Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 84 / Friday, May 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 24841 

regulations, may exempt individual 

nonhuman primates from the plan for 

scientific reasons, provided these 

reasons are set forth in a research 

proposal and reviewed by the IACUC. 

On May 7, 2014, APHIS received a 

petition submitted jointly by the New 

England Anti-Vivisection Society, the 

North American Primate Sanctuary 

Alliance, the Laboratory Primate 

Advocacy Group, and the Animal Legal 

Defense Fund requesting that we initiate 

rulemaking to amend the AWA 

regulations. Specifically, the petition 

asks that we amend § 3.81 to require 

that research facilities construct and 

maintain an ethologically appropriate 

environment for nonhuman primates 

housed at the facilities, that is, an 

environment that is appropriate with 

respect to the patterns of behavior 

exhibited by the nonhuman primates in 

their natural state. The petition also asks 

that we amend § 3.81 to specify 

minimum standards that must be met in 

order for an environment to be 

considered ethologically appropriate. 

The petition cites standards recently 

adopted by the National Institutes of 

Health (NIH) for chimpanzees used in 

NIH-funded research as a reference 

point for the development of such 

generally applicable minimum 

standards and as evidence of their 

feasibility. 

The petition agrees that the intent of 

§ 3.81 of the AWA regulations is to 

ensure that the environment provided to 

nonhuman primates housed at research 

facilities promotes the psychological 

well-being of the primates. The petition 

suggests, however, that because of 

ambiguities in the current regulations, 

research facilities have broad discretion 

regarding the actual environment 

provided to nonhuman primates at their 

facilities, and can meet the requirements 

in § 3.81 without actually meeting their 

intent. 

The petition states that, by amending 

the AWA regulations in the manner that 

the petitioners suggest, we would 

remove these ambiguities and facilitate 

regulatory compliance. 

We are making this petition available 

to the public and soliciting comments to 

help determine what action, if any, to 

take in response to this request. The 

petition and any comments submitted 

are available for review as indicated 

under ADDRESSES above. We welcome 

all comments on the issues outlined in 

the petition. In particular, we invite 

responses to the following questions: 

1. Should APHIS amend § 3.81 of the 

AWA regulations to require research 

facilities to construct and maintain an 

ethologically appropriate environment 

for nonhuman primates, and specify the 

minimum standards that must be met 

for an environment to be considered 

ethologically appropriate? 

2. What constitutes an ethologically 

appropriate environment for a 

nonhuman primate? Does this differ 

among species of nonhuman primates? 

If so, how does it differ? 

3. Are there any environmental 

conditions that make an environment 

ethologically inappropriate for a 

nonhuman primate? If so, what are 

they? Do they differ among species of 

nonhuman primates? 

4. Does an ethologically appropriate 

environment for nonhuman primates 

used in research differ from an 

ethologically appropriate environment 

for nonhuman primates that are sold or 

exhibited? If so, in what ways does it 

differ? 

5. Who should make the 

determination regarding the ethological 

appropriateness of the environment for 

nonhuman primates at a particular 

research facility: The attending 

veterinarian for the facility, APHIS, or 

both parties? If both parties should 

jointly make such a determination, 

which responsibilities should fall to the 

attending veterinarian and which to 

APHIS? 

We encourage the submission of 

scientific data, studies, or research to 

support your comments and position. 

We also invite data on the costs and 

benefits associated with any 

recommendations. We will consider all 

comments and recommendations 

received. 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 2131–2159; 7 CFR 2.22, 

2.80, and 371.7. 

Done in Washington, DC, this 27th day of 

April 2015. 

Kevin Shea, 

Administrator, Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service. 

[FR Doc. 2015–10195 Filed 4–30–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

10 CFR Part 431 

[Docket No. EERE–2013–BT–STD–0006] 

RIN 1904–AC55 

Energy Conservation Standards for 

Commercial and Industrial Fans and 

Blowers: Availability of Provisional 

Analysis Tools 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Notice of Data Availability. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Energy (DOE) has completed a 

provisional analysis of the potential 

economic impacts and energy savings 

that could result from promulgating an 

energy conservation standard for 

commercial and industrial fans and 

blowers. This analysis incorporates 

information and comments received 

after the completion of an analysis 

presented in a notice of data availability 

(NODA) published in December 2014. 

At this time, DOE is not proposing an 

energy conservation standard for 

commercial and industrial fans and 

blowers. This analysis may be used in 

support of the Appliance Standards 

Federal Rulemaking Advisory 

Committee (ASRAC) commercial and 

industrial fans working group 

negotiations to develop a 

recommendation for regulating 

commercial and industrial fans. DOE 

encourages stakeholders to provide any 

additional data or information that may 

improve the analysis and to present 

comments submitted to this NODA and 

to the NODA published in December 

2014 to the working group. 

DATES: Information is available as of 

May 1, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: The analysis for this NODA 

is available at: http://www1.eere.energy.

gov/buildings/appliance_standards/

rulemaking.aspx?ruleid=25. 

Interested persons are encouraged to 

submit comments using the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at: http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Alternatively, interested persons may 

submit comments, identified by Docket 

number EERE–2013–BT–STD–0006, by 

any of the following methods: 

(1) Email: to CIFB2013STD0006@

ee.doe.gov. Include EERE–2013–BT– 

STD–0006 in the subject line of the 

message. Submit electronic comments 

in WordPerfect, Microsoft Word, PDF, 

or ASCII file format, and avoid the use 

of special characters or any form of 

encryption. 

(2) Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. 

Department of Energy, Building 

Technologies Program, Mailstop EE–2J, 

Revisions to Energy Efficiency 

Enforcement Regulations, EERE–2013– 

BT–STD–0006, 1000 Independence 

Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585– 

0121. Phone: (202) 586–2945. If 

possible, please submit all items on a 

CD, in which case it is not necessary to 

include printed copies. 

(3) Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. 

Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Building Technologies Program, 

6th Floor, 950 L’Enfant Plaza SW., 

Washington, DC 20024. Phone: (202) 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

24842 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 84 / Friday, May 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

1For editorial reasons, upon codification in the 

U.S. Code, Part C was re-designated Part A–1. 

2Supporting documents are available at: http://

www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=EERE-2013- 

BT-STD-0006 

3The December 2014 NODA comment period was 

originally scheduled to close on January 26, 2015. 

DOE subsequently published a notice in the Federal 

Register extending the comment period to February 

25, 2015, to allow additional time for interested 

parties to submit comments. 

4The efficiency of a fan is defined as the ratio of 

air output power to mechanical input power. Fan 

efficiency varies depending on the output flow and 

pressure. The best efficiency point or BEP 

represents the flow and pressure values at which 

the fan efficiency is maximized when operating at 

a given speed. 

5 In the December 2014 NODA, DOE calculated 

the FEI at the speed corresponding to the highest 

electric motor synchronous speed configuration that 

exists within the fan’s operational speed range. 

6The Air Movement and Control Association 

(AMCA), New York Blower Company, Natural 

Resources Defense Council (NRDC), the Appliance 

Standards Awareness Project (ASAP), and the 

Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance (NEEA). 

7Supporting documents from this meeting, 

including presentation slides are available at: 

http://www.regulations.gov/#a!documentDetail;

D=EERE-2013-BT-STD-0006-0029. 

8All comments are available at: http://

www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=EERE-2013- 

BT-STD-0006. 

586–2945. If possible, please submit all 

items on a CD, in which case it is not 

necessary to include printed copies. 

(4) Instructions: All submissions 

received must include the agency name 

and docket number or RIN for this 

rulemaking. 

Docket: The docket, which includes 

Federal Register notices, comments, 

and other supporting documents/

materials, is available for review at 

www.regulations.gov. All documents in 

the docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. However, 

not all documents listed in the index 

may be publicly available, such as 

information that is exempt from public 

disclosure. 

A link to the docket Web page can be 

found at: http://www.regulations.gov/

#!docketDetail;D=EERE-2013-BT-STD0006. The www.regulations.gov Web 

page contains instructions on how to 

access all documents in the docket, 

including public comments. See 

ADDRESSES, for further information on 

how to submit comments through 

www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. Ashley Armstrong, U.S. 

Department of Energy, Office of Energy 

Efficiency and Renewable Energy, 

Building Technologies, EE–2J, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 586–6590. Email: 

CIFansBlowers@ee.doe.gov. 

Mr. Peter Cochran, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of the General Counsel, 

GC–33, 1000 Independence Avenue 

SW., Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 586–9496. Email: 

peter.cochran@hq.doe.gov. 

For further information on how to 

review other public comments and the 

docket, contact Ms. Brenda Edwards at 

(202) 586–2945 or by email: 

Brenda.Edwards@ee.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. History of Energy Conservation Standards 

Rulemaking for Commercial and 

Industrial Fans and Blowers 

II. Current Status 

III. Summary of the Analyses Performed by 

DOE 

A. Energy Metric 

B. Engineering Analysis 

C. Manufacturer Impact Analysis 

D. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period 

Analyses 

E. National Impact Analysis 

IV. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Public 

Comment 

I. History of Energy Conservation 

Standards Rulemaking for Commercial 

and Industrial Fans and Blowers 

The Energy Policy and Conservation 

Act of 1975 (EPCA), as amended, 

established the Energy Conservation 

Program for Certain Industrial 

Equipment under Title III, Part C. (42 

U.S.C. 6311–6317, as codified) 1

Included among the various types of 

industrial equipment addressed by 

EPCA are commercial and industrial 

fans and blowers, the subject of this 

notice. (42 U.S.C. 6311(2) (A)) All 

references to EPCA refer to the statute 

as amended through the American 

Energy Manufacturing Technical 

Corrections Act (AEMTCA), Public Law 

112–210 (December 18, 2012). 

DOE initiated the current rulemaking 

by publishing a proposed coverage 

determination for commercial and 

industrial fans and blowers. 76 FR 

37678 (June 28, 2011). This was 

followed by the publication of a Notice 

of Public Meeting and Availability of 

the Framework Document for 

commercial and industrial fans and 

blowers in the Federal Register. In the 

Framework Document, DOE requested 

feedback from interested parties on 

many issues related to analyses DOE 

would conduct as part of the 

rulemaking, such as the engineering 

analysis, the manufacturer impact 

analysis (MIA), the life-cycle cost (LCC) 

and payback period (PBP) analyses, and 

the national impact analysis (NIA). 78 

FR 7306 (February 1, 2013).2

On December 10, 2014, DOE 

published a Notice of Data Availability 

(the ‘‘December 2014 NODA’’) that 

presented a provisional analysis 

estimating the potential economic 

impacts and energy savings that could 

result from promulgating a regulatory 

energy conservation standard for 

commercial and industrial fans and 

blowers. 79 FR 73246.3 The December 

2014 NODA analysis relied on an 

electric input power based metric (i.e., 

‘‘wire-to-air’’), the fan energy index 

(FEI). The FEI of a fan was defined as 

the average electric input power, or fan 

energy rating, of a fan that exactly meets 

the efficiency level being analyzed 

(FERSTD), divided by the average electric 

input power or fan energy rating of the 

fan (FER). In the December 2014 NODA, 

the FER was calculated over a specific 

load profile based on the fan’s flow at 

peak total efficiency 4 and at a specified 

speed.5

In October 2014, several energy 

efficiency advocates and representatives 

of fan manufacturers 6 (the ‘‘Joint 

Stakeholders’’) presented a different 

energy metric approach to DOE called 

‘‘Fan Efficiency Ratio’’. The Joint 

Stakeholder approach included a fan 

efficiency only metric (FERH) as well as 

a wire-to-air metric (FERW).7 This metric 

approach was described in more details 

by AMCA in a white paper (‘‘AMCA 

white paper’’) published in December 

2014 which AMCA included in 

comments to the December 2014 

NODA.8 (AMCA, No. 48 at p. 15) Based 

on the additional information received, 

and comments to the December 2014 

NODA, DOE revised its analysis. This 

second NODA presents an analysis that 

characterizes fan performance and 

efficiency levels using a revised FEI 

metric that is based on the FERW

presented by the Joint Stakeholders. 

(See section III.A for details on the 

revised FEI metric) 

II. Current Status 

The analyses described in this NODA 

were developed to support a potential 

energy conservation standard for 

commercial and industrial fans. As DOE 

announced in an April 2015 notice, 

DOE intends to establish a negotiated 

rulemaking working group under the 

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking 

Federal Advisory Committee (ASRAC) 

in accordance with the Federal 

Advisory Committee Act (FACA) and 

the Negotiated Rulemaking Act (NRA) to 

negotiate proposed definitions, the 

equipment classes for which standards 

would be considered (including any 

system interaction effects), certain 

aspects of a proposed test procedure (if 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 84 / Friday, May 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 24843 

9Supporting documents from the October 2014 

meeting, including presentation slides are available 

at: http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;

D=EERE-2013-BT-STD-0006-0029. 

10AMCA, Introducing Fan Efficiency Ratios, 

December 2014, http://www.amca.org/resources/

FER_Whitepaper_single%20pages.pdf. 

11These default losses assumptions are presented 

in the LCC spreadsheet, in the ‘‘Default Losses’’ 

worksheet. The default transmission efficiency is 

equal to one in case of a direct driven fan. 

applicable), and proposed energy 

conservation standards for fans and 

blowers. 80 FR 17359 (April 1, 2015) 

To examine these issues, and others 

as necessary, DOE will provide to all 

parties in the negotiation data and an 

analytic framework complete and 

accurate enough to support their 

deliberations. DOE is publishing this 

analysis to inform a prospective 

negotiation. 

In this NODA, DOE is not proposing 

any energy conservation standards for 

commercial and industrial fans. DOE 

may revise the analyses presented in 

this NODA based on any new or 

updated information or data it obtains 

during the course of the rulemaking. 

DOE encourages stakeholders to provide 

any additional data or information that 

may improve the analysis. 

III. Summary of the Analyses 

Performed by DOE 

DOE developed a fan energy 

performance metric and conducted 

provisional analyses of commercial and 

industrial fans in the following areas: (1) 

Engineering; (2) manufacturer impacts; 

(3) LCC and PBP; and (4) national 

impacts. The metric and provisional 

analyses incorporate information 

received after the completion of the 

analysis for the December 2014 NODA, 

including the published fan industry 

white paper ‘‘Fan Efficiency Ratios’’ and 

a database of confidential sales 

information provided by (AMCA). The 

fan energy performance metric and the 

tools used in preparing these analyses 

and their respective results are available 

at: http://www.regulations.gov/#!docket

Detail;D=EERE-2013-BT-STD-0006. 

Each individual spreadsheet includes an 

introduction that provides an overview 

of the contents of the spreadsheet. These 

spreadsheets present the various inputs 

and outputs to the analysis and, where 

necessary, instructions. Brief 

descriptions of the fan energy 

performance metric, of the provisional 

analyses, and of the supporting 

spreadsheet tools are provided below. If 

DOE proposes an energy conservation 

standard for commercial and industrial 

fans in a future NOPR, then DOE will 

publish a TSD containing a detailed 

written account of the analyses 

performed in support of the NOPR, 

which will include updates to the 

analyses made available in this NODA. 

A. Energy Metric 

Commercial and industrial fan energy 

performance is a critical input in the 

provisional analyses discussed in this 

notice. For the purpose of this NODA, 

DOE revised the fan energy metric used 

to represent fan performance and 

characterize the efficiency levels 

analyzed in the December 2014 NODA. 

The revised FEI metric is based on an 

approach similar to the wire-to-air 

metric presented by the Joint 

Stakeholders to DOE in October 2014. 

AMCA subsequently published a white 

paper in December 2014 that describes 

the Joint Stakeholder approach in more 

detail. AMCA included this white paper 

in its publicily-available comments to 

the December 2014 NODA, which 

additional stakeholders supported in 

their written comments on the 

December 2014 NODA.9 10 (Joint 

Stakeholders, No. 50 at p. 2; AMCA, No. 

48 at p. 15; CAIous, No. 49 at p. 2; 

Morrison, No. 51 at p. 2) 

In this NODA, the FEI is defined as 

the electric input power of a fan, or fan 

energy rating that exactly meets the 

efficiency level being analyzed 

(FERSTD), divided by the electric input 

power, or fan energy rating, of a given 

fan model (FER) at a given operating 

point (characterized by a value of flow 

and total pressure). For a given 

operating point, an FEI value less than 

one would indicate that the fan does not 

meet the efficiency level being analyzed 

for that given operating point, while a 

value greater than one would indicate 

that the fan is more efficient than the 

efficiency level being analyzed at that 

given operating point. For each fan 

operating point, the FEI is calculated as: 

In order to calculate the FER of a fan, 

DOE assumed default motor full load 

and part load efficiency values, as well 

as default transmission losses: 11

Where: 

FERi: electrical input power (hp) at operating 

point i; 

Qi: flow (cfm) at operating point i; 

Pi: total fan efficiency (%) at operating point 

i; 

hfan,i: total fan efficiency (%) at operating 

point i; 

hT,i: default transmission efficiency (%) at 

oprating point i (equals 100% f the fan 

is a direct driven fan); 

LM,i: default electric motor losses (hp) at 

operatin gpoint i; 

BHPi: shaft input power (hp) at operating 

point i; 

6343: conversion factor to I–P units. 

For the FERSTD calculation of a fan 

that exactly meets the efficiency level 

being analyzed, DOE used the same FER 

equation, except the calculation of the 

fan shaft input power is based on a 

minimum allowable fan total efficiency: 

Where: 

FERSTD,i: Maximum allowable electrical input 

power (hp) at operating point i; 

BHPSTD,i: Maximum allowable shaft input 

power (hp) at operating point i; 

Qi: flow (cfm) at operating point i; 

Pi: total pressure (in.wg) at operating point i; 

hSTD,i: minimum total fan efficiency (%) at 

operating point i ; 

hT,i: default transmission efficiency (%) at 

operating point i (the minimally 


mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALSEP01MY15.008</GPH> EP01MY15.009</GPH> EP01MY15.010</GPH>
24844 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 84 / Friday, May 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

12The efficiency target is a constant that 

described the expected minimum allowable fan 

efficiency for very high flow and total pressure 

operating points at a given efficiency level. 

13See AMCA’s DOE Fan efficiency Proposal 

presented at the 59th AMCA Annual Meeting, 

January 24, 2015. http://www.amca.org/adovacy/

documents/DOEFanEfficiencyProposal-AMCA

AnnualMeetingRedux1-24-15.pdf. 

14Static efficiency is equal to the total efficiency 

multiplied by the ratio of static pressure to total 

pressure, at a given point of operation. Static 

pressure is the difference between fan total pressure 

and fan velocity pressure at a given point of 

operation. 

15Unducted fans include the following fan 

categories: Axial unhoused, centrifugal unhoused, 

and power roof ventilators. 

16The fan’s total output power is the power 

delivered to the air (or gas). It is proportional to the 

product of the fan airflow rate and fan total pressure 

(if air were incompressible). 

17See AMCA’s DOE Fan efficiency Proposal 

presented at the 59th AMCA Annual Meeting, 

January 24, 2015. http://www.amca.org/adovacy/

documents/DOEFanEfficiencyProposalAMCAAnnualMeetingRedux1-24-15.pdf 

compliant fan is assumed to always be 

belt-driven); 

LM,i: default electric motor losses (hp) at 

operating point i; 

6343: conversion factor to I–P units. 

For all fan categories, the minimum 

fan total efficiency at a given operating 

point is expressed as a function of flow 

and total pressure, as follows: 

Where: 

hSTD,i: Minimum total fan efficiency (%) at 

operating point i; 

BHPSTD,i: Max allowable shaft input power 

(hp) at operating point i; 

Q0: flow constant equal to 250 

P0: total pressure constant equal to 0.4 

htarget: constant used to establish the 

efficiency level 12

6343: conversion factor to I–P units 

This equation was based on the metric 

approach recommended by the Joint 

Stakeholders as well as on AMCA’s 

proposed values for Q0 and P0 and on 

DOE’s preliminary review of the 

applicability of this equation.13

The primary difference between the 

revised FEI metric used in this NODA 

and the wire-to-air metric recommended 

by the Joint Stakeholders is that the 

Joint Stakeholders recommend using an 

equation expressing static efficiency 14

as a function of static pressure and flow 

when calculating FER and FERSTD at a 

given operating point for unducted fans 

(i.e. fans generally applied without a 

duct on their outlet), instead of using 

total efficiency as a function of total 

pressure and flow, as recommended for 

ducted fans.15 In its white paper, AMCA 

states that a metric based on static 

efficiency should be used for unducted 

fans, to accommodate the selection of 

unducted fans based on the use of static 

pressure. AMCA noted, however, that 

this opinion is not shared across all the 

industry. Three additional 

representatives of the industry agreed 

that static efficiency should be the basis 

for any metric related to unducted fans 

because of existing selection practices, 

while one recommended using total 

efficiency for all fan categories. (Joint 

Stakeholders, No. 50 at p. 3; AMCA, No. 

48 at p. 16; CES Group LLC, No. 40 at 

p. 1; Multi-wing, No. 52 at p. 2; Carrier, 

No. 43 at p. 6; Morrison, No. 51 at p. 2) 

DOE understands that using static 

pressure may be useful for selecting 

unducted fans, however, because static 

efficiency is, by definition, calculated 

using total pressure, and because the 

shaft input power of a fan is a function 

of the fan’s total output power and total 

efficiency, DOE maintained the use of 

an energy metric based on total pressure 

and total efficiency for all fan 

categories.16 DOE does not believe this 

approach would prevent end-users from 

selecting fans using either static or total 

pressure. 

B. Engineering Analysis 

The engineering analysis establishes 

the relationship between the 

manufacturer production cost (MPC) 

and efficiency levels of commercial and 

industrial fans and blowers. This 

relationship serves as the basis for 

calculations performed in the other 

analysis tools to estimate the costs and 

benefits to individual consumers, 

manufacturers, and the nation. 

As a first step in the engineering 

analysis, DOE established seven 

provisional fan groups based on 

characteristics such as the direction of 

airflow through the fan and the presence 

of a housing. While DOE analyzed seven 

provisional fan groups in this NODA, 

DOE expects the working group to 

discuss and ultimately recommend 

equipment classes for which standards 

would be considered. For each of the 

seven provisional fan groupings, DOE 

identified existing technology options 

that could affect efficiency. DOE then 

conducted a screening analysis to 

review each technology option and 

decide whether it: (1) Is technologically 

feasible; (2) is practicable to 

manufacture, install, and service; (3) 

would adversely affect product utility or 

product availability; or (4) would have 

adverse impacts on health and safety. 

The technology options remaining after 

the screening analysis consisted of a 

variety of impeller types and guide 

vanes. DOE used these technology 

options to divide the fan groups into 

subgroups and conducted a marketbased assessment of the prevalence of 

each subgroup at the different efficiency 

levels analyzed using the sales data 

provided by AMCA. This NODA has 

fewer subgroups than the December 

2014 NODA due to limitations in the 

sales data provided by AMCA. DOE 

analyzed six efficiency levels in this 

NODA, each representing a different 

efficiency target (htarget). AMCA 

presented results for an efficiency target 

of 62 percent for ducted fans.17 This 

NODA includes one efficiency level 

representing the same efficiency target 

as well as additional levels above and 

below. 

DOE estimated the MPCs for each 

technology option for each fan group as 

a function of blade or impeller diameter, 

independent of efficiency level. DOE 

then calculated MPCs for each fan group 

at each efficiency level analyzed by 

weighting the MPCs of each technology 

option within a group by its prevalence 

at the efficiency level being analyzed. 

The MPCs were derived from product 

teardowns and publically-available 

product literature and informed by 

interviews with manufacturers. 

DOE’s preliminary MPC estimates 

indicate that the changes in MPC as 

efficiency level increases are small or, in 

some fan groups, zero. However, DOE is 

aware that aerodynamic redesigns are a 

primary method by which 

manufacturers improve fan 

performance. These redesigns require 

manufacturers to make large upfront 

investments for R&D, testing and 

prototyping, and purchasing new 

production equipment. DOE’s 

preliminary findings indicate that the 

magnitude of these upfront costs is more 

significant than the difference in MPC of 

a fan redesigned for efficiency compared 

to its precursor. For this NODA, DOE 

included a conversion cost markup in 

its calculation of the manufacturer 

selling price (MSP) to account for these 


mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALSEP01MY15.011</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 84 / Friday, May 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 24845 

18See description in LCC spreadsheet, LCC 

sample description worksheet. 

conversion costs. These markups and 

associated MSPs were developed and 

applied in downstream analyses. They 

are discussed in section C and presented 

in the engineering analysis and 

conversion cost spreadsheet. 

The main outputs of the commercial 

and industrial fans engineering analysis 

are the MPCs of each fan group 

(including material, labor, and 

overhead) and technology option 

distributions at each efficiency level 

analyzed. 

C. Manufacturer Impact Analysis 

For the MIA, DOE used the 

Government Regulatory Impact Model 

(GRIM) to assess the economic impact of 

potential standards on commercial and 

industrial fan manufacturers. DOE 

developed key industry average 

financial parameters for the GRIM using 

publicly available data from corporate 

annual reports along with information 

received through confidential 

interviews with manufacturers. These 

values include average industry tax rate; 

working capital rate; net property, plant, 

and equipment rate; selling, general, 

and administrative expense rate; 

research and development expense rate; 

depreciation rate; capital expenditure 

rate; and manufacturer discount rate. 

Additionally, DOE calculated total 

industry capital and product conversion 

costs associated with meeting all 

analyzed efficiency levels. DOE first 

estimated the average industry capital 

and product conversion costs associated 

with redesigning a single fan model to 

meet a specific efficiency level. DOE 

estimated these costs for all technology 

options within each fan group. DOE 

multiplied the per model conversion 

costs by the number of models that 

would be required to be redesigned at 

each potential standard level to arrive at 

the total industry conversion costs. The 

number of models that would be 

redesigned was calculated using 

information from the AMCA sales 

database. 

In the December 2014 NODA, DOE 

assumed a redesign time of six months 

and an additional testing time of six 

months. Five representatives of the 

industry commented that six months 

was not a representative redesign time 

and made recommendations ranging 

from 12 to 24 months. (AHRI, No. 53 at 

p. 8; AMCA, No. 48 at p. 4; Carrier, No. 

43 at p. 2; Greenheck, No. 54 at p. 5; 

Morrison, No. 51 at p. 4) DOE revised 

its conversion cost estimates in this 

NODA to assume a redesign time of 12 

months and additional testing time of 6 

months. 

The GRIM uses these estimated values 

in conjunction with inputs from other 

analyses including the MPCs from the 

engineering analysis, the annual 

shipments by fan group from the NIA, 

and the manufacturer markups for the 

cost recovery markup scenario from the 

LCC analysis to model industry annual 

cash flows from the base year through 

the end of the analysis period. The 

primary quantitative output of this 

model is the industry net present value 

(INPV), which DOE calculates as the 

sum of industry annual cash flows, 

discounted to the present day using the 

industry specific weighted average cost 

of capital, or manufacturer discount 

rate. 

Standards can affect INPV in several 

ways including requiring upfront 

investments in manufacturing capital as 

well as research and development 

expenses, which increase the cost of 

production and potentially alter 

manufacturer markups. DOE expects 

that manufacturers may lose a portion of 

INPV due to standards. The potential 

loss in INPV due to standards is 

calculated as the difference between 

INPV in the base-case (absent new 

energy conservation standards) and the 

INPV in the standards case (with new 

energy conservation standards in effect). 

DOE examines a range of possible 

impacts on industry by modeling 

various pricing strategies commercial 

and industrial fan manufacturers may 

adopt following the adoption of new 

energy conservations standards for 

commercial and industrial fans. 

In addition to INPV, the MIA also 

calculates the manufacturer markups, 

which are applied to the MPCs derived 

in the engineering analysis, to arrive at 

the manufacturer selling prices (MSPs) 

in the base case. For efficiency levels 

above the baseline, which require 

manufacturers to redesign models that 

do not meet the potential standards, 

conversion cost recovery markups were 

incorporated into the MSP in addition 

to the manufacturer markup. These 

conversion markups are based on the 

total conversion costs from the MIA and 

calculated to allow manufacturers to 

recover their upfront conversion costs. 

They are calculated by amortizing the 

conversion investment over the units 

shipped throughout the analysis period 

that were redesigned to meet the 

efficiency level being analyzed. The 

base case and standards case MSPs were 

used as inputs for downstream analyses. 

D. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period 

Analyses 

The LCC and PBP analyses determine 

the economic impact of potential 

standards on individual consumers, in 

the compliance year. The LCC is the 

total cost of purchasing, installing and 

operating a commercial or industrial fan 

over the course of its lifetime. 

DOE determines the LCC by 

considering: (1) The total installed cost 

to the consumer (which consists of 

manufacturer selling price, distribution 

channel markups, and sales taxes); (2) 

the range of annual energy consumption 

of commercial and industrial fans as 

they are used in the field; (3) the 

operating cost of commercial and 

industrial fans (e.g., energy cost); (4) 

equipment lifetime; and (5) a discount 

rate that reflects the real consumer cost 

of capital and puts the LCC in presentvalue terms. The PBP represents the 

number of years needed to recover the 

increase in purchase price of higherefficiency commercial and industrial 

fans through savings in the operating 

cost. PBP is calculated by dividing the 

incremental increase in installed cost of 

the higher efficiency product, compared 

to the baseline product, by the annual 

savings in operating costs. 

For each considered standards case 

corresponding to each efficiency level, 

DOE measures the change in LCC 

relative to the base case. The base case 

is characterized by the distribution of 

equipment efficiencies in the absence of 

new standards (i.e., what consumers 

would have purchased in the 

compliance year in the absence of new 

standards). In the standards cases, 

equipment with efficiency below the 

standard levels ‘‘roll-up’’ to the standard 

level in the compliance year. 

To characterize annual fan operating 

hours, DOE established statistical 

distributions of consumers of each fan 

category across sectors (industry or 

commercial) and applications (clean air 

ventilation, exhaust, combustion, 

drying, process air, process heating/

cooling, and others), which in turn 

determined the fan’s operating hours. 

Recognizing that several inputs to the 

determination of consumer LCC and 

PBP are either variable or uncertain 

(e.g., annual energy consumption, 

lifetime, discount rate), DOE conducts 

the LCC and PBP analysis by modeling 

both the uncertainty and variability in 

the inputs using Monte Carlo 

simulations and probability 

distributions. 

In addition to characterizing several 

of the inputs to the analyses with 

probability distributions, DOE 

developed a sample of individual fan 

selections (i.e., a fan models and the 

operating flow and pressure values for 

which they were purchased) using fan 

sales data provided by AMCA 18. By 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

24846 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 84 / Friday, May 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

19The LCC and NIA spreadsheet provide results 

for a different compliance year (2019, 2020, and 

2021). 

20The ‘‘shipments’’ worksheet of the NIA 

spreadsheet presents the scope of the analysis and 

the total shipments value in units for the fans in 

scope. 

developing this sample, DOE was able 

to perform the LCC and PBP 

calculations for each fan selection to 

account for the variability in energy 

consumption associated with each fan 

selection. DOE notes that when 

developing the LCC sample, it did not 

include fan sales data for which no flow 

and pressure selection information was 

available. 

The primary outputs of the LCC and 

PBP analyses are: (1) Average LCC in 

each standards case; (2) average PBPs; 

(3) average LCC savings at each 

standards case relative to the base case; 

and (4) the percentage of consumers that 

experience a net benefit, have no 

impact, or have a net cost for each fan 

group and efficiency level. The average 

annual energy consumption derived in 

the LCC analysis is used as an input in 

the NIA. 

E. National Impact Analysis 

The NIA estimates the national energy 

savings (NES) and the net present value 

(NPV) of total consumer costs and 

savings expected to result from potential 

new standards at each EL. DOE 

calculated NES and NPV for each EL as 

the difference between a base case 

forecast (without new standards) and 

the standards case forecast (with 

standards). Cumulative energy savings 

are the sum of the annual NES 

determined for the lifetime of a 

commercial or industrial fan shipped 

during a 30 year analysis period 

assumed to start in 2019.19 Energy 

savings include the full-fuel cycle 

energy savings (i.e., the energy needed 

to extract, process, and deliver primary 

fuel sources such as coal and natural 

gas, and the conversion and distribution 

losses of generating electricity from 

those fuel sources). The NPV is the sum 

over time of the discounted net savings 

each year, which consists of the 

difference between total energy cost 

savings and increases in total equipment 

costs. NPV results are reported for 

discount rates of 3 and 7 percent. 

To calculate the NES and NPV, DOE 

projected future shipments 20 and 

efficiency distributions (for each EL) for 

each potential commercial and 

industrial fan category. DOE recognizes 

the uncertainty in projecting shipments 

and electricity prices; as a result the 

NIA includes several different scenarios 

for each. Other inputs to the NIA 

include the estimated commercial and 

industrial fan lifetime used in the LCC 

analysis, manufacturer selling prices 

from the MIA, average annual energy 

consumption, and efficiency 

distributions from the LCC. 

IV. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Public 

Comment 

DOE is interested in receiving 

comment on all aspects of this analysis. 

DOE is particularly interested in 

receiving comments and views of 

interested parties concerning the 

following issues: 

1. DOE requests comments on the 

equation expressing fan total efficiency 

as presented in this notice, as a function 

of flow and total pressure. 

2. DOE requests comment on the 

values of the flow constant (Q0) and 

total pressure constant (P0) used to 

calculate the minimum fan total 

efficiency at a given operating point. 

3. DOE requests comments on the 

default transmission efficiency equation 

used in the FEI calculation. 

4. DOE requests comments on the 

default motor losses assumptions used 

in the FEI calculation. 

5. DOE requests comments on how 

manufacturers determine/would 

determine whether to redesign or 

eliminate a fan model that is not 

compliant at an operating point or 

points at which it has been sold 

previously. 

6. DOE estimated the number of 

redesigns at each efficiency level based 

on the sales data provided by AMCA. 

DOE recognizes that the AMCA data 

does not include all commercial and 

industrial fan sales for the industry, and 

that existing fans can operate at more 

selection points than those at which 

they were sold as represented in the 

AMCA sales database. DOE requests 

comments on whether the resulting total 

conversion costs presented in the 

spreadsheets released with this NODA 

are representative of the industry at the 

efficiency levels analyzed. If not, how 

should the number of redesigns be 

adjusted to be representative of the 

industry? 

7. DOE requests additional 

information to allow quantifying 

installation, repair, and maintenance 

costs for industrial and commercial 

fans. 

8. DOE requests additional 

information to allow quantifying 

lifetimes for industrial and commercial 

fans. 

9. DOE requests additional 

information to allow quantifying annual 

operating hours for industrial and 

commercial fans. 

10. DOE seeks inputs and comments 

on the estimates of flow and total 

pressure operating points used in the 

energy use analysis. 

11. DOE requests comments on how 

to account for consumers purchasing 

fans without providing any selection 

data (i.e., design flow and pressure 

values) in the LCC calculations. 

12. DOE requests comment on 

determining the motor horsepower 

based on 120 percent of the fan shaft 

input power when performing the 

energy use calculation. 

13. DOE requests comments on the 

method used in the LCC to identify fans 

that could be considered substitutes. 

14. DOE seeks comments and inputs 

regarding the use of typical fan curves 

and efficiency curves in order to 

calculate fan shaft input power at 

different flow and pressure values based 

on a fan selection’s performance data at 

a single given design point. 

15. DOE seeks inputs to support the 

development of trends in fan efficiency 

over time in the base case and in the 

standards cases. 

The purpose of this NODA is to notify 

industry, manufacturers, consumer 

groups, efficiency advocates, 

government agencies, and other 

stakeholders of the publication of an 

analysis of potential energy 

conservation standards for commercial 

and industrial fans. Stakeholders should 

contact DOE for any additional 

information pertaining to the analyses 

performed for this NODA. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on April 21, 

2015. 

Kathleen B. Hogan, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy 

Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable 

Energy. 

[FR Doc. 2015–10036 Filed 4–30–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION 

13 CFR Part 127 

RIN 3245–AG72 

Women-Owned Small Business 

Federal Contract Program 

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business 

Administration. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Small Business 

Administration (SBA) proposes to 

amend its regulations to implement 

section 825 of the National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 

(2015 NDAA). Section 825 of the 2015 

NDAA included language granting 

contracting officers the authority to 

award sole source contracts to Womenmstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS