. 194 I Tuesday. October 7. 1986 I Proposed Rules 

10. eoil Capacity 

Addilon commented that the ratina 

method ~liel on determinina coil 

capacitiel from coil manufacturers 

catalogl, Addilon further commented 

that thele catlilOSS cannot always be 

used for determinina the capacities for 

both the matched and mixed system 

coils because the matched or mixed coil 

desip can be of a unique desigri which 

is not included in the catalop. (Addison. 

No. 8, at %.) DOE agreel with Addison 

that there are certain limitations with 

usina coil catalogues for determinina . coil capacity: however. DOE believes 

thele catalogues can be used in the 

majority of calel. AI mentioned above. 

DOE had directed NBS to develop a 

computer program to alsist 

manufacturers in determinina coil 

capacitiel. Once a coil capacity . 

computer program has been developed it 

will be incorporated into the test 

procedures. 

11. Double Orifice Flow Devices 

Lennox commented that the 

standardized ratina method does not 

address a system using two orifice flow 

devices in series and that this device is 

used extensively. (Lennox. No.9. at 1.) 

DOE is aware that the rating method 

does not address systems that use combinations of expansion devices. 

which is one reason why DOE directed 

NBS to develop a refrigerant flow test 

method that would address 

combinations of expansion flow devices. 

including the double orifice flow device 

mentioned by Lennox. Until such test 

method is incorporated into the 

standardized rating method. these 

designs can be rated by actual tests or 

by a DOE approved rating method. 

12. Coil Circuitry 

Lennox commented that coil capacity 

can be determined by computer 

simulation only if the simulation method 

properly addresses coil circuitry. 

(Lennox No.9. at 1.) The coil simulation 

program. which NBS is presently 

developing. will address coil circuitry to 

result in more accurate ratings for mixed 

systems. Until such a test method is 

incorporated into the standardized 

rating method. these designs can be 

rated by actual tests or by a DOE 

approved rating method. 

13. Validation of the Rating 

Procedures 

Texas Utilities Electric Company 

recommended that the rating method 

should be validated against actual 

laboratory test results. (Texas Utilities 

Electric Company. No. 12. at 4.) The 

rating method was initially validated by 

NBS for 22 different systems when DOE 

published the NOI. . 

In response to the NOI. DOE received 

additional comparisons between results 

from the proposed ratina method and 

actual testiq from Rheem. Trane and 

Borg.Warner. manufacturers of matched . systems. (Rbeem. No. 5, at 5-8; Trane. 

No • ." at 3: and Borg.Warner, No. 15, at 

3.) Based on thiJ information, the 

proposed ratina method was revised for 

indoor fan power, a credit for TXV'a. 

and different limits for the coil capacity . ratio. NBS also had a consultina 

eqineer compare the revised . procedures against actual test results as 

an independent check of the ratina 

procedure. DOE believes that today's 

standardized ratina method will produce 

ratinas that are comparable with results 

from testing and no further validation is 

necessary. 

14. Expand Ratina Procedures for 

Heating 

TVA recommended that DOE should 

develop a similar standardized rating 

method for the heating function of heat 

pumps. (TVA, No. 20. Page 1.) DOE has 

directed NBS to develop a rating method 

for the heating function of heat pumps 

and is evaluating the procedures other 

organizations. e.g. ARI. are developing. 

Until such a test method is incorporated 

into the standardized rating method. 

these designs can be rated by actual 

tests or by a DOE approved rating 

method. 

e. Ground Water-Source Heat Pumps 

and Earth-Coupled Heat Pumps 

Today. DOE is proposing test 

procedures for two types of watersource heat pumps. ground water-source 

heat pumps and earth-coupled heat 

pumps. A ground water-source heat 

pump utilizes a refrigerant-to-water heat 

exchanger(s) in which ground water is 

circulated to and from the heat 

exchanger(s) in an open loop. An earthcoupled heat pump utilizes a refrigerantto-water heat exchanger(s) in which 

water to and from the heat exchanger(s) 

is circulated through the ground in a 

closed loop. DOE is proposing test 

procedures only for these designs of 

water-source heat pumps because they 

typically are used in residential 

applications. whereas. all other types of 

water-source heat pumps are generally 

used solely for commercial applications. 

In 1979. DOE proposed test 

procedures for water-source heat pumps 

based upon recommended procedures 

from NBS. However. test procedures for 

water-source heat pumps were not 

included in the 1979 final rule because 

commenters stated that the proposed 

procedures for water-source heat pumps 

were not consistent with the ones for 

air-source heat pumpa. These . 

commenters contended that the 

inconsistencies could give erroneous . 

cost information. and encourage sales of 

one product over another. In view of 

these comments, DOE directed NBS to 

develop and recommend appropriate 

test procedures for water-source heat 

pumps. 

Today's notice specifies the same test 

procedures for both ground water- source beat pumps and earth-coupled 

heat pump. and are based on ARI 

Standard 325-8S and on research . conducted by NBS. See "Laboratory 

Tests of a Residential Unitary WaterSource Heat Pump", NBSIR 81-2287. 

November 1982 and "Method of Testing. 

Rating and Estimating the Seasonal 

Performance of Ground -Water Source 

Heat Pumps", NBSIR 81-2434. November 

1982. The NBS Method is based on four 

steady-state tests: a high temperature 

cooling test (70 eF). a low temperature 

cooling test (SO eF). a high temperature 

heating test (70 eF) and a low 

temperature heating test (SO en 

DOE. is today proposing that SEER 

and HSPF are calculated using a 

seasonal part-load factor of 0.90 for 

SEER and 0.85 for HSPF. if the water- source heat pump does not require any 

supplemental resistance heat. For units 

that require supplemental resistance 

heat DOE is proposing a bin method of 

calculating SEER and HSPF similar to 

the existing heat pump calculation 

procedure. 

f. Split-Type Ductless S}'stems 

A split-type ductless system is a 

relatively new product design that has 

recently been marketed in the United 

States that is not covered by the current 

test procedure. A split-type ductless 

system is a central air conditioner with 

a remote condenser or remote 

condenSing unit and one or more 

ductless indoor fan-coil units. One 

feature that distinguishes these systems 

from other types of central air 

conditioners and heat pumps is that the 

split-type ductless system with multiple 

indoor units can operate in a multiple 

zone control mode in which each indoor 

unit is a separate zone and that each 

indoor unit will operate only upon 

demand. 

DOE believes that the special design 

characteristics of split-type ductless 

systems will result in materially 

inaccurate and unrepresentative data 

for these systems if they are tested by 

the existing DOE test procedures. The 

DOE test procedures specify that the 

unit must be connected to ductwork 

whereas split-type ductless systems are 
CAS-RM-79-102 COMMENT 07

Federal Register I Vol. 51, No. 194 I Tuesday, October 7, 1986 I Proposed Rules 35743 

installed without ductwork. Specifying a 

testing condition for ductwork for splittype ductless systems would result in an 

abnormally high pressure drop across 

the indoor unit, resulting in unwarranted 

reductions in both capacity and . 

efficiency. Consequently, DOE directed 

NBS to develop a test procedure for 

split-type ductless systems. 

NBS developed a test procedure for 

split-type ductless systems based, 

wherever possible, on ANSII ASHRAE 

Standard 116-83 and ARI Standard 2101 

24G-84. See "Procedure for Testing, 

Rating and Estimating the Seasonal 

Performance of Multiple-Indoor-Coil 

Residential Air Conditioners and Heat 

Pump", NBS letter report. AprilS. 1985. 

DOE has reviewed the NBS testing 

approach and believes that it can be 

used for testing split-type ductless 

systems. Today's notice specifies that 

for split-type ductless systems with 

multiple indoor units, the outdoor unit 

would be tested separately for each 

combination of indoor units. DOE 

believes that this provision is necessary 

to provide complete information to consumers because as the split-type 

ductless system operates with fewer 

indoor units it tends to become less 

efficient. DOE believes that this 

information is important, especially if 

consumers operate the split-type 

ductless system with several indoor 

units turned off. 

Section 8.2.2.lb of A;."IJSI/ ASHRAE 

Standard 116-1983 specifies that the 

indoor supply duct shall be blocked 

during the defrost cycles in the Frost 

Accumulation test. DOE considers this 

to be an unrealistic operating condition 

for split-type ductless systems because 

these systems do not operate in this 

manner. Consequently. today's notice 

specifies that the indoor supply would 

not be blocked during the test. 

Today's notice specifies that during 

cyclic testing of multiple indoor units. a 

single control circuit would be 

substituted for multiple thermostats in 

order to maintain a uniform cycling rate. 

Today's notic.e also specifies that the 

thermostats 'for the indoor units would 

be shunted during the steady-state tests. 

These testing provisions. which are in 

addition to the test procedures in ANSI/ 

ASHRAE Standard 116-1983 and the 

ARI Standard 210/240-84. are considered necessary to complete the 

test procedures for split-type ductless 

systems. 

8. Variable-Speed Heat Pumps 

In 1981. OHA granted an exception to 

York for its variable-speed heat pump. 

Federal Energy Guidelines. 7 DOE 

section 81.209. In 1983. OHA extended 

the exception to Borg-Warner. formerly 

York. Federal Energy Guidelines, 10 

DOE section 81,306. These two 

exceptions specified an alternative test 

procedure for testing and rating 

variable-speed heat pumps. " 

In 1988, Carrier petitioned DOE for. 

test procedure waiver for its variablespeed heat pump. February 14, 1988. 51 

FR 5587. Carrier petition specified an 

alternative test procedure different from 

the York approach. 

ARI Standard 210/~ also 

specifies an alternative test procedure" " 

for evaluating variable-speed heat "_" 

pumps. See ARI Standard 210/~, 

Appendix S, Rating Equipment with 

Variable-Speed Compressors. 

Today's notice w(>uld extend coverage 

of the test procedures for variable-speed 

heat pumps to all firms manufacturing 

variable-speed central air conditioners 

and heat pumps. As such. the final rule 

would tenninate the exception relief 

granted by OHA to both York and BorgWarner for their models of variable- " 

speed heat pumps and the test 

procedure waiver granted to Carrier for 

Us models of variable-speed heat 

pumps. 

DOE has reviewed the three methods 

for determining ratings for variablespeed heat pumps developed by BorgWarner. ARI and Carrier. All three 

methods are similar in determining 

SEER and all require a steady-state 

cooling test at an intennediate 

compressor speed to accurately reflect 

the performance of the unit while it is 

operating between the minimum and 

maximum compressor speeds. 

Consequently. DOE believes that all 

three methods should result in similarly 

accurate and comparable ratings for 

SEER. 

The ARI method does not include a steady-state heating test at an 

intermediate compressor speed; the 

Borg-Warner and Carrier methods do 

include such a test. For this reason. DOE 

believes that both the Borg-Warner and 

Carrier methods could. potentially. 

result in more accurate ratings for HSPF 

than the ARI method. Consequently. the 

ARI method has not been adopted for 

today's proposal. 

There is one key difference between 

the Borg-Warner and Carrier methods. 

The Borg-Warner method uses an optional separate steady-state healing 

test at the intermediate compressor 

speed for each design heating 

requirement to accurately describe the 

performance of the heat pump operating 

between the minimum and maximum 

compressor speeds. The Carrier method 

requires a single steady-state heating ., 

test at one intermediate compressor 

speed and then determines analytically 

the performance of the heat pump 

operating between the minimum and 

maximum compressor speeds for each 

design heating requirement. DOE 

believes that both methods should result 

in Similarly accurate and comparable 

ratings for HSPF. Since the Carrier 

method is less burdensome by requiring 

only one additional test. DOE has based 

the method for determining HSPF for 

variable-speed heat pumps on the 

Carrier method. " 

h. Transition Period 

Today'. notice would replace, in its 

entirety. the existill8 test method for 

central air conditioners. In order to 

reduce the burden ofretesting existing 

models, today's notice would provide for 

testing by either method during a twoyear transition period follOWing the 

publication date of the final rule. 

Specifically. the existing test method 

remains as Appendix M while the 

proposed test method is Appendix Ml. 

After the two-year transition period. 

only Appendix M1 would be allowed. 

The present test method (Appendix M) 

would no longer be allowed and would 

be deleted, from the DOE test 

procedures. 

In addition. ratings for untested 

combinations of split-system central air 

conditioners would be determined in 

accordance with new § 430.23(m)(5}. 

There would be no transition period for 

rating untested combinations of splitsystem units. 

New basic models of central air 

conditioners and heat pumps 

manufactured after the effective date of 

the final rule shall be tested only by the 

test procedures specified in Appendix 

Ml. Appendix M cannot be used for 

testing new basic models. DOE believes 

that this transition period will minimize 

any retesting burden. 

III. Comment Procedures 

a. Written Comments 

Interested persons are invited to 

participate in the rulemaking by 

submitting data. views. or arguments 

with respect to the proposed 

amendments set forth in this notice to 

the address indicated at the beginning of 

the notice. 

Comments should be identified on the 

outside of the envelope and on 

documents submitted to DOE with the 

designation "Central Air Conditioner 

Test Procedures. Docket No. CAS-RM79-102". Seven (7) copies are requested 

to be submitted. All comments received 

by the date specified at the beginning of 

this notice and all other relevant 

information will be considered by DOE 

before final action is taken on the 
CAS-RM-79-102 COMMENT 07

35744 Federal Register I Vol. 51. No. 194 I Tuesday. October 7. 1986 I Proposed Rules 

proposed regulation. Pursuant to the 

rovisions of 10 CFR 1004.11. any person 

JbmittiDl information which he or .he 

oeUeves to be confidential and exempt 

by law from public diac10sure .hould 

submit ODe oomplete copy of the 

document and 6 copies. if possible. from 

which the information believed to be 

confidential has been deleted. DOE will 

make its own determination with regard 

to the confidential status of the 

information and treat it accordill8lo its 

determination. 

Factors of interest to DOE when 

evaluatill8 requests to treat as 

confidential information that has been 

submitted include: {I) A description of 

the item; (2J an indication as to whether 

and why such items of information have 

been treated by the submitting party as 

confidential. and whether and why such 

items are customarily treated as 

confidential within the industry; (3) 

whether the information is generally 

known 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) an indication as to when 

such information might lose its 

1nfidential character due to the 

Issage of time; and (7) whether 

.Jisc\osure of the information would be 

in the public interest. 

b. Public Hearing 

1. Procedures for Submitting Requests to 

Speak 

The time and place of the public 

hearing are indicated at the beginning of 

this notice. DOE invites any person who 

has an interest in today's proposed rule. 

or who is a representative of a group or 

class of persons that has an interest in 

the proposed amendments. to make a 

request for an opportunity to make an 

oral presentation. Such requests should 

be directed to the address indicated at 

the beginning of this notice and must be 

received by the time specified at the 

beginning of this notice. Requests may 

be hand delivered to such address 

between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 

p.m .. Monday through Friday. Requests 

should be labeled "Central Air 

Conditioner Test Procedures. Docket No. 

CAS-RM-79-102" both on the document 

and on the envelope. 

The person making the request should 

briefly describe the interest concerned 

and.. if appropriate. state why he or she 

'c; a proper representative of the group 

class of persollB that have such an 

.terest, and give a telephone number 

where he or she may be contacted. 

Each person to be heard is requested 

to submit leven (7) copies of Ju. or her 

statement to the address and by the date 

Biven at the beciDnill8 of this notice. In 

the event any perIOn wiliams to testify 

CBJUlOt meel this requirement. 

alternative aJTanpments cait be made 

with the Office of Hearina and Dockets 

in advance of the hearing by ao . 

indicatins in the letter requesting to 

make an oral presentation. 

2. Conduct oJ Hearing 

DOE reserves the right to select the 

persons to be heard at this hearing. to 

schedule the respective presentations. 

and to establish the procedures 

governing the conduct of the hearing. 

Each presentation shaD be limited to 20 

minutes. 

A DOE official will be designated to 

preside at the hearing. The hearing will 

not be a judicial or an evidentiary·type 

hearing. but win be conducted in 

accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553 and 

section 336 of the Act. At the conclusion 

of all initial oral statements. each person 

who has made an oral statement will be 

given the opportunity to make a rebuttal 

statement The rebuttal statements will 

be given in the order in which the 

official statements were made and will 

be subject to time limitations. 

Any interested person who wishes to 

ask a question at the hearing may 

submit the question. in writing. to the 

presiding officer to be asked of any 

person making a statement at the 

hearing. The presiding officer will 

determine whether the question is 

relevant and whether time limitations 

permit it to be presented for answer. 

A transcript of the hearing will be 

made and the entire record of the 

hearing. including the transcript. will be 

retained by DOE and made available for 

inspection at the DOE Freedom of 

Information Reading Room. Room 1E152. Forrestal building. 1000 

Independence Avenue. SW .• 

Washington. DC, between the hours of 

8:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m .. Monday through 

Friday. For information concerning the 

availability of records at the Freedom of 

Infor!Dation Reading Room. call (202) 

252-5969. In addition. any person may 

purchase a copy of the transcript from 

the reporter. 

IV. Environmental Review 

Pursuant to section 7{c)(2) of the 

Federal Energy Administration Act of 

1974. a copy of this notice has been 

submitted to the Administrator of the 

Environmental Protection Agency for his 

comments concerning the impact of thil 

proposal on the quality of the 

environment 

Since teat procedures onder the 

enellY conservation program for 

consume!' products will be used only to 

standardize the measurement of energy 

usage. and will not affect the quality of 

distributiChl of energy usap. prescribing 

test procedures win not result in any 

environmental impacts. DOE. therefore 

has determined that prescribing test 

procedures under the enel1Y 

conservation program for consumer 

products clearly is not a major Federal 

action significantly affecting the quality 

of the human environment within the 

meaning of the National Environment 

Policy Act of 1969. Consequently. 

neither an Environmental Impact 

Statement nor an Environmental 

Assessment is required for the proposed 

rule. 

V. Review Under Executive Order 12291 

The proposed rule has been reviewed 

in accordance with Executive Order 

12291 which directs that all regulations 

achieve their intended goal I without 

imposing unnecessary burdens on the 

economy. on individuals. on public or 

private organizations. or on State and 

local governments. The Executive Order 

also requires that regulatory impact 

analyses be prepared for "major rules". 

The Executive Order defines "major 

rule" as any regulation that is likely to 

result in: (1) An annual effect on the 

economy of $100 million or more; (2) a 

major increase in costs or prices for 

consumers. individual industries. 

Federal. State. or local government 

agencies. or geographic regions; or (3) 

significant adverse effects on 

competition. employment. investment. 

productivity. innovation. or on the 

ability of the United States-based 

enterprises to compete with foreignbased enterprises in domestic or export 

markets. 

The proposed role would amend 

already·existing test procedures for 

central air conditioners and heat pumps. 

DOE has determined that any burden 

imposed OD any person. industry. or 

government entity by the amendment of 

extent procedures. based in part on 

commercial standards. is not sufficient 

to being the proposed rules within the 

definition of "major rule". 

VI. Regulatory FleXlDility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act. Pub. L. 

96-345 (5 U.S.C. 601-612). requires that 

an agency prepare an initial regulatory 

flexibility analyses to be published at 

the time the proposed rule is published. 

This requirement (which appears in 

section 6(3) does not apply if the agency 

"certifies that the rule will not. if 

promulgated have a significant 

, 

I 

11 

~ , 

. 

I. 
CAS-RM-79-102 COMMENT 07

Federal Register I Vol. 51. No. 194 I Tuesday. October 7. 1986 I Proposed Rules 35745 

economic impact on a substantial . 

·~ber of small entities." The proposed 

affects manufacturers of central air 

.lditioners and heat pumps. As 

previously discussed. the proposed 

changes would not have significant 

economic impacts. but rather would 

simply improve the test procedures. 

Therefore. DOE certifies that the 

proposed rule. if promulgated. would not 

have a "significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities." 

VII. Technical Support Documents 

The following is a list of the technical 

support documents cited in today's 

proposed rule. These documents are 

listed in order of appearance in the 

notice. 

1. ANSI/ ASHRAE Standard 116-81, 

"Methods of Testing for Rating Unitary 

Air-Conditioning and Heat Pump 

Equipment .... 

2. ARI Standard 210/240-84. 

"Standard for Unitary Air-Conditioning 

and Air-Source Heat Pump Equipment". 

3. ANSI/ ARI Standard 325-85, . 

"Standard for Ground Water-Source 

Heat Pumps". 

4. "Seasonal Performance of AirConditioners-Experimental Analysis of 

the DOE Test Procedures Set Up 

Measurement Errors for Unitary AirConditioners and Heat Pumps", HL 82-

T, Purdue University. May 1982. 

5. "Seasonal Performance 

Characteristics of Air-ConditionersAnalvsis of the DOE Test Procedures", 

HL 8:1-11. Purdue University. 1981. 

6. "Trends of Residential AirConditioning Cyclic Tests". ASHRAE 

Transactions 1982. Volume 88. Part 2. 

7. "Analysis of Heat Pump Data and 

Industry's Response", HL 81-37, Purdue 

University, February 1982. 

8. "Field Performance of Three 

Residential Heat Pumps in the Cooling 

Mode", NBSIR 85-3107. National Bureau 

of Standards. March 1985. 

9. "Field-Measured Cycling. Frosting. 

and Defrosting Losses for a High 

Efficiency Air-Source Heat Pump". 

ASHRAE Transactions 1985, Volume 91. 

Part 2. 

10. "Rating Procedure for Mixed Air 

Source Unitary Air Conditioners and 

Heat Pumps Operating in the Cooling 

Mode", NBSIR 86-3301. National Bureau 

of Standards. February 1986. 

11. "Laboratory Tests of a Residential 

Unitary Water-Source Heat Pump", 

NBSIR 81-2287, National Bureau of 

Standards. November 1982. 

12. "Method of Testing. Rating and 

Estimating the Seasonal Performance of 

Ground-Water Source Heat Pumps, 

NBSIR 81-2434, National Bureau of 

Standards. November 1982. 

13. "Procedure for Testing, Rating and 

Estimating and Seasonal Performance of 

Multiple-Indoor-Coil Residential Air 

Conditioners and Heat Pumps". NBS 

letter repoI:l. National Bureau of 

Standards. April 8. 1985. 

In consideration of the foregoing, it is 

proposed to amend Part 430 of Chapter . 

n of Title 10. Code of Federal 

Regulations. as set forth below. 

List of Subjects in .10 eFR Part 430 

Administrative practice and 

procedure. Energy conservation, 

Household appliances. 

Issued in Washington. DC, September 16, 

1986. 

John R. Berg. 

Principal, Deputy Assistant Secretary. 

Conservation and Renewable Energy. 

PART 43D-ENERGY CONSERVATION 

PROGRAM FOR CONSUMER 

PRODUCTS 

1. ·The authority citation for Part 430 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Energy Policy and Conservation 

Act. Title III. Part B. 8S amended by National 

Energy Conservation Policy Act. Title IV. Part 

2, (42 U.S.C. 6291~). 

1. Section 430.2 is amended by 

removing the definitions of "Air-source 

heat pump". "Cooling only unit", "Heat 

pump". and "Water-source heat pump" 

and by revising the definition of 

"Central air conditioner" to read as 

follows: 

§ 430.2 Definitions. 

"Central air conditioner" means an 

appliance which consists of one or more 

factory-made assemblies that normally 

includes an indoor conditioning coil(s). 

compressor(s) and outdoor coil(s) to 

provide either air cooling for coolingonly units or air heating and optionally. 

air cooling. for heat pumps; which may 

also provide air-circulating. air-cleaning. 

dehumidifying or humidifying; which is 

rated below 65.000 Btu per hour and is 

not contained within the same cabinet 

as a furnace whose rated capacity is 

above 225.000 Btu per hour; which is 

powered by single phase electric 

current; which is not equipped with a 

desuperheater/water heater device; and 

which includes the following products: 

(a) "Air-source heat pump" means a 

central air conditioner which utilizes a 

refrigerant-to-outdoor-air heat 

exchanger and which provides air 

heating and optionally. air cooling. 

(b) "Cooling-only unit" means a 

central air conditioner which consists of 

an outdoor air-cooled condensing unit 

and an indoor evaporator coil and 

which provides air cooling. 

(c) "Earth-coupled heat pump" means 

a central air conditioner which utilizes a 

refrigerant-to-water heat exchanger(s) in 

which the water from the heat 

exchanger(s) is circulated through the 

ground in a closed loop and which· 

provides air heating and optionally. air 

cooling; 

(d) "Ground water-sour~e heat pump" 

means a central air conditioner which 

utilizes a refrigerant-to-water heat 

exchanger(s) in which the water from 

the heat exchanger(s) is circulated 

through the ground in an open loop and 

which provides air heating and 

optionally. air cooling. 

2. Section 430.22 is amended by 

revising paragraph (m) to read as 

follows: 

§ 430.22 Teat procedure, for measures of 

energy consumption. 

* * * • • 

(m) Central air conditioners. (1) The 

estimated annual operating cost for 

cooling-only units and air-source heat 

pumps shall be one of the follOWing: 

(i) For cooling-only units or the 

cooling portion of the estimated annual 

operating cost for air-source heat pumps 

which provide both heating and cooling. 

the product of: (A) The quotient of the 

cooling capacity. its But's per hour. 

determined from the steady-state wetcoil test (Test A) measured at the 

highest compressor speed. as described 

in section 3.1 of Appendix M or section 

3.1 of Appendix M1 to this subpart. 

divided by the seasonal energy 

efficiency ratio. in Btu's per watt-hour. 

determined from section 5.1 of Appendix 

M or section 4.1 of Appendix M1 to this 

subpart; (B) the representative average 

use cycle for cooling of 1.000 hours per 

year; (C) a conversion factor of 0.001 

kilowatts per watt; and (D) the 

representative average unit cost of 

electricity in dollars per kilowatt-hour 

as provided pursuant to section 323(b)(2) 

of the Act. the resulting product then 

being rounded off to the nearest dollar 

per year; 

(ii) For air-source heat pumps which 

provide only heating or the heating 

portion of the estimated annual 

operating cost for air-source heat pumps 

which provide both heating and cooling. 

the product of: (A) The quotient of the 

standardized design heating 

requirement. in Btu's per hour. nearest to 

the capacity measured in the high 

temperature test. determined in sections 

5.2 and 6.2.6 of Appendix M or section 

3.1 of Appendix M1 to this subpart. 

divided by the heating seasonal 

performance factor. in Btu's per watthour. calculated for heating region IV 

corresponding to the above mentioned 
CAS-RM-79-102 COMMENT 07

35746 Federal Register I Vol. 51. No. 194 J Tuesday. October 7, 1986 I Proposed Rules 

standardized design heating requirement 

determined from section 5.2 of Appendix 

M or section 4.2 of Appendix M1 to this 

subpart (B) the representative averase 

'se cycle for heating of %,080 hours per 

ear; {C) the adjustment factor of 0.77 

which serves to adjust the calcualted 

design heating requirement and heating 

load hours to the actual load 

experienced by a heating system; (O) a 

conversion factor of 0.001 kilowatts per 

watt; and (E) the representative average 

unit cost of electricity in dollars per 

kilowatt-hour as provided pursuant to 

section 323{b )(2) of the Act. the resulting 

product then being rounded off to the 

nearest dollar per year; or {iii) For air-source heat pumps which 

provide both heating and cooling, the 

estimated annual operating cost is the 

sum of the quantity determined in 

paragraph (m)(l)(i) of this section added 

to the quantity determined in paragraph 

(m)(l)(ii) of this section. 

(2) The estimated annual operating 

cost for earth-coupled heat pumps and 

ground water-source heat pumps shall 

be one of the following: 

(i) The cooling portion of the 

estimated annual operating cost, is 

determined from section 4.7 of Appendix 

M1 of this subpart for the maximum 

design cooling requirement at region IV, 

as determined from section 4.5.2 of 

Appendix M1 to this subpart, being 

rounded off to the nearest dollar per 

·'ear; 

(til The heating portion of the 

stimated annual operating cost is 

determined from section 4.7 of Appendix 

Ml of this subpart for the maximum 

design heating requirement at region IV, 

as determined from section 4.5.2 of 

Appendix Ml to this subpart, being 

rounded off to the nearest dollar per 

year: Of 

(iii) For earth-coupled heat pumps or 

ground water-source heat pumps which 

provide both heating and cooling. the 

sum of the quantity determined in 

paragraph {m}(2)(i) of this section added 

to the quantity determined in paragraph 

(m)(2J(ii) of this section. 

(3) The estimated regional annual 

operating cosl for cooling-only units and 

for air-source heal pumps shall be one of 

the following: 

{il For cooling-only units or the 

coolil18 portion of the estimated regional 

annual operating cost for air-source heat 

pumps which provide both healing and 

cooling. the product of: {A) The quotient 

of the cooling capacity, in Btu's per hour, 

determined from the steady-state wetcoil test (Test A) measured at the 

highest compressor speed. as described 

in section 3.1 of Appendix M or section 

3.1 of Appendix M1 to this subpart. 

-1ivided by the seasonal energy 

efficiency ratio. in Btu's per watt-hour. 

determined from section 5.1 of Appendix 

M or section 4.1 of Appendix Ml to this 

subpart; (B) the eatimated number of 

regional cooling load boW'S per year 

determined from section 6.1.3 of 

Appendix M or Figure 1 of Appendix M2 

to this subpart; {C) a conversion factor 

of 0.001 kilowatt. per watt and (D) the 

representative average unit cost of 

electricity in dollars per kilowatt-hour 

as provided pursuant to eection 323(b)(2J 

of the Act. the resulting product then 

being rounded off to the nearest dollar 

per year; 

(ii) For air-source heat pumps which 

provide only beating or the beating 

portion of the estimated regional annual 

operating cost for air-source heat pumps 

which provide both heating and cooling, 

the product of: tA} The quotient of the 

standardized design heating 

requirement, in Btu's per hour. nearest to 

the capacity measured in the high 

temperature test (Test A). determined in 

sections 5.2 and 6.2.6 of Appendix M or 

section 3.2 of Appendix Ml to this 

subpart, divided by the heating seasonal 

performance factor. in Btu's per watthour. calculated for the appropriate 

region of interest and corresponding to 

the above mentioned standardized 

design heating requirement determined 

from section 5.2 of Appendix M or 

section 4.2 of Appendix Ml to this 

subpart; fBJ the estimated number of 

regional heating load hours per year 

determined from section 6.2.5 of 

Appendix M or Figure 2 of Appendix M1 

to this subpart: (C) the adjustment factor 

of 0.77 which serves to adjust the 

calculated design heating requirement 

and heating load hours to the actual 

load experienced by a heating system; 

(D) a conversion factor of 0.001 

kilowatts per watt; and (El the 

representative average unit cost of 

electricity in dollars per kilowatt-hour 

as provided pursuant to section 323(bJ(2l 

of the Act. the resulting product then 

being rounded off to the the nearest 

dollar per year; or 

(iil) For air-source heat pumps which 

provide both heatiIl8 and cooling. the 

estimated regional annual operating cost 

is the sum of the quantity determined in 

paragraph {m)(3)(il of this section added 

to the quantity determined in paragraph 

(m)(3)(iiJ of this section. 

(4) The estimated regional annual 

operatil18 cost for earth-coupled heat 

pumps and ground water-source heat 

pumps shall be one of the following: 

(il The cooling portion of the 

estimated annual operating cost is 

. determined from section 4.7 of Appendix 

M1 of this subpart for the appropriate 

standardized design cooling requirement 

at the region of interest. as determined 

from section 4.5.2 of Appendix Ml to 

this subpart, hems rounded off to the 

nearest dollar per year; 

(ii) The heating portion of the 

estimated annual operating cost is 

determined from section 4.7 of Appendix 

Ml to this subpart for the appropriate 

standardized design heatiD8 requirement 

at the region of interest. being rounded 

off to the nearest dollar per year; or 

[iii) For earth-coupled beat pumps or 

ground water-source heat pumps which 

provide both heating and cooling, the 

sum of the quantity determined in 

paragraph (m)(4)(i) of this section added 

to the quantity determined in paragraph 

(m)(4Jlii) of this section. 

. (5) The measurers) of efficiency for 

cooling-only units and air-source heat 

pumps shall be one or more of the 

following: 

(i) The seasonal energy efficiency 

ratio for cooling-only units and airsource heat pumps which provide 

cooling shall be the seasonal energy 

efficiency ratio. in Btu's per watt-hour. 

determined according to section 5.1 of 

Appendix M or section 4.1 of Appendix 

M1 to this subpart. rounded off to the 

nearest 0.05. 

(ii) The heating seasonal performance 

factors for air-source heat pumps shall 

be the heating seasonal performance 

factors. in Btu's per watt-hour. 

determined according to section 5.2 of 

Appendix M or section 4.2 of Appendix 

Ml to this subpart for each applicabJe 

standardized design heating requirement 

within each climatic region, rounded off 

to the nearest 0_05. 

(iii) The annual performance factofs 

for air-source heat pumps which provide 

heatil18 and cooling. shall be the annual 

performance factors. in Btu's per watthour,determined according to section 

5.3 of Appendix M or section 4.3 of 

Appendix Ml to this subpart for each 

standardized design heating requirement 

within each climatic region. rounded off 

to the nearest 0.05. 

(6) The measurers) of efficiency for 

earth-coupled heat pumps and ground 

water-source heat pumps shall be one or 

more of the following: 

(i) The seasonal energy efficieDc~' 

ratio for earth-coupled heat pumps and 

ground water-source heat pumps which 

provide cooling shall be the seasonal 

energy efficiency ratio. in Btu's per watthour, determined according to section 

4.4 of Appendix Ml to this subpart. 

rounded off to the nearest 0.05. 

(ii) The heating seasonal performance 

factors for earth-coupled beat pumps 

and ground water-source heat pumps 

which provide healing shall be the 

heating seasonal performance factors, in 

Btu's per watt-hours. determined 
CAS-RM-79-102 COMMENT 07

Federal Register I Vol. 51. No. 194 I Tuesday. October 7. 1986 I Proposed Rules 35747 

according to section 4.5 of Appendix M1 

to this subpart for each applicable 

standardized design heating requirement 

within each climatic region. rounded off 

to the nearest 0.05. 

(iii) The annual performance factors 

for earth-coupled heat pumps and 

ground water-source heat pumps which 

provide heating and cooling. shaJJ be the 

annual performance factors. in Btu's per 

watt-hour. determined according to 

section 4.6 of AppendiX M1 to this 

subpart for each standardized design 

heating requirement within each 

climatic region. rounded off to the 

nearest 0.05. 

(7) Other useful measures of energy 

consumption for central air conditioners 

shall be those measures of energy 

consumption which the Secretary of 

Energy determines are likely to assist 

consumers in making purchasing 

decisions and which are derived from 

the application of Appendices M and M1 

to this subpart. ' 

(8) For a transition period of 24 

months from the effective date of this 

amendment, all measures of energy 

consumption shall be determined either 

by the uniform test method for 

measuring energy consumption of 

central air conditioners, as set forth in 

Appendix M of this subpart or by the 

amended test method for measuring 

energy consumption of central air 

conditioners. as set forth in Appendix 

Ml of this subpart. After the tran.,ition 

period. all measures of energy 

consumption shall be determined only 

bv the amended test method as set forth 

in Appendix Ml of this subpart; the 

uniform test method, as set forth in 

Appendix M of this subpart shall no 

longer be used. 

3, Section 430.Z3 is amended by 

revising paragraph (m) to read as 

follows: 

§ 430.23 Units to be tested. 

• • 

(m)(l) For central air conditioners, 

each condensing unit shall have a 

condenser-evaporator coil combination 

selected and a sample of sufficient size 

tested in accordance with applicable 

provisions of this subpart such that-

(i) Any represented value of estimated 

annual operating cost. energy 

consumption or other measure of energy 

consumption of the condenserevaporator coil combination for which 

consumers would favor lower values 

shall be no less than the higher of (A) 

the mean of the sample or (Bl the upper 

90 percent confidence limit of the true 

mean divided by 1.05, and 

(ii) Any represented value of energy 

efficiency or other measure of energy 

consumption of the condenserevaporator coil combination for which 

consume1'8 would favor higher values 

sha)) be no greater than the lower of (AJ 

the mean of the sample or (B) the lower 

90 percent confidence limit of the true 

mean divided by 0.95. 

(2) The condenser-evaporator coil 

combination selected for tests pUl'Buant 

to paragraph (m)(1) of this section shall 

be that combination manufactured by 

the condensing unit manufacturer likely 

to have the largest volume of retail 

sales. Components of similar design may 

be substituted without requiring 

additional testing if the represented 

measures of energy consumption 

continue to satisfy the applicable 

sampling provisions of paragraphs (m)(l) 

(i) and (iiJ. For every other condenserevaporator coil combination 

'manufactured by the same manufacturer 

or in part by a component manufacturer 

using that same condensing unit, 

either- . 

(iJ A sample of sufficient size. 

comprised of production units or 

representing production units, shall be 

tested to insure that the requirements of 

paragraphs (m)(l) (i) and (ii) are met for 

such other condenser-evaporator coil 

combinations; or 

(ii) The representative values of the 

measures of energy consumption shall 

be based on the standardized rating 

method in section 4.1.6 of Appendix M1 

to this subpart; or 

(iii) The representative values of the 

measures of energy consumption shall 

be based by an alternative rating 

method that has been approved by DOE 

in accordance with the provisions of 

paragraphs (m) (4) and (5) of this 

section. 

(3) Whenever the representative 

"'alues of the measures of energy 

consumption. as determined by the 

provisions of paragraphs (m)(Z) (ii) and 

(iii) of this subpart, do not agree within Z 

percent of the representative values of 

the measures of energy consumption as 

determined by actual testing, the 

representative values determined by 

actual testing shall be used to comply 

with section 3Z3(c) the Act, or to comply 

with rules prescribed under section 3Z4 

of the Act. 

(4) The basis of the alternative rating 

method referred to in paragraph 

(m)(Z)(iii) of this section shall be a 

representation of the mechanical vapor 

compression refrigeration cycle. The 

'major components in the refrigeration 

cycle shall be modeled as "fits" to 

manufacturer performance data or by 

graphic or tabular performance data. 

Heat transfer characteristics of coils 

may be modeled as a function of face 

area. number of rows, fins per inch, 

refrigerant circuitry. air flow rate and 

entering air enthalpy. Additional 

performance-related characteristics to 

be considered may include type of 

expansion device. refrigerant flow rate 

through the expansion device. power of 

the indoor fan and degrada tion 

coefficient. 

(5) Manufacturers who elect to use an 

alternative rating method for 

determining measures of energy 

consumption under paragraphs 

(m)(2)(iii) and (4) of this section must 

submit a request to DOE for revising the 

alternative rating method to the 

Assistant Secretary of Conservation and 

Renewable Energy. 1000 Independence 

Avenue SW .• Washington. DC 20585. 

and receive approval to use alternative 

method by the Assistant Secretary 

before the alternative method can be 

used for rating central air conditioners. 

(6) Each request to DOE for reviewing 

an alternative rating method shall 

include: 

(i) The name, address and telephone 

number of the official representing the 

manufacturer. 

(ii) Complete documentation of the 

alternative rating procedure. including 

the computer code when a computer 

model is used. 

(iii) Ratings for two complete lines of 

coil families for two different 

condensing units. The tested capacities 

for the matched svstems for the two 

condensing units shall differ by a factor 

of two. Rating information for the mixed 

systems shall include the ratings from 

testing. from the standardized rating 

method and from the alternative rating 

method. 

(iv) Complete test data. product 

information, and related information to 

allow DOE to verify the rating 

information submitted by the 

manufacturer. 

(7) Manufacturers who elect to use an 

alternative rating method for 

determining measures of energy 

consumption under paragraphs (m) 

(Z)(iii) and (4) of this section must either 

subject a sample of their units to , 

independent testing on a regular basis 

(e.g., voluntary certification program) or 

have the representations reviewed and 

certified by an independent State 

registered professional engineer who is 

not an employee of the manufacturer. 

The registered professional engineer is 

to certify that the results of the 

alternative rating procedure accurately 

represent the energy consumption of the 

unit(s) and are more representative of 

the unit's performance than the standard 

rating procedure in § 430.23(m)(Z)(ii). 

The manufacturer is to keep the 

registered professional engineer's 
CAS-RM-79-102 COMMENT 07

35748 Federal Register I Vol. 51, No. 194 I Tuesday, October 7, 1986 I Proposed Rules 

c:ertifications on file for review by DOE 

for as long as said combination made 

IIlilable for sale by the manufacturer. 

(8) For new basic models of central air 

conditioners and heat pumps 

manufactured after the effective date of 

the final rule, the models shall be tested 

according to the provisions in Appendix 

Ml of this subpart. 

4. Subpart B of Part 430 is amended by 

adding Appendix Ml 8S follows: 

Appendix Ml To Subpart B-Amendeel Test 

Method for Measuring the Energy 

Consumption of Central Air Conditioners 

1.0 Definitions. Definitions shall include the 

definitions specified in Section 3.0 of ARI 

Standard 210!24(}-64. Section 3.0 of ANSI/ 

ARI Standard 32~5, Section 3.0 of ANSII 

ASHRAE Standard 116-1983 and the 

follOWing additional definitions. 

1.1 "Annual performance factor" means the 

total heating and cooling done by a heat 

pump in a particular region in one year 

divided by the total electric power used in 

one year. 

1.2 "ANSI" means the American National 

Standards Institute. 

1.3 "ANSI/ARI Standard 32~5" means the test standard published in 1985 jOintly by 

ANSI and ARI and titled "Standard for 

Ground Water-Source Heat Pumps". 

1.4 "ANSI! ASHRAE Standard 37-1978" 

means the test standard published in 1978 

jointly by ANSI and ASHRAE and titled 

"Methods of Testing for Rating Unitary AirConditioning and Heat Pump Equipment". 

1.5 "ANSI/ ASHRAE Standard 116-1983" 

eans the test standard published in 1983 

Jointly by ANSI and ASHRAE and titled 

"Methods of Testing for Seasonal Efficiency 

of Unitary Air-Conditioners and Heat 

Pumps". 

1.6 "ARI" means the Air-Conditioning and 

Refrigeration Institute. 

1.i "ARI Standard 210/24G-84" means the 

test standard published in 1984 by ARI and 

titled "Standard for Unitary Air-Conditioning 

and Air-Source Heat Pump Equipment". 

1.8 "ASHRAE" means the American 

Society of Heating. Refrigerating and AirConditioning Engineers, Inc. 

1.9 "Continuously recorded" means a 

method of recording measurements in 

intervals no greater than 5 seconds. 

1.10 "Cyclic test" means a test where the 

indoor and outdoor conditions are held 

constant. but the unit is manually turned "on" 

and "off' for specific time periods to simulate 

part-load operation. 

1.11 "Demand-defrost control system" 

means a system which is designed to perform 

the defrost function on the outdoor coil of the 

heat pump only when a predetermined 

degradation of performance is measured. 

1.12 "Design cooling requirement (OCR)" 

means the amount of cooling required to 

maintain a given indoor temperature at a 

particular outdoor design temperature. 

1.13 "Design heating requirement [DHR)" 

means the amount of heating required to 

maintain a given indoor temperature at a 

'larticular outdoor design temperature. 

1.14 "Dry-coil test" means a test conducted 

"t a wet-bulb temperature and a dry-bulb 

temperature such that moisture will not 

condense on the evaporator coil of the unit 

1.15 "Latent cooling" means the total 

amount of cooling in Btu's necessary to . remove water vapor from the air passing over the indoor coil by condensation during a period of time. 

1.16 "Matched system" means a testeel 

combination of a split-system central air 

conditioner. 

1.17 "Mixed system"· means an untested 

coinbination of a split-system central air 

conditioner in which the ratings are determined by 4.1.6 of this appendix. 

1.18 "Part-load factor (PLF)" means the 

ratio of the cyclic enel'8Y efficiency ratio to 

the steady-state enel'8Y efficiency ratio at 

identical ambient conditions. 

1.19 "Sensible cooling" means the total 

amount of cooling in Btu's performed by a unit over a period of time, excluding latent 

cooling. 

1.20 "Single package unit" means a central 

air conditioner in which the compressor. 

condenser, evaporator and fan are enclosed 

in a single assembly. 

1.21 "Split system" means a central air 

conditioner with a remote condenser or remote condensing unit. 

1.22 "Split-type ductless system" means a central air conditioner with a remote 

condenser or remote condensing unit and one or more ductless indoor fan-coil units. 

1.23 "Steady-state test" means a test in 

which all the indoor and outdoor conditions 

are held constant and the unit is in a nonchanging operating mode. 

1.24 "Temperature bin" means a 5'F 

,increment over a dry-bulb temperature range 

of 65 OF through 104 OF for the cooling cycle 

and -25 OF through 64 OF for the heating 

cycle. 

1.25 'Time-temperature defrost control 

system" means a system which automatically 

provides the defrost function at a predetermined time interval whenever the 

outdoor temperature drops below a level 

where frosting will occur. 1.26 'Test condition tolerance" means the 

maximum permissible variation of the 

average of the test observations from the 

standard or desired test conditions as 

prOVided in Table III-A or ANSI/ ASHRAE 

Standard 116-1983 for air-source units and in 

Table 5 of this Appendix for water-source 

units. 

1.27 "Test operating tolerance" means the 

maximum permissible difference between the 

maximum and the minimum instrument 

observation during a test as provided in 

Tables III-B and Ill-C of ANSI/ ASHRAE 

Standard 116-1983 for air-source units and in 

Table 5 of this Appendix for water-source 

units. 

1.28 "Wet-coil test" means a test conducted 

at a wet-bulb temperature and a dry-bulb 

temperature such that moisture will condense on the test unit evaporator coil. 

2.0 Testing conditions. 

2.1 Testing conditions for cooling-only 

units and air-source heat pumps. For coolingonly units and air-source heat pumps, testing 

conditions shall be as specified in section 5.0 

of ARI Standard 210/24(}-64, with the 

inclusion of the following conditions. 

2.1.1 Split-type ductless systems. The 

follOWing paragraph is in addition to the 

requirements specified in section 5.1.3.5 pf 

ARt 210/240-84: 

For split-type ductless systems. all 

standard rating tests shall be performed with 

a minimum length of 25 feet of 

interconnecting tubing between each indoor 

fan-coil unit and the common outdoor unit. 

2.1.2 Additional testing conditions for splittype ductless systems. For split-type ductless 

systems. a single control circuit shall be 

lubstituteel for any multiple thermostats in 

order to maintain a uniform cycling rate 

during test D and the high temperature 

heating cyclic test. During the steady-slate 

tests. all thermostats shall be shunted 

resulting in all indoor fan-coil units being in 

operation. 

2.1.3 Additional testing conditions for 

cooling-only units and air-source heat pumps 

with variable-speed compressors. For 

cooling-only units and air-source heat pumps 

with variable-speed compressors. the air flow 

rate at fan speeds less than the maximum fan 

speed shall be determined by using the fan 

laws for a fixed resistance system. The air 

flow rate is then given by the ratio of the 

actual fan speed to the maximum fan speed 

multiplied by the air flow rate at the 

maximum fan speed. Minimum static 

pressure requirements only apply when the 

fan is running at the maximum speed. 

2.2 Testing conditions for earth-coupled 

heat pumps and ground woter-source heat 

pumps. For earth-coupled heat pumps and 

ground water-source heat pumps. testing 

conditions shall be as specified in section 5.0 

of ANSI/ARI Standard 32fr1985. 

3.0 Test procedures. 

3.1 Test procedures for cooling-only units 

and air-source heat pumps. For cooling-only 

units and air-source heat pumps, test 

procedures shall be as specified in section 5.0 

of ARl Standard 210/241l-B4 and in section 8.0 

ANSI/ ASH RAE Standard 116-1983, with the 

inclusion of the following conditions. 

3.1.1 Cyclic test. The following paragraphs 

are in place of section 5.1.3.1 of ARl Standard 

210/241l-B4. 

5.1.3.1 Cyclic tests. For units other than 

variable-speed units, heating and cooling 

cyclic tests shall be conducted by cycling the 

compressor(s) 6 minutes "on" and 24 minutes 

"off'. The capacity and all electrical energy 

shall be measured for the integration time (8,] 

of six (6) minutes. All off-cycle electrical 

energy shall be measured for the total 

integration time (Bevel of 30 minutes. Offcycle electrical energy does not include the 

fan power. 

For variable-speed units, heating and 

cooling cyclic tests shall be conducted by 

cycling the compressor 12 minutes "on" and 

48 minutes "off'. The capacity and all 

electrical energy shall be measured for the 

integration time (B), of 12 minutes. All offcycle electrical energy shall be measured for 

the total integration time (8 .... ) of 60 minutes. 

Off-cycle electrical energy does not include 

the fan power. 

In lieu of conducting C and D tests, and 

assigned value of 0.25 shall be used for the 

degradation coefficient for cooling, CD' In lieu 

of conducting the high temperature heating 

cyclic test, and assigned value of 0.35 shall be 

used for the degradation coefficient for 
CAS-RM-79-102 COMMENT 07

Federal Register I Vol. 51, No. 194 I Tuesday, October 7, 1986 I Proposed Rples 35749 

heatins. C. For unita with the two 

compressor speeds. two compressors or 

cylinder unJoadins. if the .ssigned 

desradation coefficient is Uled for one 

coolins mode. it must be used for both 

cooling modes. If the assigned degradation 

coefficient is uaed for one heatins mode. it 

must be used for both heatins mode •. 3.1.2 Ail'4Durc:. uni,. with variable-speed 

compressors. 'I1Ie followins provisions are iii 

place of the provisions in Appendix B of ARI 

Standard 2t0/24O-M for the intermediate 

coolins steady-state te.t. 

For air-source units with variable-apeed 

comprellors. an intermediate cooling .teady-

.tate te.t .hall be conducted in which the 

unit .hall be operated at a constanl, 

intermediate compressor .peed (K = V J in 

which the dry-bulb and wet-bulb 

temperatures of the air entering the indoor 

coil and the outdoor coil selected for the 

intermediate coolins steady-.tate test are at 

the temperatures .pecified for the 

intermediate cooling steady-state test in 

Table B1 of ARI Standard 210/240-84. The 

tolerances for the dry-bulb and wet-bulb 

temperature. of the air entering the indoor 

and outdoor coils .hall be the test operating 

tolerance and test condition tolerance 

specified in Table III-A of ANSI/ ASHRAE 

Standard 116-1983. The intermediate . compressor speed shall be within 10 percent 

of the average of the maximum and minimum 

compressor .peeds. '. 

For air-source unita with variable-speed 

compre •• o .... the frost accumulation test shall 

be conducted in which the unit shall be 

operated at a con.tant. Intermediate 

compressor speed (K-V.). 'I1Ie intermediate 

compressor speed shall be within 10 percent 

of the aver.,. of the maximum aDd minimum 

compressor .peeds. 

3.1.3 Split-t}'PB ductless systems. The 

followins parasfaph i. in addition to the 

requirements specified in section B.Z.2.1.b of 

ANSI/ ASHRAE Standard tt&-1983. . 

For split-type ductle.s systems which tum 

the indoor fan off durins defrost. the indoor • upply duct shall not be blocked. 

3.2 Test procedures for eorth-coupled heat 

pumps and ground water-Bource heat pumps. 

For earth-coupled heat pumps and sround 

water-.ource heat pumps. test procedures 

shall be as specified in section 5.0 of ANSI/ 

ARI Standard 325-85. section 8.0 of ANSI/ 

ASHRAE Standard 37-78 and section 8.0 of 

ANSI! ASHRAE Standard 11&-1983. 

4.0 Calculations. Calculations shall be as 

specified in 10 of ANSI/ ASHRAE Standard 

11&-1983. subject to the follOWing additional 

provisions. The equation for determining the 

flow rate of standard air (Qs). as determined 

in 6.7.3 of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 11&-1983. 

is replaced by the following equation: 

Q. ... Q .. 

0.075 V. 

where: 

Q..=measured indoor air flow rate. nil/min 

o.o75-d8Dsity of standard air.lb/nll 

V.-.pecific volume of air at nozzle. nll/lb of 

air-water mixture 

4.1 Seasonal energy efficiency ratio for air-

.ouree units. 'I1Ie sea.onal energy efficiency 

ratio (SEER) thall be expre.sed in Btu per 

watt-hour • 

4.1.1 Seasonal energy efficiency rolio for 

air-souree units with single-speed 

compressors. For air-source units with Single-

.peed compressors. SEER shall be defined as 

the cooling seasonal energy efficiency ratio 

(SEER) as specified in 10.1.2 of ANSI! 

ASHRAE Standard 11&-1983. with the 

followins added provisions. One. the number 

of hours in the jUl temperature bin (n)) in the 

equations for the capacity (q(t,)) and for the 

power input (E(1j)) is defined in Table 1 of 

this Appendix. Two. the part-load factor 

(PLF) in the equation for the power input 

(E(t))) is defined as: 

for CLF ( 0.70 

PLF = (1 - CLF)(l - PLF(0.70» 

0.30 

where: 

Er= exponential factor and is defined as: 

Er=1.9In 125 

CD 

CLF=coolingload factor. as defined in 10.1.2 

of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 116-1983 

PLF (0.70) = part-load factor at a cooling load 

factor of 0.70. as determined above 

CD=degradation factor. as defined in 9.2.2 of 

ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 116-1983 or is 

assigned the value of 0.25. 

4.1.2 Seasonal energy efficiency rotio for 

air-source units with two-speed compressors 

or two compressors. For air-source units with 

two-speed compressors or two compressors. 

SEER shall be defined as the cooling seasonal 

energy efficiency ratio (SEER) as specified in 

10.1.3 of ANSI/ ASHRAE Standard 116-1983 

in which the number of hours in the j'" 

temperature bin (n)) in the equations for the 

cooling capacity (q(t,)) and for the power 

input (E(t))) is defined in Table 1 of this 

Appendix and in which the part-load factor 

(PLY) in the equation for the power input 

(E(t))) is defined in 4.1.1 of this Appendix. 

4.1.3 Seosonal energy efficiency rotio for 

air-source units with triple-capacity 

compressors. [Reserved] 

4.1.4 Seasonal energy efficiency rotio for 

air-source units with variable-speed 

compressors. For air-source units with 

variable-speed compressor. SEER shall be 

defined as the seasonal energy efficiency 

-

for eLF") 0.70 

ratio (SEER) as specified in 2.1 of Appendix B 

of ARI Standard 210/240-84 in which the 

number of hours in the jlh temperature bin (n)) 

in the equations for the capacity (q(t,)) and 

for the power input (E(t))) is defined in Table 

1 of the appendix and in which the part-load 

factor (PLF) in the equation for the power 

input (E(t))) is defined in 4.1.1 of this 

appendix. 

The SEER shall be determined by the 

method for two speed or two compressor 

units. as specified in ANSI/ ASHRAE 

Standard 116-1983 and ARI Standard 210/ 

240-84. and in accordance with the follOWing 

changes. The capacity for the unit modulating 

at the intermediate compressor speed (k=v) 

at any t~mperature (t;) is determined by: 
CAS-RM-79-102 COMMENT 07

35750 Federal Register I Vol. 51, No. 194 I Tuesday, October 7, 1986 I Proposed Rules 

k=v .. • q '(87) + Mq (tj-87) 

. Where: k=V 

q (87)· the capacity of the unit at 870 p determined by the intermediate coOling steady-state test 

Mq • slope of the capacity curve for the intermediate 

compressor .speed (kav) 

M = q 

+ Nq * 

82 67 

0'<=2(95) ss 

95 

* (1 

Ok=2(82) ss 

82 

Oka v(87) ss 

Ok=l (87) ss Nq = 

Ok=2(87) ss Ok=1(87) ss 

Once the equation for q~.' It;) has been 

determined. the temperature where q~=' 

(tJ)=BL(t,) can be found. This temperature is 

designated as (tve) and replaces 87 'F in the 

equations for Case II in Appendix B of ARt 

Standard 210/240-&1. 

The electrical power input for the unit 

operating at the intermediate compressor 

speed (k=v) and the temperature [t,.) is 

determined by: 

where: E~:v(87) = the electrical power input of the unit 

at 87 0 F determined by the intermediate 

cooling stea1y-state test 

= slope of the electrical power input curve 

for the intermediate compressor speed (k=v) 

M~ = .... 

N,.. &: 

.ti 

Once Ek:;' (t •• ) has been determined. it 

'eplaces E":: (87) in the equations for Case 

I in Appendix B of ARI Standard 210/240-&1. 

4.1.5 Seasonal energy efficiency ratio for 

split-type ductless systems. For split-type 

ductless systems. SEER shall be defined as 

EI<=1(82) ss 

82 

Ek=V(87) 

ss 

Ek=2(87) ss 

67 

82 

Ek=1(87) 

SS 

Ek=1(87) 

ss 

specified in 4.1.1 of this appendix for each 

combination of indoor coils to be used with a common outdoor unit. 

4.1.6 Seasonal energy efficiency ratio and 

capacity for untested combinations of splitsystem central air conditioners. 

For untested combinations of split-system 

central air conditioners. the capacity at 95 OF 

(Q.) and the seasonal energy efficiency ratio 

(SEER.) are determined by the following 

equations: 

BlWNG COOE ... 50-01 .... 
CAS-RM-79-102 COMMENT 07

Federal Register I Vol. 51, No. 194 I Tuesday, October 7,1986 I Proposed Rules 

S££Rx • 

wbere: 

l~t -\": + !:!5 ~:t.aJ · 

.p . 

,.0.35 * Fa - 3.25 !.l.a.& . . c ... e . Om 

(~) - 0.8 * FO.14 * pb + 0.1 !L.x + 0.1 

Pm 82 

c . e Pr,m 

_ { :0.15 for Fe~ 1 

a 

for Fe<l 

b • { o for Fe?l 

. -0.2 for Fe<l 

Fe • indoor coil scaling factor, as determined in 4.1.6.1 

of this ,ppendix 

F • expansion device scalin; factor, as determined in 

e Table 6 of this ~ppendix 

FT~J = thermostatic exp~nsion valve factor, as determined in 

Table 6 of t~is ~ppenjix 

PF • power input to the indoor fan of the matched system, ,m as determined in 4.1.6.3 of this Appendix 

PF • power input to the indoor fan of the mixed system, as 

,x determined in 4.1.6.4 of this Appendix 

Om • capacity at 95°F of the mat~hed system, as reported in the currentARI Directory of Certified Unitary AirConditioners and Unitary Air-Source neat Pumps 

/0)= ratio of the capacities of the mixed system \~ to the matched system at 82°F 

m 82 

l

? )= ratio of the power of the mixed system to the ~ matched system at 82°F 

m a2 

• seasonal energy efficiency ratio of the matched . system, as reported in the current ARI Directory of Certified Unitary Air-Conditioners and Unitary Air-Source Heat Pumps 

35751 
CAS-RM-79-102 COMMENT 07

85752 Federal Register I Vol. 51. No. 194 I Tuesday. October 1. 1986 I Proposed Rules 

.. 1.8.1 Indoor coil MXJIi", /actor. 

The indoor coillCAJins factor (fJ 

determined by the fonowiDl equation: 

where: 

Qc.. ~ CQc.. ---

Q...-cooliDa capacity of the mixed coil at 

the air ma .. now rate specified for the 

matched .y.tem 

Q...-coolina capacity of the matched coil at 

the indoor .. ir volumetric now rate 

(CFM.) at which the matched .ystem 

capacity (Q.) was mea.ured. If CFM. is 

not known. it can be determined by: 

f25*Q. 

CFM.,--

12.000 

Capacities of the matched and mixed coils 

shall be determined by the same method and 

at the followina conditions: Inlet air 

conditions of 80 'F dry bulb and 67 'F wet 

bulb; 45 'F refrigerant saturation temperature; 

and the same refrigerant superheat at the -

evaporator outlet. If coil capacities are 

obtained by means of a catalog or computer 

simulation. the same catalog or computer 

simulation shall be used for both coils. Coil 

material and geometry (e.g .. inside tube 

diameter. tube staggering. fin spacing. fin 

thickness. fin shape, and number of tube 

depth rows) shall be accounted for by the 

method used. That is, the methodology used 

must have these parameters as independent 

variables. This rating procedure cannot be 

used if Fe is smaller than 0.8. If the ratio of 

Q •.• /Q .... is greater than 1.3. then F. shall be 

defined as 1.3. If the rating is calculated for a 

heat pump system able to operate in the 

heating mode. two additional conditions have 

to be satisfied: 

(1) The internal volume of the mixed indoor 

coil assembly shall be within 100-120 percent 

of the internal volume of the matched coil 

assembly; or shall not exceed the volume of 

the matched coil assembly; or shall not 

exceed the volume of the largest coil certified 

with a given condensing unit by the 

condensing unit manufacturer. which ever is 

largest. . (2) Condensing capacity of the mixed coil 

shall be within 100-120 percent of capacity of 

the matched coil; or shall not exceed the 

capacity of the largest certified coil. 

whichever is largest. 

4.1.6.2 Expansion device scaling factor. 

The expansion device scaling factor (F.) is 

the ratio of refrigerant mass flow rates 

through the mixed and matched expansion 

devices at the same operating conditions and 

c:iepends on the types of matched and mixed 

expansion devices used. Values for F. are 

--eported in Table 6 of this appendix. The 

B ting procedure shall not be used if: 

-The mixed Iystem has a combination of 

capillary tubel or orifices connected in serier. 

-The matc:hed ayllem hal a cOmbination 

of capillary tubes or orifices connected in . 

aeriea unleu the mixed syetem hal a TXV; 

-The matched .yetem hal a TXV ancl the 

mixed lyetem hal either a capillary tube or 

an orifice. unleu the condeuaiDa unit . 

manufacturers certifie. alto a ayaIem which a 

TXV it replaced by a capillary tube or orifice 

type expansion device. In .uch a can this 

.yetem may be couidered as a matched 

lyetem and ita performance data may be uaed 

for calculation of performance of the mixed 

ayatem: 

-The upaniion device ICAlina factor. F .. 

II outside the ranae 0.95-1.35 for sy.tems 

operatina in the coolina mode only; 

-The expan.ion device acalina factor. F .. i. outside the ranp 1.00-1.25 for system. 

operating in both the beatina and coolina 

mode. 

For Cases I to IV. F. shall be determined 

below. where subscripts 1 and; correspond to 

the number of capillary tubes or orificies 

connected in parallel in the mixed and 

matched expansion devices. respectively. 0 

denotes the inner diameter. L denotes the 

length of a capillary tube or an orifice in 

inches. The inner diameter and length are to 

be measured to an accuracy of ±1.5%. 

Subscripts. and DI refer to the mixed and 

matched expansion devices. respectively. 

Case I 

For a matched system and a mixed system, 

both consisting of capillary tubes. Fe shall be 

defined as: . 

F. =---

The flow factors "' •. 1 and "'m.; for capillary 

tubes in the mixed and matched systems are 

determined by their geometry and by the 1983 

ASHRAE Handbook. Equipment Volume, 

Chapter 20. Figure 38. 

Case II 

For a matched syslem consilting of 

capillary tubes and a mixed system 

consisting of orifices, F. shall be defined as: 

l: ..".; 

F. = 109.6 ... ; 

where: 

72200 D' •. I 

"' •• 1 = ------"'-'----

[0.58+0.008 CL. . .I0 •. i)]U 

"' • .j..,al defined above in Cale I 

CasellI 

For a matched system consisting of orifices 

and a mixed system consisting of capillary 

tubes. F. shall be defined as: 

109.8 % ••• 1 

F. - % .... 

where: 

• ...... defined above in eanl 

7Z2OO0· .... .... -------;;;;.;...---

(0.58+0.008 (L.. .. /D •. J) .. • 

ea.e1V 

For a matched aystem and a mixed .ystem. 

. both conlistina of orifices. F. shall be defined .. : 

% .... F •• -.--

% .., •• , 

where: 

.., .... =a. defined in Case II 

•• ,,=a8 defined in Case JU 

4.1.6.3 Power input to the indoor fan of the 

lIIatched system. 

For matched systems equiped with indoor 

fans, the power input to the indoor fan (P'.m) 

shall be measured in accordance with ARI 

Standard 210/240-84 and at the same indoor 

air volumetric flow rate (CFMm) at which the 

capacity of the matched system (Q .. ) was 

measured. If CFMm is not known. it shall be 

defined al: 

425Qm 

CFM,.,=-. - 12,000 

For matched systems not equipped with 

indoor fans. PFolI shall be defined as: 

Pr.M =0.365 CFMm 

4.1.6.4 Power input to the indoor fan of 

the mixed system. 

For mixed systems equipped with indoor 

fans. the power input to the indoor fan (Pr .• ) 

shall be measured in accordance with ARI 

Standard 210/240-84 and at the same indoor 

air volumetric flow rate (CFM.) at which the 

capacity of the mixed B}'stem (Q.) was 

measured. For mixed systems not equipped 

with indoor fans. Pr .•• hall be defined as: 

Pp •• =O.365 CFM. 

4.2 Heating seasonal performance factor 

for air-source units. The heating seasonal 

performance factor (HSPF) shall be 

expressed in Btu per watt-hour. For each of 

the six regions specified in Table 2 of this 

appendix. a separate HSPF shall be 

determined for the standardized maximum 

OHR, the standardized minimum OHR and 

for all other standardized OHR's (See Table 3 

of this Appendix) between the maximum and 

minimum values. 

For air-Iource units that are equipped with 

"demand defrost control systems", the value 

for HSPF. as determined above shall be 

multiplied by an enhancement factor. F ... ,· to 

compensate for improved performance not 

measured in the Frost Accumulation Test. 

The factor. File, depends on the number of 

defrost cycles in a 12-hour period (n) and 

should be calculated as follows: 
CAS-RM-79-102 COMMENT 07

Federal Register I Vol. 51, No. 194 I Tuesday, October 7, 1986 I Proposed Rules 35753 

Where: 

N-l F.., _1+0.04_ 

., 

0-721.)/t. or 8, whichever iI.maller 

PLF 

where: 

E,=exponential factor and is defined as: 

1.25 

Ep = 1.91nCo 

HLF=heating load factor. as defined in 10.1.2 

of ANSI/ ASHRAE Standard 116-1983 

PLF(0.70)=part-load factor at a heating load 

factor of 0.70. as determined above 

CD=degradation factor. as defined in 9.2.2 of 

Al'lSI/ ASHRAE Standard 116-1983 or is 

assigned the value of 0.35 

4.2.2 Heating seasanal performance 

factor for air-source units with two-speed 

compressors or two compressors. For airt=lensth of the defrost accumulation teat 

period in minutea 

4.2.1 Heating seasonal performQI/CII 

factor for ai1'4DUI'CB wiIB with BingJINpeed 

compressors. For air-source unitt with .ingle-

.peed compressol'8, HSPF .hall be defined u the heatins seasonal performance factor 

(HSPF) as .pecified in lD.2.2 of ANSI{ 

ASHRAE Standard 11~1983 multiplied by 

8.413 Btu/watt-hour. with the followins 

added provisions. One. the number of hours 

in the ,... temperature bin (nJ in the equations 

for HSPF and for the .upplementary -

resi.tance heat term (RH (tJ) is dermed in 

Table 2 of this appendix: Two. the part-load 

factor (PLF) in all the equations HSPF is 

defined a.: 

(1 - HLi> (1 - PLi(0.70», for HLF~ 0.70 

0:-30 

source unit8 with two-speed compressors or two compressors. HSPF shall be defined as the heating seasonal performance factor 

(HSPF) as speCified in 10.2.3 of ANSI/ 

ASHRAE Standard 11~1983 multiplied by 

3.413 Btu/watt-hour in which the number of 

hours in the j'b temperature bin (nJ) in the 

equations for HSPF and for the 

supplementary resistance heat term (RH (t))) 

is defined in Table 2 of this appendix and in 

which the part-load factor (PLF) in the 

equation for the power input (E (t;)) is defined 

in 4.1.2 of this appendix. 

4.2.3 Heating seasonal performance 

factor for air-source units with triblecapacity compressors. [Reserved] 

4.2.4 Heating seasonal performance 

factor for air-source units with variablespeed compressors. For air-source units with 

variable-speed compressors. HSPF shall be 

defined a8 the heatins seasonal performance 

factor (HSPF) as specified in 2.2 of Appendix 

B of ARI Standard 210/240-84 multiplied by 

3.413 Btu/hr in which the number of hours in 

the jUl temperature bin (n)) in the equations 

for HSPF and for supplementary resistance 

heat term (RH (t))) is defined in Table 2 of 

this Appendix and in which the part-load 

factor (PLF) in the equation for the power 

input (E(t))) is defined in 4.2.1 of this 

appendix. 

The HSPF shall be determined by the 

method for two speed or two compressor 

units. as specified in ANSI/ ASHRAE 

Standard 116-1983 and ARI Standard 210/ 

240-84. and in accordance with the following 

changes. The capacity for the unit modula ting 

at the intermediate compressor speed (k = V) 

at any temperature (t;) is determined by: 

qK=V(tj) = qk=v (35) + Mq (tj - 35) 

where: qK=v(35) = the capacity of the unit at 35 0 F determined 

at the intermediate compressor speed (k=v) in 

the frost accumulation test 

Mq 

Nq 

= slope of the capacity curve for the intermediate 

compressor speed (k=v) 

k=l (62) k= 1 Oss Oss (47) = * ( 1 - N ) 

62 47 q 

k=2 (47) k=2 Qss (17) - Oss 

+ Nq 47 17 

Ok=v 

ss (35) Ok=1 

ss (35) 

= Ok=2 

5S (35) Ok=1 

ss (35) 
CAS-RM-79-102 COMMENT 07

35754 Federal Register I Vol. 51, No. 194 I Tuesday, October 7. 1986 I Proposed Rules 

Once the equation for qI'-(t,) hal been 

"'etennined. the temperature where - -"(tJ-81.(t,) can be found. 'I'hH 

.emperature i. designated as t\IB- A aeparate 

where: 

.... \(=1 .!:iss 

ME = 

+ N£ 

Iva shall be determinedJor each deaip 

heatill8 requirement. 

The electrical power input for the unit 

operatill8 at the intennediate ComPlellOf 

apeed (k-v) and at the temperature (t\'8) is 

determined by: 

the electrical power input of the unit 

at 3SoF determined at the intermediate 

compressor speed (k=v) in the frost 

accumulation test : 

slqpe of the electrical power input curve for 

the intermediate compressor speed (k-v) 

(62) _ Ek=1 (47) ss * (1 - N ... ) 

62 - 47 .co 

... k=2 (47) _ Ek=2 l:iss (17) 55 

47 - 17 

Ek=v 

55 (35) _ Ek=l 55 (35) 

NE = Ek=2 

55 

The following section replaces Case II in 

section 2.2 of ARI 210/240-84. 

(35) Ek= 1 

55 (35) 

Case II 

When the compressor speed varies 

between the maximum speed (k=2) and 

minimum speed (k=1) such that k=v to 

satisfy the building load at temperature tj 

evaluate the following equations: 

81LlING CODE 6450-01 .... 
CAS-RM-79-102 COMMENT 07

Federal R .... ter I Vol. 51, No. 194 I Tuesday, October 7, 1988 I Proposed Rules 

where: 

where: 

kav 

qss (tj , a steady-state capacity delivered by the 

unit at any speed between the minimum and 

maximum compressor spee4s at temperature tj 

+ 

. kal Ek- v Ess (t3' - ss (tVH) 

t3 - tva 

: 

* (t· - tvH) . 1 

the ele=trical power input required by the 

unit at temperature t· and at a variable 

compressor speed betw~en the minimum and 

maximum compressor speeds 

It=v Ess (tVH ) = the electrical power input required by the' 

unit at temperature tvn and at the 

intermediate compressor speed (k=v), as 

determined above 

the electrical power input required by the 

unit at temperature t3 and at the 

minimum compressor speed 

t) = temperature at which 

when tj « tVH 

k=l 

gss (tj) = BL(tj) 

+ -----

k=2 where: Ess (t4> - the ele6trical power input required by the 

unit at temperature t4 and at the maximum 

compressor speed 

1t=2 t4 - temperature at which gss (tj>· BL(tj' 

BIWNG CODE ~1~ 
CAS-RM-79-102 COMMENT 07

35756 Federal Register I Vol. 51, No. 194 I Tuesday, October 7, 1986 I Proposed Rules 

For air-source units with variable-speed 

compressors that are equipped with "demand 

defrost control systems", the value for HSPF. 1S determined above. shall be multiplied by In enhancement factor of 1.04 to compensate 

for improved performance not measured in 

the Frost Accumulation Test. 

4.2.5 Heating seasonal performance 

foetor for split-type ductless systems. For 

split-type ductless systems. HSPF shall be 

APF= 

where: 

CLH = cooling load hours for a specific 

location as reported in Figure 1 of this 

appendix 

Q .. (95)=Steady state capacity as measured 

in Test A 

HLH=healing load hours for a specific 

location as reported in Figure 2 of this 

appendix 

defined as speCified in section 4.2.1 of this 

appendix. Separate values of HSPF shall be 

determined for each combination of indoor 

coils to be used with a common outdoor coil. 

4.2.6 Heating seasonal performance 

foetor for untested combinations of splitsystem central air conditioners. (Reserved) 

4.3 Annual performance foetor for air- source units. The annual performance factor 

(APF) shall be expressed in Btu per watthour: For each of the six regions in Table 2 of 

. this appendix. a separate APF shall be 

determined for the standardized maximum 

DHR, the standardized minimum DHR and 

for all other standardized DHR's (See Table 3 

of this appendix) between the maximum and 

minimum values. APF shall be defined as: 

[CLH * 0ss(95)] + (HLH * VHR * C) 

CLH * 0S5(95) 

SEER 

HLB * DHR * C 

+ 

DHR=standardized design heating 

requirement 

C=adjustment factor which serves to adjust 

the calculated design heating load hours 

to the actual heating load hours 

experienced by a heating system and is 

0.77 

SEER = seasonal energy efficiency ratio as 

. determined by 4.1 of this appendix 

HSPF 

HSPF=heating seasonal performance facto! 

as determined by 4.2 of this appendix 

4.4 Seasonal energy efficiency ratio for 

earth-coupled heat pumps and ground water· source heat pumps. The seasonal energy 

efficiency ratio (SEER) shall be expressed in 

Btu per watt-hour. For each of six regions 

specified in Table 4 of this Appendix. SEER 

shall be determined by: 

SEER SEER (70) - 70-T w • [SEER [70)-SEER (50)] 

where: 

SEER(70)=SPLF' EER(70) 

SEER(50)=SPLF' EER(50) 

T" =ground water temperature for the 

respective region and is reported in 

Table 4 of this Appendix 

EER(70)=energy efficiency ratio at a ground 

water temperature of 70 OF. as 

determined bv 5.1.4.1a of ANSI/ ARI 

Standard 32S.:.s5 

EER(50)=energy effrciency ratio at a ground 

water temperature of 50 OF. as 

determined by section 5.1.4.1b of ANSI/ 

ARI Standard 325-85 

Where: 

HSPF (70) = SPLF • 3.412' COP [70) 

HSPF (50) = SPLF • 3.412' COP (50) 

70-50 . 

SPLF=seasonal part-load factor. and is 

assigned the value of 0.90 

4.5 Heating seasonal performance factor 

for earth-coupled heat pumps and ground 

water-source heal pumps. The healing 

8easonal performance factor [HSPF) shall be 

expressed in Btu per walt-hour. For each of 

the six regions specified in Table 4 of this 

appendix, a separate HSPF shall be 

determined for the standardized maximum 

DHR. the standardized minimum DHR and all 

other s.tandardized DHR'~; (See Table 3 of this 

appendix) between the maximum and 

minimum values. 

70-Tw 

HSPF=HSPF(70) - --. [HSPF(70)-HSPF(5O)] 

70-50 

Tw=ground water temperature for the 

respective region and is reported in 

Table 4 of this Appendix 

4.5.1 Heating seasonal performance 

factor for units without supplementary 

resistance heat. For units without 

supplementary resistance heat. HSPF shall be 

defined as: 

SPLF=seasonal part-load factor. ano IS 

assigned the value of 0.85 
CAS-RM-79-102 COMMENT 07

Federal Register I Vol. 51, No. 194 I Tuesday, October 7, 1986 I Proposed Rules 

COp(70)=coefficient of performance at a 

ground water tempera ture of 10 of. as 

determined by section SoU.lc of ANSI/ 

ARJ Standard 3Z5-85 . 

COP(50)=c:oefficient of performance at a 

pund water temperature of SO of. as 

determined by IM!ction 5.l.5Jd of ANSI! 

ARI Standard 32S-85 

3.412 = conversion factor of 3.412 Btu per 

waH-hour 

4.5.2 Heating seasonal performance 

foetor for units with supplementary 

resistance heat. For units with supplementary 

resistance heat. HSPF shall be defined as 

lpecified in aection 10.2.2 of ANSI! ASHRAE 

Standard 116-1983. with the foUowing added 

provilioDl. One. the number of houri in the 

. JU' temperature bin (nJ in the equations for 

HSPF and for supplementary reaiatance heat 

term (RH(tj )) shall be defined in 4.2.1 of this 

appendix. Two. the heat pump low 

temperature cut-out factor shall be assigned 

the value of 1.0. Three. the part-load ractor 

(PLF) shall be auigned the value of 0.85. 

Four. the total power input (E(lj)) shan be 

equal to the steady-state power input at a 

constant ground water temperature (Ea(Tw)). 

which shall be defined as: 

E..RCT w) =E..H(SO) + [&".H(70) - ~.H(50)l 

T..-

050 

Where: 

Ess .H(50)=steady-state powednput during 

heating at a ground water temperature of 

50 ·F. as determined by section 5.l.4.1c 

of ANSI/AID Standard 325-85 

E55 .H(70)=steady-state power input during 

beating at a ground water temperature of 

70 ·F. as determined by section 5.l.4.ld 

of ANSII ARI Standard 325-85 

Tw=ground water temperature for the 

respective region and is reported in 

Table 4 of this Appendix 

For regions I. II. 1II. IV and VI. the 

maximum DHR. the standardized DHR 

reported in Table 4 of this appendix. nearest 

to the greater of either Qss.H(T w) or: 

DHRwAX = 2 Qss.dT w) * (55-ToD) 

where: 

T,....50 

*--

7~50 

T .. -so 

Qss.dT w)= Qss.dSO) + IQss.d70) -Qss.dSO)] *.--

7~SO 

35757 
CAS-RM-79-102 COMMENT 07

35758 Federal Register I Vol. 51, No. 194 I Tuesday, October 1, 1986 I Proposed Rules 

. TCID-outdoor des. temperature. as reported ... '. . ill Table .. of this AppaDdix 

/~SO)-steady-state heatina capacity at a 

. ~. JIOIIIId water temperature of SO.,.. as 

determined accordins to the testiDa 

requiremeJlts of 5.1. 5.1.3 and 5.1.4Jd of 

ANSII ARI Standard 3Z5-85 

Q...(7O)_steady-itate heatina capacity at a 

pound water temperature of 70 .,.. as 

determined accordiDs to the t .. tina 

requirements of 5.1. 5.1.3 and 5.1.4Jc of 

ANSI/ ARI Standard 3Z5-85 

Q..dSO)-.teadY-Itate coolin8 capacity at a pound water _perature of SO .,.. a. 

determined accordins to the teatins 

requirements of 5.1. 5.1.3 and s.u.lb of 

ANSI/ARI Standard ~ 

Q..d70)-steadY-Itate coolins capacity at a pound water temperature of 70 ·F. aa 

determined accordins to the testins 

requirements of 5.1. 5.1.3 and 5.UJa of 

ANSI! ARJ Standard 325-85 . 

For Regions I. U. Ul, IV and VI, the 

minimum DHR, which ia rounded off to the 

Dearest atandardiUd DHR reported In Table 

.. of this appendix. ia the ...... of either 

Q...lT.)or: 

mm... - Q..dT.) • (8&-T.J 

For Re,i0ll V. the maximum DHR ia the 

peater of either Q...(T.) or 2.Z times . 

Q..dT.) and the minimum DHR .. the Jeuor 

of either Q...(T.) or Q..dT .). Both thti 

maximum and minimum values ofDHR are 

rounded off to the Dearest atandardized DHR 

reported In Table 4 of thia appeudix. 

... Annual perfOrtlllUlCe foetor for IItUIh-

.coUpled heot pumTm ond sround walBNDUrt:e 

heot pumTm. The annual performance factor 

lAPP) aball be expreued In Btu per watt- '. 

bour. For each of the .Ix regions specified In 

Table 4 of this appendix. a separate APF 

ahan be determined for each combination of 

OCR's and DHR's between and includins the 

maximum and minimum values. APF is 

defined as: 

[CLd * OCR) + (HLH * DHR *C] 

APF = 

eLH • OCR 

SEER 

vhere: 

Ui=cooling load hours for a specific 

location as reported in Table 4 of this 

Appendix 

HLH=heating load hours for a specific 

location as reported in Table 4 of this 

Appendix 

DHR=standardized design heating 

. requirement 

C = adjustment factor which sel"\'es to adjust 

the calculated design heating load hours 

to the actual heating load hours 

experienced by a heating system and ill 

0." 

SEER = seasonal energy efficiency ratio as 

determined by 4.4 of this Appendix 

HSPF=heating seasonal performance factor 

as determined by 4.5 of this Appendix 

For all regions. the maximum DCR is 

rounded off to the standardized OCR reported 

in Table 4 of this appendix nearest to 

Qss.dTwl. For region IV. the minimum OCR is 

the lesser of either Qss.dTwl or Qss.H(Tw) 

dividp.d by 2.2. For Regions I. II, Ill. IV and VI, 

+ HLii * OHR * C 

dSPF 

the minimum OCR is the lesser of either 

Q..H(TW) or: 

2 Qss.dTw) OCRWI = • (85-TOD] 

60 

4.7 Estimated annual operating cost for 

earth·coupled heat pumps and graund watersource heat pumps. For earth·coupled heat 

pumps and ground water-source heat pumps. 

the cooling portion of the estimated annual 

operating cost (Ad at each design cooling 

requirement (OCR) for each region is: 

CUi • DCR Ac = • 0.001 • P 

SEER 

where: 

CLH=representative average use cycle for 

cooling and is 1.000 hours 

OCR = as defined in 4.6 of this Appendix 

SEER = as defined in 4.4 of this Appendix 

D.OO1-converalOD factor of D.OO1 knowalt per 

watt 

P-repr ...... tIve averqe unit coat of 

electricity ID doJJan per JcjJowatt-hour. aa 

provided purauant to 323(b)(2) of the Act 

. Por~pJed heat pumps and iround 

wateMource heat pumpa. the beatins portion 

of the .. timated annual operatlns coat (Aa) at 

each desIp baatlns requirement (DHR) for 

_chrepmia: 

A..- HLH·DHR· C *o.om.p 

HSPF 

where:· 

HLH-repreaentatlve averap use cycle for 

beatins and It 2.0lIO hours 

DHR-aa defined In 4.8.1 of thia Appendix 

Cea. defined In 4.8.1 of this Appendix 

HSPF-aa defined In 4.5 of this Appendix 

D.OO1-converaion factorofG.OO1 kilowatt per 

watt 

P-repreaentative average unit coat of 

electricity in dollars per kilowatt-bour, as 

provided pursuant to 323(b)(2) of the Act 

4.8 Estimated regional annual operating 

cost for eorth-coupled heat pumps and 

ground water-source heat pilmps. For earthcoupled heat pumps and ground water-source 

heat pumps, a 8eparate estimated regional 

annual opera tins cost shall be detennined for 

each combination of Itandardized design 

coolins and heating requirements between 

the maximum and minimum values. The 

estimated regional annual operatins cost 

shall be determined by the method in 4.7 of 

this Appendix in which Tables 1. 2 and 3 of 

this appendix are used to determine the . 

cooling load hours (CLH). heatinsload hours 

(HLH) and ground water temperature (Tw). 

Further. the seasonal energy efficiency ratio 

(SEER) and seasonal heating perfonnance 

factor (HSPF) are adjusted for the respective 

value of Twin each region. 

Table 1.-Oistribution of Temperature Bin 

Hours for Cooling 

Bin No. (j). 

1 _ .. _ ............. _ ... ___ ................. . 

2 ................... _ ..... _. __ ._ ........... . 3 ............. _. __ ............. _._ ... . 

4 ................................ _ ...... ___ •... 

5 .................. _ ................ _._ ...... . 8 ............. _ .......... _._. ___ .. _ ... . 

7._ ..... __ ... _ ................ __ ....... . 

8 ......... _ .......... _ .. _._ ....... . 

Repr-. 

live Btn 

temperature 

(Tj) 

67 

72 

n 

52 

87 

12 

17 

102 

Tempera. 

tureBin 

Hours 

214 

231 

216 

181 

104 

52 

18 

4 
CAS-RM-79-102 COMMENT 07

Federal Register I VoL 51, No. 194 I Tuesday, October 7, 1986 I Proposed Rules 

Teble 2.-DistrIJUtion 01 Temperat1n Bin 

Hoeft for Cooling 

....... T ......... 1in HaIn ... ..n ....... ..... lin No.. lin 

::rcr: I • • " v VI 

!~ 12 at. 

--,., 111 111 

57 178 231 2411 250 

-.. 41 12 145 204 24t 232 231 ., ~== If1 17 178 240 2111 201 ., .., .t totO 231 22!1 214 

J7 S1 110 208 245 2311 

-

2111 

7 12 14 70 t., 213 210 .. --- ~ .. 30 112 'II 251 • ~O--== • 1 10 37 11M 204 • 17 0 a ,. .t 15t 0 11 ___ 12 0 0 • • 121 0 

ta...;...;._ 7 0 0 .. 21 '05 0 

13..._. __ . 2 0 0 2 tC eo 0 14 ___ -3 0 0 0 5 50 0 t5~ ___ -. 0 0 0 2 28 0 

te,.-- -t3 0 0 0 0 1C 0 

1Tr_~_ -11 0 0 0 0 • 0 tlL __ ._. . ':'23 0 0 - 0 0 3 0 

Table ~.-Standardjzed Design Cooling and 

Heating Requirements (Btu/hr) 

5.000 ...... __ ........ _ .................. _ .• 25.000 50.000 110.000 

10.000 ...... _ ................ __ ........... 30.000 60.000 100.000 

15.000 ...... _._ ...... _ ...... _ ................ 35.000 70.000 110.000 

20.000.............................................. 40.000 60.000 130.000 

TABLE 4.-REGIONAL COOUNG LOAD HOURS 

(CLH). HEATING LOAO HOURS (HLH). OUT· 

DOOR DESIGN TEMPERATURE (Too) AND 

MEAN GROUNO·WATER TEMPERATURE (T w) 

Region CLH HLH Too T. 

I 2.COO 750 37 72 

II 1.800 1.250 27 ee 

'" 1.200 1.750 17 112 

IV 800 2.250 5 63 

V coo 2.750 -10 45 

VI 200 2.750 30 56 

TABLE I.-TEsT TOLERANCES FOR 8T&ADY. 

STATE f'ERFOAMANcE TEsTa FOR ENmtCouPLED AND GRouND WATEA-SouRctE 

HEATPuMPa 

T_ T_ ....... 0IIIdMaII .!: . .... -' _a 

IndDor .,....." 'f: 

~ a.o tLI 

IAIvinIJ U 

1ndDor-.....,'f: 

~. 1.0 U 

1MwInII· ,.0 

0uId0cIr ..... IIuIb, 'f: 

~ CUI U 

1MwInII .. CUI 

Water 1IcIw • ..-_ I 

E-..at ...-..nee 10 .. 1IcIw. inC:MI 01 .. , .... _. ____ . 0.05 G.OI 

EJectric:8I '«III8Oa • ..- I.D 

TABL.£ e.-EXPANSION DEvICE ScALING FACTOR. (F.) and Thermostatic Expansion Value 

Factor (F'l'Xv) for Matched Systems 

Matched aystem F .... 

TXV, no bleed .......... TXV. no bleed , ....... 1,0 ..... _ ....... 1.000 

TXV. no bleed .......... TXV, .. /bIeed , ......... 1.0 ......... _ ... 0.1175 

TXV, .. /bIeed ........... Tl(V, no bleed , ........ 1.0 ............... 1.025 

TXV, w/bleed ........... TXv, .. /bIeed , ......... 1.0 ............... 1.000 

CaptUary Of orifICe... TlCV, no bleed ' .. _... 1.0 ............... 1.050 

Capillary Of orifoce... TXV, "'/bleed ,......... 1.0 ............... 1.025 

Capillary .................... Capillary .............. _ ... Case I ......... 1.000 

Capillary .................... Onfice ........................ Case II ........ 1.000 

Onfice ........................ Capillary .......... _...... Case III ....... 1.000 

Onfice........................ Onfice....................... Case IV ....... 1.000 

'The mixed TXV shall have equivaten\ capacity and .. me euperhaat semng as the matclled TXV. 'The mixed T XV shall have equivalent capacity .. the 

matched expansoon 0eYice. 

[FR Doc. 8&-22486 Filed 10-6-86; 8:45 am] 

.. LUNG CODE 1450-01-411 

35759