1 |EnergyEfficiencyandRenewableEnergyeere.energy.govEnergyConservationStandardsNoticeofProposedRulemaking(NOPR)forpackagedterminalairconditioners(PTACs)andpackagedterminalheatpumps(PTHPs)October29,2014RonMajetteDepartmentofEnergyBuildingTechnologiesProgramEERE‐2012‐BT‐STD‐0029PTACs@ee.doe.gov2Welcome•Introductions(aroundtheroom)•RoleoftheFacilitator•GroundRules-Speakoneatatime.-Sayyournamefortherecord– therewillbeacompletetranscriptofthismeeting.-Beconcise– sharethe‘air‐time.’-Keepthefocushere– cellphonesonsilent;limitsidebarconversations.-Webinarparticipantsturnphoneonmute;“raiseyourhand”toberecognizedtospeak.•HousekeepingItems•AgendaReview•OpeningRemarks3PublicMeetingAgenda9:00– 9:25amWelcome,Introductions,OpeningStatements,Overview,Statute,Context9:25– 9:45amMarketandTechnologyAssessment,ScreeningAnalysis9:45– 10:45amEngineeringAnalysis10:45– 11:00amBreak11:00– 11:15amEquipmentPriceDetermination11:15– 12:00pmTrialStandardLevels,EnergyUse,Life‐CycleCostAnalysis12:00– 1:00pmLunch1:00– 2:00pmShipments,NationalImpactAnalysis2:00– 2:30pmManufacturerImpactAnalysis2:30– 3:00pmEmissions/MonetizationofEmissions,UtilityImpact,EmploymentImpact,RegulatoryImpactAnalyses3:00– 3:15pmProposedStandard3:15– 3:30pmClosingRemarksandAdjourn4ListeningviatheWebcast• TheDepartmentisbroadcastingthismeetingliveovertheInternet.• DOEisprovidingthewebcasttoaccommodatestakeholdersthatareunabletoattendthepublicmeetinginperson.• Thewebbroadcastallowsstakeholderstolisteninandviewtheslides.• Allstakeholdersareencouragedtosubmitwrittencommentsafterthepublicmeeting.5PurposeofPublicMeeting1. PresenttheenergyconservationstandardsDOEisproposingforPTACsandPTHPsinthisnoticeofproposedrulemaking.2. Invitecommentontheanalysisfromparticipants.3. Discussthenextstepsfortherulemaking.4. Encourageparticipantstosubmitdata,information,summarystatements,andwrittencomments,includingadditionalissuesfordiscussion.6IssueforDiscussionIssueboxnumberingcorrespondstothelistofissuespublishedattheendoftheNoticeofPublicRulemaking(NOPR)document,availableatregulations.gov,underdocketnumberEERE‐2012‐BT‐STD‐0029,at:http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EERE‐2012‐BT‐STD‐0029‐0017.ThedeadlineforsubmittingcommentsisNovember17,2014.IssueBox:DOEwelcomescomments,data,andinformationconcerningstandardsbeingconsideredforPTACsandPTHPs.IssuesthatcorrespondtothoseraisedinDOE’spublishedmaterialwillbenumberedinaccordancewiththatmaterial.Whetherinvitedbyanissueboxornot,commentsarewelcomeonanypartofDOE’sanalysis.7HowtoSubmitWrittenComments•Inallcorrespondence,pleaserefertothePTAC‐PTHPrulemakingby:– EnergyConservationStandardsforPackagedTerminalAirConditionersandPackagedTerminalHeatPumps;– DocketNumberEERE‐2012‐BT‐STD‐0029;and– RegulatoryIdentificationNumber(RIN)1904‐AC82.•Email:pkgTerminalAC‐HP2012STD0029@ee.doe.govPostal:Courier:Ms.BrendaEdwardsU.S.DepartmentofEnergyBuildingTechnologiesProgram,MailstopEE‐5B1000IndependenceAvenue,SWWashington,DC20585‐0121Ms.BrendaEdwardsU.S.DepartmentofEnergyBuildingTechnologiesProgram,Suite600950L’EnfantPlaza,SWWashington,DC20024Tel:202‐586‐2945CommentPeriodcloses:November17,2014,11:59PMEDT8OpeningRemarksMeetingparticipantsareinvitedtoprovideopeningremarksorstatementsatthistime.9PresentationOverviewEnergy Use; Life-Cycle Cost AnalysisShipments; Trial Standard Levels; National Impact Analysis45Market & Technology; Screening Analysis2Engineering Analysis; Markups Analysis31Overview; Scope of CoverageManufacturer Impact Analysis6Emissions, Utility, Employment, and Regulatory ImpactsProposed Standard7810RegulatoryHistory•TheEnergyPolicyActof1992(EPACT1992)amendedtheEnergyPolicyandConservationActof1975(EPCA)to:−Includepackagedterminalairconditioners(PTACs)andpackagedterminalheatpumps(PTHPs)asacoveredequipmenttype;and−EstablishthefirstenergyconservationstandardsforPTACsandPTHPs.•OnOctober7,2008,DOEpublishedafinalruleamendingexistingstandardsforPTACsandPTHPs(hereafter“2008FinalRule”).•OnFebruary22,2013,DOEinitiatedtherulemakingcyclebypublishingaframeworkdocument andholdingapublicmeetingonMarch18,2013.•OnOctober9,2013,ASHRAEStandard90.1‐2013amendedStandard90.1requirementsforPTACsandtriggeredDOEreview.•OnMarch13,2014,DOEpublishedanoticeofproposedrulemaking(NOPR)regardingtestproceduresforPTACsandPTHPs•OnApril11,2014,DOEpublishedanoticeofdataavailability(NODA)inresponsetotheamendedStandard90.1requirementsforPTACs.11CurrentStandards– PTACsandPTHPsThe2008FinalRuleprescribedthecurrentenergyconservationstandardsforPTACsandPTHPsmanufacturedonorafterSeptember30,2012(forstandardsize)orSeptember20,2010(fornon‐standardsize).EquipmentTypeSub‐categoryCoolingCapacity(Btu/h)EnergyConservation Standard:EER(Btu/Wh),COP(unitless)PTACStandardSize†<7,000 EER=11.7≥7,000and≤15,000 EER=13.8– 0.300*Cap‡>15,000 EER=9.3Non‐StandardSize†<7,000 EER=9.4≥7,000and≤15,000 EER=10.9– 0.213*Cap‡>15,000 EER=7.7PTHPStandardSize†<7,000 EER=11.9, COP=3.3≥7,000and≤15,000EER=14.0– 0.300*Cap‡COP=3.7– 0.052*Cap‡>15,000 EER=9.5,COP=2.9Non‐StandardSize†<7,000 EER=9.3,COP=2.7≥7,000and≤15,000EER=10.8– 0.213*Cap‡COP=2.9– 0.026*Cap‡>15,000 EER=7.6,COP=2.5† Standard size refers to equipment withwall sleeve dimensions having an external wallopening greater than or equal to 16” high or greater than or equal to 42” wide.Non-standard size refers to equipment with existing wall sleeve dimensions having anexternal wall opening greater less than 16” high or less than 42” wide.‡ “Cap” means cooling capacity in thousand Btu/h at 95°F outdoor dry-bulb temperature.12201320162014 201520172018PTACandPTHPEnergyConservationStandardsRulemakingScheduleMilestone DateNoticeofPublicMeetingandAvailabilityofFrameworkDocument 22February2013NoticeofProposedRulemaking 16September2014FinalRule(projected)September2015FinalRule(statutorydeadline,perASHRAEtriggerrequirements)9April2016ComplianceDate(projected)January2019201913EPCAFactors42U.S.C.6295(o)(2)(B)(i)directsDOEtoconsidersevenfactorswhensettingenergyconservationstandards.EPCAFactors DOEAnalysis1.EconomicimpactoncustomersandmanufacturersLife‐CycleCostAnalysisManufacturerImpactAnalysis2.LifetimeoperatingcostsavingscomparedtoincreasedcostfortheequipmentLife‐CycleCostAnalysis3.Totalprojectedenergysavings NationalImpactAnalysis4.ImpactonutilityorperformanceEngineeringAnalysisScreeningAnalysis5.Impactofanylesseningofcompetition ManufacturerImpactAnalysis6.Needfornationalenergyconservation NationalImpactAnalysis7.OtherfactorstheSecretaryconsidersrelevantEmissionsAnalysisUtilityImpactAnalysisEmploymentImpactAnalysis14ScopeofCoverage•DOEisproposingstandardsforPTACsandPTHPs,definedbyEPCASection340asfollows:A“packagedterminalairconditioner”is“awallsleeveandaseparateunencasedcombinationofheatingandcoolingassembliesspecifiedbythebuilderandintendedformountingthroughthewall.Itincludesaprimesourceofrefrigeration,separableoutdoorlouvers,forcedventilation,andheatingavailabilitybybuilder'schoiceofhotwater,steam,orelectricity.”(42U.S.C.6311(10)(A))A“packagedterminalheatpump”is“apackagedterminalairconditionerthatutilizesreversecyclerefrigerationasitsprimeheatsourceandshouldhavesupplementaryheatsourceavailabletobuilderswiththechoiceofhotwater,steam,orelectricresistantheat.”(42U.S.C.6311(10)(B))15NOPRStageFrameworkDocumentNOPRFinalRuleMarket&TechnologyScreeningAnalysisEngineeringAnalysisEnergyUseCharacterizationShipmentsAnalysisNationalImpactAnalysisLife‐CycleCostandPaybackPeriodAnalysisMarkupsAnalysisManufacturerImpactAnalysisEmissionsAnalysisEmploymentImpactAnalysisUtilityImpactAnalysisRegulatoryImpactAnalysis16PresentationOverviewEnergy Use; Life-Cycle Cost AnalysisShipments; Trial Standard Levels; National Impact Analysis45Market & Technology; Screening Analysis2Engineering Analysis; Markups Analysis31Overview; Scope of CoverageManufacturer Impact Analysis6Emissions, Utility, Employment, and Regulatory ImpactsProposed Standard7817PurposeofMTAandScreeningAnalysis•MarketandTechnologyAssessment(MTA)DetermineequipmentclassesProvideinformationonthemarket,manufacturers,andshipmenttrendsIdentifytechnologyoptionstoimproveefficiency•ScreeningAnalysisScreenouttechnologyoptionsthatDOEwillnotconsiderintheengineeringanalysisbasedon:1. Technologicalfeasibility:incorporationincommerciallyavailableequipmentorinworkingprototypes2. Practicabilitytomanufacture,install,andservice:massproductionandreliableinstallationandservicingcouldbeachievedonthescalenecessarytoservetherelevantmarketatthetimethestandardrequirescompliance3. Adverseimpactsonequipmentutilityoravailability: significantadverseimpactontheutilityoftheequipmenttosignificantsubgroupsofcustomers,orcausingtheunavailabilityofanycoveredequipmenttypewithperformancecharacteristics,features,sizes,capacities,andvolumesthataresubstantiallythesameasequipmentgenerallyavailableintheUnitedStatesatthetime.4. Adverseimpactsonhealthorsafety:significantadverseimpactsonhealthorsafety18EquipmentClasses•DOEdividescoveredequipmentintoclassesby:–thetypeofenergyused;–thecapacityoftheequipment;or–otherperformance‐relatedfeaturesthatjustifydifferentstandardlevels,suchasfeaturesaffectingcustomerutility.•DOEestablishesseparateenergyconservationstandardsforeachequipmentclass.•DOEisproposingtomaintaintheexistingequipmentclassdivisionsforPTACsandPTHPs.•DOEisnotproposingnewenergyconservationstandardsfornon‐standardsizePTACsandPTHPs.–“Non‐standardsize”referstoequipmentwithexistingwallsleevedimensionshaving anexternalwallopeninglessthan16”highorlessthan42”wide.–Non‐standardsizeequipmentholdsasmallanddecliningportionofthemarket.–Amendmentstoenergyconservationstandardsfornon‐standardsizeequipmentwouldresultinaverysmallamountofenergysavings.19EquipmentClasses•DOEisproposingtomaintainthefollowingequipmentclassdivisions:EquipmentTypeSub‐CategoryCoolingCapacity(Btu/h)PTACStandardSize<7,000≥7,000and≤15,000>15,000Non‐StandardSize<7,000≥7,000and≤15,000>15,000PTHPStandardSize<7,000≥7,000and≤15,000>15,000Non‐StandardSize<7,000≥7,000and≤15,000>15,000TypeofEquipment-PTACequipmentincludescoolingandheatfromhotwater,steam,orelectricity.-PTHPequipmentutilizesreversecyclerefrigerationasitsprimeheatsource.PhysicalDimensions‐Standard‐sizeunitsaresoldfornewconstructionandreplacementofexistingstandard‐sizeequipment.‐Non‐standardsizeunitsaretypicallymanufacturedforreplacementofunitsinolderbuildings,wherealterationofnon‐standardsizewallopeningsmaybecostprohibitive.CoolingCapacity‐ThesinglestandardsizeassociatedwithPTACsandPTHPsmakesitchallengingtoachievehigherefficiencylevelsinhigher‐capacityequipment.‐Smallercapacityunitshavemoreroomfordesignoptions(i.e.,increasedheatexchangersize)thatenablegreaterenergyefficiency.20•DOEidentifiedtechnologyoptionsthatcanimproveenergyefficiencyforPTACsandPTHPs.•DOEthenreviewedtheidentifiedtechnologyoptionsandscreenedthemusingthefollowingcriteria:–Technologicalfeasibility;–Practicabilitytomanufacture,install,andservice;–Adverseimpactsonequipmentutilityoravailabilitytocustomers;and–Adverseimpactsonhealthorsafety.•DOEtheneliminatedtechnologyoptionswhere:–Availabledatasuggestthattheefficiencybenefitsofthetechnologyarenegligible;–Dataarenotavailabletoevaluatetheenergyefficiencycharacteristicsofthetechnology;or–ThetestprocedureandEERorCOPmetricwouldnotmeasuretheenergyimpactofthetechnology.TechnologyOptionsandScreeningAnalysis21TechnologyOptions/ScreeningAnalysisPTAC andPTHP TechnologyOptionsHigherEfficiencyCompressors IncreasedHeatExchangerAreaHigherEfficiencyFanMotors ImprovedAirFlowandFanDesignScrollCompressorsHydrophobicMaterialTreatmentofHeatExchangersVariable‐speedCompressors Re‐circuitingHeatExchangerCoilsComplexControlBoards HeatPipesClutchedFanMotors CorrosionProtectionMicrochannelHeatExchangers ThermostaticExpansionValveRifledInteriorHeatExchangerTubeWalls AlternateRefrigerants(suchasHCFC‐32)•DOEidentifiedthetechnologyoptionsbelowthatcanimprovePTACandPTHPefficiency.•DOEscreenedinfouroftheseoptionsforconsiderationintheengineeringanalysis.Thoseinreditalics eitherdonotmeetthescreeningcriteriaordonotofferefficiencygainsoverbaselineunitsasmeasuredbytestprocedure.22IssuesforCommentIssue1:AlternateRefrigerantsDOEdidnotconsideralternaterefrigerantsintheanalysisbecauseDOEisnotawareofanySNAP‐approvedrefrigerantsthatareknowntohavebetterefficiencythanR‐410AforPTACandPTHPequipment.DOErequestsfeedbackontheefficacyofalternativerefrigerantsinPTACandPTHPequipment.23PresentationOverviewEnergy Use; Life-Cycle Cost AnalysisShipments; Trial Standard Levels; National Impact Analysis45Market & Technology; Screening Analysis2Engineering Analysis; Markups Analysis31Overview; Scope of CoverageManufacturer Impact Analysis6Emissions, Utility, Employment, and Regulatory ImpactsProposed Standard7824EngineeringAnalysisMethodologySelectcertainrepresentativeequipmentclassesandcapacitiestobeanalyzedintheengineeringanalysis.Developefficiencylevels(ELs)thatspantherangeofefficienciesavailablefromthebaselinetothemaximumtechnologicallyfeasible.Chooseunitsthatthatcoverthefullrangeofefficiencylevelsandrepresenttypicaldesignapproaches.Testandteardownthechosenunitstodeterminetherelationshipbetweenmanufacturerproductioncost(MPC)andenergyefficiency.SelectRepresentativeEquipmentClassesDevelopEfficiencyLevelsChooseRepresentativeUnitsforAnalysisTestandTeardowntoDetermineCost‐EfficiencyRelationships25SelectRepresentativeEquipmentClasses•TherearelargevariationsinequipmentcoolingcapacityandperformanceinthestandardsizePTACandPTHPequipmentclasses•DOEselectedrepresentativecoolingcapacitiesandanalyzedspecificequipmenttoprovideinformationrepresentativeoftheentireequipmentclass.•DOEidentifiedtworepresentativecoolingcapacities:–The9,000Btu/hcapacityhadthehighestnumberofstandard‐sizePTACandPTHPmodelslistedinthe2013AHRIDirectory.–The15,000Btu/hcapacityrepresentsthegreatesttechnicalhurdlesforefficiencyimprovement,consideringthesizeconstraintsofstandard‐sizePTACsandPTHPs.DevelopEfficiencyLevelsChooseRepresentativeUnitsforAnalysisTestandTeardowntoDetermineCost‐EfficiencyRelationshipsSelectRepresentativeEquipmentClasses26EfficiencyLevels•Thebaselineefficiencylevelrepresentsmodelsattheminimumefficiencylevelallowedbythestandard.–ANSI/ASHRAE/IESStandard90.1‐2013wasissuedinthecourseofthisrulemakinganditraisedtheStandard90.1minimumequipmentefficiencyforPTACsto1.8%abovetheFederalenergyconservation.–DOEisobligatedeithertoadoptthosestandardsdevelopedbyASHRAEortoadoptlevelsmorestringentthantheASHRAElevels.–DOEidentifiedtheANSI/ASHRAE/IESStandard90.1‐2013asthebaselineefficiencylevel.•The“maxtech”efficiencylevelrepresentsthemostefficientmodel(s)observedinthemarket.–DOEannouncedintheframeworkdocumentforthisrulemakingthatitplannedtoconsiderthemaxtechlevelequalto20%abovethe2012PTACstandard.–Afterextensiveequipmenttesting,DOEhasrevisedthemaxtechleveltobe18%abovethe2012PTACstandard.DevelopEfficiencyLevelsChooseRepresentativeUnitsforAnalysisTestandTeardowntoDetermineCost‐EfficiencyRelationshipsSelectRepresentativeEquipmentClasses27EfficiencyLevels•DOEselectedefficiencylevelsatincrementsbetweenthecurrentFederalstandardandthemaxtechlevel.•EfficiencylevelsforstandardsizePTACsandPTHPSare1.8%,4%,8%,12%,16%,and18%moreefficientthanthecurrentFederalPTACstandardsthatbecameeffectiveonSeptember30,2012.•Thetableonthefollowingslidepresentstheefficiencylevelsandtheircorrespondingvaluesfortherepresentativecoolingcapacities.DevelopEfficiencyLevelsChooseRepresentativeUnitsforAnalysisTestandTeardowntoDetermineCost‐EfficiencyRelationshipsSelectRepresentativeEquipmentClasses28EfficiencyLevelsEquip‐mentTypeCoolingCapacityEfficiencyLevels(Percentagesrelativeto2012PTACECS)CurrentFederalPTAC ECS*EL1,Baseline,1.8%**EL2,4%EL3,8%EL4,12%EL5,16%EL6,18%(MaxTech)PTACAll,EER‡13.8–(0.300*Cap)14.0–(0.300*Cap)14.4–(0.312*Cap)14.9–(0.324*Cap)15.5–(0.336*Cap)16.0–(0.348*Cap)16.3–(0.354*Cap)9,000Btu/h11.1EER 11.3EER 11.5EER 12.0EER 12.4EER 12.9EER 13.1EER15,000Btu/h9.3EER 9.5EER 9.7EER 10.0EER 10.4EER 10.8EER 11.0EERCoolingCapacityN/ABaseline,1.8%**EL1,4%EL2,8%EL3,12%EL4,16%EL5,18%(MaxTech)PTHPAll,EER‡N/A14.0–(0.300*Cap)14.4–(0.312*Cap)14.9–(0.324*Cap)15.5–(0.336*Cap)16.0–(0.348*Cap)16.3–(0.354*Cap)All,COP‡N/A3.7–(0.052*Cap)3.8–(0.058*Cap)4.0–(0.064*Cap)4.1–(0.068*Cap)4.2–(0.070*Cap)4.3–(0.073*Cap)9,000Btu/hN/A11.3EER3.2COP11.5EER3.3COP12.0EER3.4COP12.4EER3.5COP12.9EER3.6COP13.1EER3.6COP15,000Btu/hN/A9.5EER2.9COP9.7EER2.9COP10.0EER3.0COP10.4EER3.1COP10.8EER3.2COP11.0EER3.2COP*ThislevelrepresentsthecurrentFederalminimumforPTACequipment.** ThislevelrepresentsthecurrentFederalminimumforPTHPequipmentandtheANSI/ASHRAE/IESStandard90.1‐2013minimumforbothPTACandPTHPequipment.‡“Cap”meanscoolingcapacityinthousandBtu/hat95°Foutdoordry‐bulbtemperature.29RepresentativeUnitsforAnalysis•DOEselectedseveralstandard‐sizePTACandPTHPunitstorepresentthemarket,andusedtheseforteardownintheengineeringanalysis.Theselectedequipmentexhibitedthefollowingfivecharacteristics:1.Theselectedequipment,takentogether,coverthefullrangeofefficiencylevelsconsideredintheanalysis.2.Theselectedequipmenthascoolingcapacitycorrespondingtooneoftheselectedrepresentativecoolingcapacities(9,000Btu/hor15,000Btu/h).3.Whenpossible,DOEselectedonelower‐efficiencyunitandonehigher‐efficiencyunitfromthesamemanufacturer.Whenpossible,thoseunitssharedsimilarcharacteristics(e.g.,bothfromthesameequipmentline).4.TheequipmenttendedtobefrommanufacturerswithrelativelylargesharesofthePTACandPTHPmarkets,andthuswasrepresentativeoftypicaldesignapproaches.5.Theselectedequipmentincludedbaseunitswithfew,ifany,equipmentfeaturesoroptionsthataddcostwithoutaffectingequipmentefficiency.DevelopEfficiencyLevelsChooseRepresentativeUnitsforAnalysisTestandTeardowntoDetermineCost‐EfficiencyRelationshipsSelectRepresentativeEquipmentClasses30RepresentativeUnitsforAnalysisDevelopEfficiencyLevelsChooseRepresentativeUnitsforAnalysisTestandTeardowntoDetermineCost‐EfficiencyRelationshipsSelectRepresentativeEquipmentClasses•ThechartbelowillustratestheefficiencylevelsandtheratedcapacityandefficiencyoftwentyPTACandPTHPunitsselectedtorepresentthemarket.31Cost‐EfficiencyRelationships•DOEcalculatedmanufacturerproductioncosts(MPCs)bydisassemblingPTACsandPTHPsfrommultiplemanufacturersandcreatingbillsofmaterials(BOMs).•BOMsdescribetheequipmentcomponentsindetailandincludeestimatesofmaterials,labor,capitalequipment,andoverheadcosts.•Comparingotherwise‐identicalPTACandPTHPmodels(i.e.,modelswithsimilarcasing,controls,andfans,butwherethePTHPhasreversecyclecapability),DOEestimatesthatthetypicalPTHPunithasanadditional$37‐$38ofproductioncostscomparedwithanotherwise‐identicalPTACunit.ThisadditionalcostforPTHPsdoesnotvarywithefficiencylevel.•Chapter5oftheTSDprovidesadditionaldetailsonDOE’steardownandcostmodelmethodology.DevelopEfficiencyLevelsChooseRepresentativeUnitsforAnalysisTestandTeardowntoDetermineCost‐EfficiencyRelationshipsSelectRepresentativeEquipmentClasses32Cost‐EfficiencyRelationships•DOEcreatedcost‐efficiencycurvesforeachrepresentativecoolingcapacityandequipmenttype.•Intheshipmentsanalysis,DOEcombinedrepresentativecurvesbasedonestimatedmarketsharetodevelopaweighted‐averagecost‐efficiencycurveforeachequipmentclass.DevelopEfficiencyLevelsChooseRepresentativeUnitsforAnalysisTestandTeardowntoDetermineCost‐EfficiencyRelationshipsWeightedAverage

$MPCEfficiencyLevelRepresentativeCapacityCurves

$MPCEfficiencyLevel15,000 Btu/h PTAC9,000 Btu/h PTAC15,000 Btu/h PTHP9,000 Btu/h PTHPChapter9oftheTSDcontainsmoredetailsexplaininghowDOEextrapolatestheproposedamendedenergyconservationstandardsfortherepresentativecoolingcapacitiestotheentirerangeofcoolingcapacitiesSelectRepresentativeEquipmentClasses33Cost‐EfficiencyRelationships:9,000Btu/hCapacity•Cost‐efficiencyresultsfor9,000Btu/hPTACsandPTHPs:DevelopEfficiencyLevelsChooseRepresentativeUnitsforAnalysisTestandTeardowntoDetermineCost‐EfficiencyRelationshipsEfficiencyLevelPercentabove2012PTACECSIncre‐mentalCost(2013$)Cost‐EfficiencyCurvePTAC PTHPEL1Base‐line1.8%‐‐EL2 EL1 4% $3.88EL3 EL2 8% $7.93EL4 EL3 12% $16.57EL5 EL4 16% $25.91EL6 EL5 18% $35.94$0$10$20$30$4011.3 11.5 12.012.4 12.9 13.1

Incremental Cost (2013$)EnergyEfficiencyRatio(EER)SelectRepresentativeEquipmentClasses34Cost‐EfficiencyRelationships:15,000Btu/hCapacity•Cost‐efficiencyresultsfor15,000Btu/hPTACsandPTHPs:DevelopEfficiencyLevelsChooseRepresentativeUnitsforAnalysisTestandTeardowntoDetermineCost‐EfficiencyRelationshipsEfficiencyLevelPercentabove2012PTACECSIncre‐mentalCost(2013$)Cost‐EfficiencyCurvePTAC PTHPEL1Base‐line1.8%‐EL2 EL1 4% $3.73EL3 EL2 8% $8.29EL4 EL3 12% $19.96EL5 EL4 16% $35.00EL6 EL5 18% $53.42$0$10$20$30$40$50$609.5 9.7 10.0 10.4 10.8 11.0

Incremental Cost (2013$)EnergyEfficiencyRatio(EER)SelectRepresentativeEquipmentClasses35Cost‐EfficiencyRelationships:Results•Cost‐efficiencycurvesarenonlinear.Asefficiencyincreases,additionalefficiencyincreasebecomesmoredifficultandmorecostlyformanufacturers.•Theincreaseincapacitybetween9,000Btu/hand15,000Btu/hcausesanincreaseinthebaselineunitMPC.•Afasterincreaseinthecurve(i.e.,asteeperslope)isevidentforthe15,000Btu/hcoolingcapacitycomparedtothe9,000Btu/hcoolingcapacity.DevelopEfficiencyLevelsChooseRepresentativeUnitsforAnalysisTestandTeardowntoDetermineCost‐EfficiencyRelationshipsSelectRepresentativeEquipmentClasses36MarkupsAnalysis•Purpose–CharacterizePTAC&PTHPdistributionchannelsandmarketsegments.–Estimatecustomerpricesbasedonmanufacturer’ssellingprice(MSP).•Methodology–DOEderivedState‐levelmarkupsbasedonconfidentialinterviews,economicreportsfromindustrytradegroups,andU.S.censusdata.–Markupswerederivedforeachdistributionchannel.37MarkupsAnalysis:DistributionChannels•ThePTACandPTHPmarkethasfourprimarydistributionchannels.ManufacturerMechanical ContractorGeneralContractorCustomer57%WholesalerCustomerCustomerCustomer21%17%5% 

# National Accounts38MarkupsAnalysis:DataSources•Manufacturermarkupsarebasedonmarkupsdevelopedforthe2008FinalRuleandconfidentialmanufacturerinterviews.•Wholesalermarkupsarebasedonthe“2010ProfitReport” fromHeating,Air‐Conditioning&RefrigerationDistributorsInternational.•Mechanicalcontractormarkupsarebasedonthe“2005FinancialAnalysisoftheHVACRContractingIndustry” fromtheAirConditioningContractorsofAmerica.•Generalcontractormarkupsarebasedonthe2007U.S.EconomicCensus.•SalestaxesbystatearebasedoninformationfromtheSalesTaxClearinghouse.•DOEderivednationalaccountsmarkupsbyweightingtheoverallmarkupsestimatedforotherdistributionchannelsandthenreducingthattotalby50percenttocapturethepricesavingsrealizedfromequipmentpurchasedthroughnationalaccounts.39MarkupTypes•BaselineMarkups:–RelatetheMSPofbaselineequipmenttothecustomerpurchaseprice.–Indicateacustomerpricethatcoverstheexpensesplusprofitofeachsegmentinthedistributionchannel.•IncrementalMarkups:–RelatetheincreaseinMSPofmoreefficientequipmenttotheincreaseincustomerpurchaseprice.–CoveronlyexpensesthatvarywithMSP,inthiscase,expensesthatincreaseduetoanefficiencystandard.–DOEbelievesthatlaborandoccupancycostsareinvariantwithrespecttoMSP,whileotheroperatingcostsandprofitarevariantwithrespecttoMSP.•DOEcalculatedbaselineandincrementalmarkupsforeachdistributionchannelandfornewconstructionapplications(14%ofsales)andreplacementapplications(86%ofsales).•DOEappliedbaselinemarkupstotheMSPofthebaselinelevel,andtheincrementalmarkupstotheincrementaldifferenceinMSPforefficientequipmentabovethebaseline.40OverallMarkups:BaselineDistributionChannelWholesaler‐EndUserWholesaler‐MechanicalContractor‐GeneralContractor‐EndUserNationalAccount(Mfg Direct)Wholesaler‐EndUserWholesaler‐MechanicalContractor‐EndUserWholesaler‐MechanicalContractor‐GeneralContractor‐EndUserWeightedOverallMarkupNEWCONSTRUCTION REPLACEMENT‐Manufacturer1.27 1.27‐1.27 1.27 1.27‐Wholesaler 1.36 1.36‐1.36 1.36 1.36MechanicalContractor‐1.43‐ ‐1.52 1.52‐GeneralContractor‐1.34‐ ‐‐1.34‐NationalAccounts‐ ‐1.49‐ ‐‐‐SalesTax‐ ‐‐1.071.071.07‐MarkupbyDistributionChannel1.73 3.31 1.49 1.85 2.81 3.763.1041OverallMarkups:IncrementalDistributionChannelWholesaler‐EndUserWholesaler‐MechanicalContractor‐GeneralContractor‐EndUserNationalAccount(Mfg Direct)Wholesaler‐EndUserWholesaler‐MechanicalContractor‐EndUserWholesaler‐MechanicalContractor‐GeneralContractor‐EndUserWeightedOverallMarkupNEWCONSTRUCTION REPLACEMENT‐Manufacturer1.27 1.27‐1.27 1.27 1.27‐Wholesaler 1.10 1.10‐1.10 1.10 1.10‐MechanicalContractor‐1.15‐ ‐1.22 1.22‐GeneralContractor‐1.22‐ ‐‐1.22‐NationalAccounts‐ ‐1.16‐ ‐‐‐SalesTax‐‐ ‐1.071.071.07‐MarkupbyDistributionChannel1.40 1.96 1.16 1.40 1.82 2.221.9342IssuesforComment:MarkupsAnalysisIssue2:DistributionChannelsToestimatethenumberandtypeofdistributionchannelsandthedistributionoftheshipmentsthroughthedistributionchannels,DOEleveragedtheinformationfromthe2008PTACandPTHPfinalrule.(73FR58772).DOErequestscommentregardingtheselectedchannelsanddistributionofshipmentsthroughthechannels.43PresentationOverviewEnergy Use; Life-Cycle Cost AnalysisShipments; Trial Standard Levels; National Impact Analysis45Market & Technology; Screening Analysis2Engineering Analysis; Markups Analysis31Overview; Scope of CoverageManufacturer Impact Analysis6Emissions, Utility, Employment, and Regulatory ImpactsProposed Standard7844EnergyUseAnalysis•Purpose–Determineunit‐averageannualenergyuse(UEC)ofPTACsandPTHPsattheconsideredefficiencylevelstofindannualenergycostsandsavings.–AnnualenergycostsareinputstoLife‐CycleCostandPaybackPeriodAnalysis.•Methodology–Post‐processedoutputsfromprioranalysis:•TotalUECsfor50StatesandD.C.,6xefficiencylevels,9,000Btu/hand12,000Btu/hcoolingcapacities,andPTACandPTHP•PriorsimulationsbasedonCBECS2003(mostrecentavailable)•239climatelocations(basedonTMY2data),aggregatedtoState‐level–Accountingforthesechangessincethe2008rulemaking:•Weatherimpacts•Equipmentefficiencyandcoolingcapacitydifferences•Populationchanges45•2008rulemakinganalysisprovidedTotalUECforPTACsandforPTHPs.•ForPTHPs,DOEanalyzedHeatingUECandCoolingUECseparately.–HeatingUEC:Heatingandfanenergyexpendedduringoperationinheatingmode.–CoolingUEC:Coolingandfanenergyexpendedduringoperationincoolingmode.•CoolingUEC=PTACTotalUEC,assumingsimilarfunctionality(otherthanreversingvalve)betweenPTACsandPTHPs,giventhesameefficiencylevelandcoolingcapacity.EnergyUseAnalysis:ApproachIssue3:CoolingEnergyUseDOErequestscommentontheenergyaPTHPconsumeswhenoperatinginthecoolingmodeandtheenergyaPTACconsumesduringitsoperation.46Weatherimpacts•ComparisonofnewerTMY3weatherdatawithTMY2weatherdatarevealedmoretimeathighertemperatures.•Determinedmonthlycoolingdegreedays(CDD)increasedby5%andmonthlyheatingdegreedays(HDD)decreasedby2%.•ScaledcoolingUECupby5%andscaledheatingUECdownby2%.•ApplyweatherimpactsforeachStateUEC.EnergyUseAnalysis:Approach47ConversionofUECs•Forthe9,000Btu/hrepresentativecoolingcapacity:–Efficiencylevels:DOElinearlyextrapolatedacrossthe6efficiencylevelsconsideredinthepreviousrulemakingtofindUECsattheconsideredefficiencylevelsoftherepresentativecoolingcapacity.•Forthe15,000Btu/hrepresentativecoolingcapacity(figure):–EfficiencylevelsandCoolingcapacity:DOElinearlyextrapolatedacrossthe9,000Btu/hand12,000Btu/hcoolingcapacitiesconsideredinthepreviousrulemakingtofindUECsattheconsideredefficiencylevelsandrepresentativecoolingcapacity.EnergyUseAnalysis:Approach9,000Btu/hUEC=‐63.367xEER+1781.1R2=0.998312,000Btu/hUEC=‐73.838xEER+2126.2R2=0.99749001000110012001300140015001600170018009.0 9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0 12.5 13.0

UEC [kWh]EERUECConversionfor15,000Btu/hCoolingCapacityPTACsEER‐ScaledUECfor9,000Btu/hPreviousUECfor9,000Btu/hEER‐ScaledUECfor12,000Btu/hPreviousUECfor12,000Btu/hEER‐andCapacity‐ScaledUECfor15,000Btu/h48Populationchange•UECsbyStateareusedintheLCCandPBPanalysis.•NationalUECsareusedintheNIA.–Statepopulationsweredeterminedfromthe2010Census.–State‐levelUECswasaveraged,weightedbyStatepopulation.EnergyUseAnalysis:ApproachState StateNamePTACStandardSize‐9,000Btu/h ...PopulationWeightEL0 EL1 ... ...1 Alabama 1344 1326 ... ... 1.53%2 Alaska 511 510 ... ... 0.23%...TotalUS USAverage 1078 1066 ......100%49 PTAC National UECsRepresentativeCoolingCapacity9,000Btu/h 15,000Btu/hEfficiencyLevel EER UEC(kWh) EER UEC(kWh)0*11.1 1078 9.3 16881†11.3 1066 9.5 1671211.5 1050 9.7 1657312.0 1022 10.0 1625412.4 994 10.4 1594512.9 966 10.8 1563613.1 952 11.0 1547EnergyUseAnalysis:Results

PTHP National UECsRepresentativeCooling Capacity9,000Btu/h 15,000Btu/hEfficiencyLevel EER|COP UEC(kWh) EER|COP UEC(kWh)0* 11.3|3.2 1985 9.5|2.9 28471 11.5|3.3 1956 9.7|2.9 28292 12.0|3.4 1918 10.0|3.0 27783 12.4|3.5 1879 10.4|3.1 27274 12.9|3.6 1841 10.8|3.2 26765 13.1|3.6 1822 11.0|3.2 2651* Represents Federal minimum efficiency level for PTACs. Represents Federal minimum and ASHRAEStandard 90.1-2013 baseline for PTHPs.†Represents ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 baseline for PTACs.50•Purpose–Provideaneconomicevaluationfromtheend‐user’sperspective.–LifeCycleCost(LCC)isthetotalcustomercostoverthelifeoftheequipment.–SimplePaybackPeriod(PBP)isthetimerequiredtorecovertheincreasedpurchasepriceofmoreenergy‐efficientequipmentthroughreducedfirst‐yearoperatingcosts.•Methodology–Determineenergyandeconomicinputs.•Determinetotalinstalledcostforeachefficiencylevel.•UseannualunitaverageenergyusedevelopedintheenergyuseanalysistorepresenttheconsumptionofdifferentPTACandPTHPend‐usersacrosstheUnitedStates.•Determineoperatingcostsforthefirstyearandlifetimeofequipmentforeachefficiencylevel.–UtilizeaMonteCarlosimulation,consistingof10,000iterationsthatselectfrominputsthatarecharacterizedbyprobabilitydistributions,tocalculateLCCandPBPresultsandvariation.•CalculatessimplePBPbydividingaverageincreaseininstalledcostbytheaveragedecreaseinfirst‐yearoperatingcost.•CalculatesLCCbyaddinginstalledcostandlifetimeoperatingcosts.•CalculatesLCCsavingsbysubtractingLCCofeachefficiencylevelfromLCCoftheefficiencylevelofequipmentthatacustomerwouldpurchaseintheabsenceofanewstandard.Life‐CycleCostandPaybackPeriodAnalysis51•TotalInstalledCostisthesumofequipmentpurchasepriceandinstallationcost.•EquipmentpurchasepriceisprovidedbytheEngineeringAnalysisandMarkupsAnalysis.•Aconstantpriceassumptionwasusedtoderivetheequipmentpriceinthecomplianceyear(2019).–ThepricetrendisbasedonhistoricalProducerPriceIndex(PPI)datafor“allothermiscellaneousrefrigerationandair‐conditioningequipment”spanningthetimeperiod1990‐2013,whichhasbeencharacterizedbydeclinesandincreasesthroughthetimeperiod.–DOEchosetheconstantpriceassumptionduetouncertaintyaboutthecontinuationoftrendsfrompastyears.•Installationcostsrepresentthelaborandmaterialsnecessarytoinstalltheequipment.–Basedonthematerials,laborrate,andlabortimedatafromRSMeans(2013),theinstallationcostsdonotchangewithefficiencylevel.LCC&PBPAnalysis:TotalInstalledCost52•TheannualenergycostistheannualenergyconsumptionfromtheEnergyUseAnalysismultipliedbytheenergyprice.•DOEusedelectricutilitytariffdatatodevelopaverageandmarginalelectricityprices.–Averageelectricityprices,andmarginalenergyanddemandpricesweredevelopedfornineCensusDivisionsandCalifornia.–SincePTACsandPTHPsarecommercialairconditionersandtypicallyconsumepeakelectricity,annualmarginalpricesperkWhbyCensusdivisionwereusedtocalculateannualenergycost.•DOEusedAnnualEnergyOutlook(AEO)2013forprojectionsoffutureaverageenergypricesforeachcensusdivision.LCC&PBPAnalysis:AnnualEnergyCostRegion AnnualMarginalPrice(¢/kWh)NewEngland10.11Mid‐Atlantic9.71East NorthCentral6.58WestNorthCentral5.80SouthAtlantic7.37East SouthCentral6.00WestSouthCentral6.15Mountain7.46Pacific– WA,OR5.77Pacific– CA12.74USAverage7.6953•Estimatedrepaircostsbasedontheannualizedvalueofaequipmentwarrantycontract.–Repaircostsincreasesproportionallywiththemanufacturersellingpriceofmoreefficientequipment.•Estimatedannualmaintenancecostsbasedonmaterials,laborrate,andlabortimedatafromRSMeans(2013).–Maintenancecostsdonotchangewithefficiencylevel.LCC&PBPAnalysis:MaintenanceandRepairCosts54•DOEusedaWeibulldistributiontomodelequipmentlifetime.•DOEuseddatafromthepreviousrulemakingandinputfromindividualswithexperienceinmanufacturingtoestimateanequipmentsurvivalfunction.–SupportivestakeholdercommentreceivedfromtheASHRAEStandard90.1‐2013NoticeofDataAvailability.•TheWeibulldistributionismodeledoffequipmenthavinganaveragelifetimeof10yearsandamaximumlifetimeof20years,whichdoesnotchangewithefficiencylevelorequipmentclass.LCC&PBPAnalysis:EquipmentLifetime55•Usedtoconvertstreamsofannualoperatingexpensestotheyearofpurchase(i.e.,2019).•Estimatedastheweightedaveragecostofcapitalusingcapitalassetpricingmodel(CAPM).•DiscountrateswereestimatedforthetypesoffirmsthatcommonlyuseaPTACorPTHP.–Lodging,Offices,andMedicalServices.•DOEusedDamodaranOnlineasthesourceofinformationforcompanydebtandequityfinancing.–Financialcostofanydebtincurredtopurchaseequipment.–Opportunitycostofanyequitytopurchaseequipment.LCC&PBPAnalysis:DiscountRates56LCC&PBPAnalysis:EnergyEfficiencyintheBaseCase•LCCandPBPanalysistypicallyanalyzesstandardlevelsrelativetoabaselineefficiencylevel.•Notallcustomerspurchaseequipmentatbaselinelevels.–DOEmustaccountforcustomerspurchasingmoreefficientequipmenttoaccuratelyestimatecustomereconomicimpacts.•Basecaseefficiencydistributionsdefinethepercentageofequipmentbeingpurchasedatvariousefficiencylevels.–Customersalreadypurchasingequipmentatefficienciesgreaterthanorequaltoaprospectivestandardlevelarenotimpactedbythestandard.–ThebasecaseefficiencydistributionforPTHPsatthe9,000Btu/hrepresentativecoolingcapacityisshowninthefigureontheright.•MarketshareandefficiencyleveldataforPTACsandPTHPswereobtainedfroma2013datasetfromtheAHRIDirectoryofCertifiedProductPerformance.•Toestimatethebasecasedistributioninthecomplianceyear(2019),DOEusedanefficiencytrendof1EERevery35years,frompriorcommercialairconditioningrulemakings.0%10%20%30%40%50%60%012345

Market ShareEfficiencyLevel57EfficiencyLevelAverageCosts(2013$)SimplePayback(years)%ofConsumersthatExperienceNetCostInstalledCostFirstYear'sOperatingCostLifetimeOperatingCostLCC1 $1,491$194$1,411$2,9026.6 20%2 $1,508$192$1,395$2,9037.3 37%3 $1,527$189$1,379$2,9067.8 62%4 $1,547$187$1,363$2,9108.2 70%5 $1,557$186$1,356$2,9138.3 73%LCC&PBPResults:9,000Btu/hRepresentativeCoolingCapacity58EfficiencyLevelAverageCosts(2013$)SimplePayback(years)%ofConsumersthatExperienceNetCostInstalledCostFirstYear'sOperatingCostLifetimeOperatingCostLCC1 $1,744$252$1,832$3,5757.8 23%2 $1,767$249$1,812$3,5798.6 42%3 $1,797$246$1,793$3,5909.8 77%4 $1,833$244$1,776$3,60911.1 87%5 $1,854$243$1,767$3,62111.7 91%LCC&PBPResults:15,000Btu/hRepresentativeCoolingCapacity59PresentationOverviewEnergy Use; Life-Cycle Cost AnalysisShipments; Trial Standard Levels; National Impact Analysis45Market & Technology; Screening Analysis2Engineering Analysis; Markups Analysis31Overview; Scope of CoverageManufacturer Impact Analysis6Emissions, Utility, Employment, and Regulatory ImpactsProposed Standard7860ShipmentsandNationalImpactAnalysesEngineeringAnalysisMarkupsAnalysisEnergyUse&EndUseLoadCharacterizationNIAShipmentsAnalysis•ShipmentsAnalysis–EstimatesPTAC‐PTHPshipmentsoverthe30‐yearanalysisperiod(2019‐2048).•NationalImpactAnalysis–EstimatestheNationalEnergySavings(NES)fromthoseshipmentsatvarioustrial standardslevels.–EstimatestheNetPresentValue(NPV)toPTACandPTHPcustomersofthesavingsfromthoseshipmentsatthevarioustrial standardslevels.61•Purpose–ToestimatePTACandPTHPshipmentsoverthe30‐yearanalysisperiod(2019‐2048).•Methodology–DOEdevelopedasingleshipmentsmodelforallPTACsandPTHPs.–Themodelisastockaccountingmodel,whichassumesthateachyeartheexistingPTACsandPTHPseitheragebyoneyearorfail.–PTACandPTHPshipmentsaredrivenbytheconstructionofnewfloorspaceandthereplacementofunitsthathavefailed.ShipmentsAnalysis62NewConstructionShipments•DOEdevelopedprojectionsfornewconstructionshipmentsbasedonprojectionsofnewcommercialfloorspacefromAEO2013.•Saturationvaluesfornewconstructionweredevelopedusingdatafromthe2008rulemaking.ReplacementShipments•DOEbuiltupinitialstockbyusingtheaverageofthehistoricalshipments(1998‐2004)fortheyears1993‐2012.•DOEdevelopedreplacementshipmentsbasedonasurvivalfunctionwhichprojectsacertainpercentageofunitstofaileachyearandbereplaced.StandardsCaseImpacts•DOEassumedthatstandardswillnotimpactshipments:standardscaseshipmentsequalsthebasecaseshipments.ShipmentsAnalysis:ProjectedShipments‐100,000200,000300,000400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000

ShipmnetsYearBasecaseShipmentsProjectionNewConstructionReplacements63•TodisaggregatetotalPTACandPTHPshipmentsintoequipmentclasses,DOEusedtheequipmentclassmarketsharesbasedonmodelavailabilityintheAHRIDirectoryofCertifiedProductPerformance.•DOEexpectsequipmentclassmarketsharestobeconstantovertime,asisexhibitedinhistoricaldata.ShipmentAnalysis:DisaggregationbyEquipmentClassPTAC PTHPCoolingCapacity<7,000Btu/h≥7,000Btu/hand≤15,000Btu/h>15,000Btu/h<7,000Btu/h≥7,000Btu/hand≤15,000Btu/h>15,000Btu/hPercent3.0% 48.5% 3.7% 1.8% 39.8% 3.2%Issue4:StakeholdersmentionedthatanumberofshipmentsarenotaccountedforintheAHRIdatabasebecausecertainmanufacturersarenon‐AHRImanufacturersandarenotsubjecttoreportingtothedatabase.DOErequestsdatafortheexpecteddistributionofmodelsthatareunreportedtotheAHRIDirectoryofCertifiedProductPerformance.64•Purpose–ToestimatetheNationalEnergySavings(NES)andthenationaleconomicimpactfromnewandamendedenergyconservationstandardsatdifferentefficiencylevelsforthe30yearperiodfrom2019– 2048.•Methodology–DOEcalculatesnationalenergysavingsbymultiplyingunitlifetimeenergysavingsbyprojectedshipmentsandaccumulatingthisprojectedvalueoverthe30years.–DOEcalculatestheNetPresentValue(NPV)byaccumulatingthedifferenceeachyearbetweenenergybillsavingsandincreasedequipmentexpendituresforallequipmentshippedoverthe30yearperiod.–NPViscalculatedusinga3%anda7%discountrate.NationalImpactAnalysis65•Tableofinputs– fromBVMNationalImpactAnalysis:InputsInput DescriptionTotalInstalledCost Annualweighted‐average perunitvaluesasafunctionofefficiencyleveltakenfromtheLCCandPBPanalysis.RepairandMaintenanceCostsRepaircostsvarywithefficiencylevel.Maintenance costsareconstantwithefficiencylevel.ThesecostsaretakenfromtheLCCandPBPanalysis.AnnualEnergyUse Annualweighted‐averageperunitenergyuseattheNationallevelasafunctionofefficiencylevelandcooling capacitytakenfromtheLCCand PBPanalysis.Base‐CaseEfficiencies Shipments‐weightedefficienciesdeterminedforthecompliance year.Basedonbase‐caseefficiencydistributionfromLCCand PBPanalysis.Standards‐CaseEfficiencies Roll‐upscenarioassumedinthecomplianceyearfordeterminingshipment‐weightedefficiencyforeachstandards case.EfficiencyTrend Market‐weightedefficiencyincreasesovertime forthebaseandstandardscases.EnergyPrices AveragepricesandforecastedenergypricesfromEIAAEO2013 forecasts(to2040)andextrapolationto2078.FullFuelCycle Multiplierto convertsiteenergytofull‐fuelcycleenergy.DiscountRate 7 percentand3percentrealfromOMB’sRegulatoryAnalysisGuidelineA‐4.PresentYear Futureexpensesarediscountedtotheyear2019.66NationalImpactAnalysis:InputsfromtheLCCandPBPAnalysisEquipmentClass(CurrentEnergyConservation Standards)Representative CoolingCapacityintheLCCandPBPAnalysisDataSource<7,000Btu/h DidnotanalyzeDOEestimated themanufacturerproductioncostof7,000Btu/hcoolingcapacityequipmentbasedoncostsof9,000Btu/hand15,000Btu/hrepresentativecoolingcapacityequipment,modifiedwithlowercapacitycompressor,fanmotors,andheatexchangers.DOEextrapolatedenergyandothereconomicsinputdataacrossthe9,000Btu/hand15,000Btu/hrepresentativecoolingcapacityforthe<7,000Btu/hequipmentclass.≥7,000Btu/hand≤15,000Btu/h9,000Btu/h InputsfromtheLCCandPBPanalysis.>15,000Btu/h 15,000Btu/h InputsfromtheLCCandPBPanalysis.67NationalImpactAnalysis:EfficiencyLevelsEquipmentTypePTAC PTHPEquipmentClass<7,000Btu/h≥7,000Btu/hand≤15,000Btu/h>15,000Btu/h<7,000Btu/h≥7,000Btu/hand≤15,000Btu/h>15,000Btu/hEfficiencyLevelEER EER EER EER|COP EER|COP EER|COP0*11.7 11.1 9.3 11.9|3.3 11.3|3.2 9.5|2.91†11.9 11.3 9.5 12.2|3.5 11.5|3.3 9.7|2.9212.2 11.5 9.7 12.6|3.5 12.0|3.4 10.0|3.0312.6 12.0 10.0 13.1|3.6 12.4|3.5 10.4|3.1413.1 12.4 10.4 13.6|3.7 12.9|3.6 10.8|3.2513.6 12.9 10.8 13.8|3.8 13.1|3.6 11.0|3.2613.8 13.1 11.0* Represents Federal minimum efficiency level for PTACs. Represents Federal minimum and ASHRAEStandard 90.1-2013 baseline for PTHPs.†Represents ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 baseline for PTACs.68NationalImpactAnalysis:BaseCaseandStandardsCaseForecastedEfficiencies•BecausekeyinputstothecalculationoftheNESandNPVaredependentontheestimatedefficienciesunderthebasecase(withoutstandards)andthestandardscase(withstandards),forecastedefficienciesareofgreatimportancetotheanalysis.•DOEuseda“roll‐up”scenariotoestablishtheshipment‐weightedefficiencyfortheyearthatstandardsareestimatedtobecomeeffective(i.e.,2019).EfficiencyLevelMarketShare(PTACs≥7,000Btu/hand≤15,000Btu/h)ASHRAE*StandardsCase123 45Baseline 0.0%--- - -1 37.9%--- - -2 29.0% 68.7%-- - -3 29.3% 27.6% 96.3%-- -4 2.5% 2.5% 2.5% 98.8%- -5 0.9% 0.9% 0.9% 0.9% 99.7%-6 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 100.0%•Basecaseefficiencydistribution.–BasedonAHRIdatafortheyear2013.–Shipment‐weightedefficiencyincreasesatarateof1EERper35yearsfrom2013‐2019.•Standardscaseefficiencydistributionsbasedon“roll‐up”scenario.–Efficienciesbelowthestandardlevel“roll‐up”tothestandardlevel.–Efficienciesabovethestandardlevelareunaffected.*ReferstoANSI/ASHRAE/IESStandard90.1‐2013minimumefficiencylevels.69NationalImpactAnalysis:BaseCaseandStandardsCaseForecastedEfficiencies11.0011.5012.0012.5013.0013.50

Shipments

‐ weighted EERBasecaseRolluptoEL1RolluptoEL2RolluptoEL3RolluptoEL4RolluptoEL5RolluptoEL6•Forthebasecaseandstandardscasesafter“roll‐up,”shipments‐weightedefficiencyincreases1EERevery35yearstoaccountfortechnologicalimprovementinequipmentandshiftstohigherefficiencyequipment.•TheprojectedefficiencydistributionofshipmentsforthePTAC≥7,000Btu/hand≤15,000Btu/hequipmentclassisshownontheright.Issue5:DOErequestscommentregardinganddatasupportingtheselectedefficiencytrend.70PTAC‐PTHPTrial StandardLevelsAnalyzedLevelMarginabovecurrentPTACenergyconservationstandardDescriptionBaseline 1.8%Equivalent toASHRAE90.1‐2013standards,theminimumstandardsDOEmayadopt.TSL1 4%Positivecustomerimpact; NegativeindustryimpactTSL 2(PROPOSED)8%Maxindustrynetpresentvalue(INPV);Maxcustomer NPVat7%discountrateTSL3 12%Negativecustomer andindustryimpactTSL4 16%Negativecustomer andindustryimpactTSL5 18%Max TechandMaxnationalenergysavings;Negativecustomer andmanufacturerimpactTrialStandardLevel(TSL)Descriptions•DOEsetTSLsatefficiencylevelsthatincreaseincrementallyfromthecurrentenergyconservationstandard(2008FinalRule)uptothemax‐techlevel.71EquipmentClassTSL1TSL2TSL3TSL4 TSL5EfficiencyLevelPTAC<7,000Btu/h2 3 4 56PTAC≥7,000Btu/hand≤15,000Btu/h2 3 4 56PTAC>15,000Btu/h2 3 4 56PTHP<7,000Btu/h1 2 3 45PTHP≥7,000Btu/hand≤15,000Btu/h1 2 3 45PTHP>15,000Btu/h1 2 3 45TrialStandardLevel(TSL)Descriptions72NationalImpactAnalysis:ResultsEquipmentClassTrialStandardLevel1234 5<7,000Btu/h0 0.003 0.005 0.006 0.007≥7,000Btu/hand≤15,000Btu/h 0.013 0.051 0.102 0.131 0.134>15,000Btu/h0.002 0.005 0.01 0.013 0.014TotalAllCoolingCapacities 0.015 0.059 0.118 0.15 0.155CumulativeFullFuelCycleNationalEnergySavings(quads)EquipmentClassDiscountRateTrialStandardLevel12 3 45Million2013$<7,000Btu/h3%0.71.82.42.22.1≥7,000Btu/hand≤15,000Btu/h22.365.9113.8134.6136.4>15,000Btu/h 1.01.2(2.4) (6.7) (7.6)Total– AllClasses 23.969.0113.8130.2131.0<7,000Btu/h7%0.1(0.2) (1.2) (2.2) (2.5)≥7,000Btu/hand≤15,000Btu/h6.312.314.510.59.0>15,000Btu/h‐(1.5) (5.4) (9.5) (10.4)TotalAllCoolingCapacities6.510.77.9(1.1) (3.8)NetPresentValueofConsumerBenefit,Discountedat3%and7%73PresentationOverviewEnergy Use; Life-Cycle Cost AnalysisShipments; Trial Standard Levels; National Impact Analysis45Market & Technology; Screening Analysis2Engineering Analysis; Markups Analysis31Overview; Scope of CoverageManufacturer Impact Analysis6Emissions, Utility, Employment, and Regulatory ImpactsProposed Standard7874•Purpose–Toassesstheimpactsofstandardsonmanufacturers;–Toidentifyandestimateimpactsonmanufacturersubgroupsthatmaybemoreseverelyaffectedthantheindustryasawhole;and–Toexaminethedirectemployment,manufacturingcapacity,andcumulativeregulatoryimpactsontheindustry.•Methodology–Analyzeindustrycashflowandindustrynetpresentvalue(INPV)throughuseoftheGovernmentRegulatoryImpactModel(GRIM);and–InterviewmanufacturerstorefineinputstotheGRIM,developsubgroupanalyses,andaddressqualitativeissues.MIA:OverviewDetails of the Manufacturer Impact Analysis can be found in chapter 12 of theTSD75•Phase1–DOEcreatesanindustryprofiletocharacterizethemarketandidentifyimportantissuesthatrequirefurtherinvestigation.•Phase2–DOEpreparesanindustrycashflowmodelandaninterviewquestionnairetoguidesubsequentdiscussionswithmanufacturers.•Phase3–DOEinterviewsmanufacturersandassessestheimpactsofstandardsbothquantitatively(usingtheGRIM)andqualitatively(impactsonemployment,competition,manufacturingcapacity,andregulatoryburden).MIA:MethodologyDetails of the Manufacturer Impact Analysis can be found in chapter 12 of theTSD76MIA:MethodologyDetails of the Manufacturer Impact Analysis can be found in chapter 12 of theTSD•UpstreamInputs–MarketandTechnologyAssessment(MTA)IndustryProfile–EngineeringMPCs–Shipments•MIAInputs–MarkupScenarios–ConversionCosts77MIA:KeyIssues•SizeConstraints–ManufacturersexpressedconcernregardingtheirabilitytoincreaseefficiencywhilemaintainingthephysicaldimensionsofPTACsandPTHPs.•ManufacturerProfitability–Manufacturersindicatedcostincreasescouldreducesalesvolumesandprofits.•CustomerUtility–Manufacturersstatedthatincreasingefficiencycouldmakeitdifficulttomeetcustomerrequirementsrelatedtonoiseandhumiditycontrol.–Manufacturersalsonotedpotentiallossofhighercapacitymodelsifthestandardissettoohigh.Details of the Manufacturer Impact Analysis can be found in chapter 12 of theTSD78•DOEmodeledtwomarkupscenariostocapturearangeofpotentialfinancialimpactsontheindustry:–PreservationofGrossMarginPercentageMarkupScenario•Representstheupperboundofprofitabilityimpacts.–PreservationofOperatingProfitMarkupScenario•Representsthelowerboundofprofitabilityimpacts.MIA:MarkupScenariosDetails of the Manufacturer Impact Analysis can be found in chapter 12 of theTSD79MIA:ConversionCostsProduct ConversionCosts(2013$M)CapitalConversionCosts(2013$M)TotalConversionCosts(2013$M)TSL1$2.2 $2.3$4.5TSL2$4.7 $2.9$7.6TSL3$7.2 $7.1$14.3TSL4$8.5 $7.1$15.6TSL5$13.5 $7.4$20.9•Industryconversioncoststotal$7.6millionatTSL2.80MIA:INPVResultsUnits BaseCaseTrialStandardLevel12345INPV2013$M 58.5 57.1to57.457.7to58.855.4to57.5 55.0to58.5 51.8to55.9ChangeinINPV2013$M‐(1.4)to(1.1)(0.7)to0.3(3.1)to(0.9) (3.5)to0.0 (6.7)to(2.6)%Change‐(2.4)to(1.9)(1.3)to0.5(5.3)to(1.6) (5.9)to0.0 (11.4)to(4.4)ProductConversionCosts2013$M‐2.24.77.2 8.5 13.5CapitalConversionCosts2013$M‐2.32.97.1 7.1 7.4Total ConversionCosts2013$M‐4.57.614.3 15.6 20.9Detailsofthemanufacturerimpactanalysiscanbefoundinchapter12oftheTSD.Note:Parenthesesindicatenegativevalues.•SummaryofTSL2–ExpectedINPVchangeintherangeof‐1.3%to0.5%–Expectedconversioncoststotal$7.6millionfortheindustry81MIA:SubgroupofManufacturerswithProductionAssets•AddafewbulletsplustableofINPVimpacts•DOEidentified22manufacturersofPTACsandPTHPs.However,mostimportanddistributePTACsandPTHPsproducedbyOEMs overseas.DOEidentifiedasubsetofdomesticmanufacturersthatownproductionassetsandanalyzedthesemanufacturersasadistinctsubgroup.–DOEexpectsmanufacturerswithproductionassetstoexperiencehigherconversioncoststhantheircompetitorswithoutproductionassets.UnitsTrialStandardLevel2All ManufacturersManufacturerswithProductionAssetsBase‐CaseINPV2013$M 58.546.8Standards‐CaseINPV2013$M 57.7to58.845.7to46.5ChangeinINPV2013$M (0.7)to0.3(1.1)to(0.3)%Change (1.3)to0.5(2.3)to(0.5)ProductConversionCosts2013$M 4.73.9CapitalConversionCosts2013$M 2.92.9Total Conversion Costs2013$M 7.66.8•SummaryofTSL2–ExpectedINPVchangeintherangeof‐2.3%to‐0.5%–Expectedconversioncostsof$6.8million(89%oftheindustrytotal)82MIA:SmallBusinessImpacts•DOEidentified12domesticsmallbusinessmanufacturersofPTACsandPTHPs.–Smallbusinessesweredefinedashaving750employeesorfewerbasedonSBAsmallbusinesssizestandards•NosmallbusinessidentifiedisanOEMofstandard‐sizePTACsandPTHPs.Rather,smallbusinessesimport,rebrand,anddistributeequipmentmanufacturedoverseas.•Smallbusinesseslikelywouldnotincurcapitalconversioncosts.However,theymayexperienceanincreaseinequipmentpurchasepricefromoverseasOEMs.Theymayalsofacetestingandcertificationcostsforequipmentredesignedtocomplywithanamendedstandard.83MIA:SmallBusinessImpactsDetails of the Manufacturer Impact Analysis can be found in chapter 12 of theTSDIssue6:DOErequestscommentonthenumberofsmallmanufacturersofPTACsandPTHPs;onthepotentialimpactsofamendedenergyconservationstandardonthosesmallmanufacturers;andontheseverityofthoseimpacts.84PresentationOverviewEnergy Use; Life-Cycle Cost AnalysisShipments; Trial Standard Levels; National Impact Analysis45Market & Technology; Screening Analysis2Engineering Analysis; Markups Analysis31Overview; Scope of CoverageManufacturer Impact Analysis6Emissions, Utility, Employment, and Regulatory ImpactsProposed Standard7885•Purpose–Toanalyzetheimpactofefficiencystandardsonsmallbusiness,particularlyIndependently‐operatinglodgingbusinesses.•Methodology‐TheSmallBusinessAssociationclassifieslodgingbusinesseswithlessthan$7millioninannualrevenueassmallbusinesses.‐Applyadiscountratepremium(1.52%)forsmallbusinesses.•Output‐TheLCCandPBPresultsshowedthattheeffectofhigherPTACandPTHPstandardsonsmallbusinessesissimilartotheeffectonthefullsampleofcommercialcustomers.LCCSubgroupAnalysis86EmissionsAnalysis•Purpose–Toreportemissionimpactsresultingfromamendedenergyconservationstandards,includingchangesinpowerplantemissionsandfullfuelcycleemissions.•Methodology–DOEusedtheNationalEnergyModelingSystem(NEMS)toderiveemissionsfactors(physicalunitsperunitofenergysavings)forCarbonDioxide(CO2)andseveralothergases.DetailsoftheAnalysiscanbefoundinchapter14oftheTSD.87CumulativeEmissionsReductionforPotentialStandardsofPTACsandPTHPsEmissionsAnalysis:ResultsTrialStandardLevel12345CO2(million metric tons)1.10 4.33 8.60 10.98 11.29NOx(thousand tons)1.12 4.42 8.78 11.06 11.31Hg(tons)0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.03N2O(thousand tons)0.02 0.07 0.14 0.18 0.18CH4(thousand tons)4.02 15.7531.28 40.0841.22SO2(thousand tons)2.47 9.74 19.30 24.17 24.7088EmissionsMonetization•Purpose–Toestimatethepotentialmonetarybenefitofreducedpowerplantemissionsresultingfromtheconsideredstandardlevels.•Methodology–SocialCostofCarbon(SCC)isintendedtobeamonetarymeasureoftheincrementaldamageresultingfromgreenhousegas(GHG)emissions.–DOEusedthemostrecent(2013)U.S.governmentinteragencyestimatesoftheSCCforemissionsin2015,permetricton(2013$):‐$12(averagevaluefromdistributionwitha5%discountrate)‐$40.5(averagevaluefromdistributionwitha3%discountrate)‐$62.4(averagevaluefromdistributionwitha2.5%discountrate)‐$119(95th‐percentilevaluefromdistributionwitha3%discountrate)–TheSCCinconstantdollarsincreasesovertime.89EmissionsMonetization:ResultsTSL1 TSL2 TSL3 TSL4 TSL5CO2* 7.21to105.5 28.06to412.08 56.03to820.95 73.86to1,066.62 76.45to1,100.06NOx‐3%discountrate1.39 5.43 10.85 14.16 14.59NOx‐7%discountrate0.57 2.2 4.42 6.02 6.27FullFuelCycleEmissionsReductionBenefits(million2013$)* Range of the economic value of CO2reductions is based on estimates ofthe global benefit of reduced CO2emissions.90UtilityImpactAnalysis•Purpose-ToestimatethechangesinelectricinstalledcapacityandgenerationthatresultforeachTSL.•Methodology-TheNationalEnergySavingsisusedtoprovideastreamofenergysavingsovertheanalysisperiod.-TheEnergyInformationAdministration’sNationalEnergyModelingSystem(NEMS)ismodifiedtorepresenttheimpactsofDOEsstandardsprogram(modifiedcodeisknownasNEMS‐BT).•Output-Reductionsintotalelectricitygeneration.-Reductionsinprimaryfuel(coal,naturalgasetc.)consumption.-Changestothemixofelectricitygenerationbyfueltype.-Changestototalinstalledcapacity.DetailsoftheAnalysiscanbefoundinchapter15oftheTSD.91EmploymentAnalysis•Purpose‐Toestimatethenetjobscreatedoreliminatednationallyasaconsequenceofamendedenergyconservationstandards,includesdirectandindirectemploymentimpacts.•Methodology-UsestheImSET (ImpactofSectorEnergyTechnologies)modelfortheevaluationofindirectemploymentimpacts,directemploymentimpactstothecommercialairconditioningindustryaredevelopedintheManufacturerImpactAnalysis(chapter12oftheTSD).-ThechangesinequipmentandenergyexpendituresaretakenfromtheNationalEnergySavingsAnalysis.•Output-Changetocommercialandenergysectoremploymentasaconsequenceofamendedenergyconservationstandards.DetailsoftheAnalysiscanbefoundinchapter16oftheTSD.92RegulatoryImpactAnalysis•Purpose-Toinvestigatethenationalimpactsofnon‐regulatoryalternativestomandatoryamendedenergyconservationstandards.•Methodology-DOEmodifiedNIAspreadsheettorepresentthefollowingnon‐regulatoryalternatives:•Output-NationalEnergySavingsandNetPresentValueforthenon‐regulatoryalternatives.-Impactofnon‐regulatoryalternativesonpurchasepriceanduseofenergy‐efficientequipment.•Nonewregulatoryaction•Manufacturertaxcredits•Customerrebates•Voluntaryefficiencytargets•Customertaxcredits•BulkgovernmentprocurementDetailsoftheAnalysiscanbefoundinchapter17oftheTSD.93PresentationOverviewEnergy Use; Life-Cycle Cost AnalysisShipments; Trial Standard Levels; National Impact Analysis45Market & Technology; Screening Analysis2Engineering Analysis; Markups Analysis31Overview; Scope of CoverageManufacturer Impact Analysis6Emissions, Utility, Employment, and Regulatory ImpactsProposed Standard7894ProposedStandard(TSL2):PTACsandPTHPsEquipmentTypeSub‐categoryCoolingCapacity(Btu/h)ProposedLevelEER(Btu/Wh),COP(unitless)PTACStandardSize†<7,000Btu/h EER=12.6≥7,000Btu/hand≤15,000Btu/hEER=14.9– (0.324*Cap‡)>15,000Btu/h EER=10.0PTHPStandardSize†<7,000Btu/hEER=12.6COP=3.5≥7,000Btu/hand≤15,000Btu/hEER=14.9– (0.324*Cap‡)COP=4.0– (0.064*Cap‡)>15,000Btu/hEER=10.0COP=3.0† Standard size refers to equipment with wall sleeve dimensionshaving an external wall opening greater than or equal to 16”high or greater than or equal to 42” wide.‡ “Cap” means cooling capacity in thousand Btu/h at 95°Foutdoor dry-bulb temperature.95SummaryofNoticeofProposedRulemaking•AtTSL2,thelifetimeenergysavingsforPTACsandPTHPspurchasedinthe30‐yearperiodthatbeginsintheyearofexpectedcompliancewithamendedstandards(2019–2048)amountto0.06quadrillionBritishthermalunits(quads).•Thecumulativenetpresentvalue(NPV)oftotalcustomercostsandsavingsoftheproposedstandardsforPTACsandPTHPsrangesfrom$10.7million(ata7‐percentdiscountrate)to$69.0million(ata3‐percentdiscountrate).ThisNPVexpressestheestimatedtotalvalueoffutureoperating‐costsavingsminustheestimatedincreaseinequipmentcostsforequipmentpurchasedin2019–2048.96HowtoSubmitWrittenComments•Inallcorrespondence,pleaserefertothePTAC‐PTHPrulemakingby:– EnergyConservationStandardsforPackagedTerminalAirConditionersandPackagedTerminalHeatPumps;– DocketNumberEERE‐2012‐BT‐STD‐0029;and– RegulatoryIdentificationNumber(RIN)1904‐AC82.•Email:pkgTerminalAC‐HP2012STD0029@ee.doe.govPostal:Courier:Ms.BrendaEdwardsU.S.DepartmentofEnergyBuildingTechnologiesProgram,MailstopEE‐5B1000IndependenceAvenue,SWWashington,DC20585‐0121Ms.BrendaEdwardsU.S.DepartmentofEnergyBuildingTechnologiesProgram,Suite600950L’EnfantPlaza,SWWashington,DC20024Tel:202‐586‐2945CommentPeriodcloses:November17,2014,11:59PMEDT97ClosingRemarks/Questions98SupportingMaterial:PTAC‐PTHPENGINEERING99RepresentativeCoolingCapacity0510152025303540 6,800 7,200 7,600 8,000 8,400 8,800 9,200 9,600 10,000 10,400 10,800 11,200 11,600 12,000 12,400 12,800 13,200 13,600 14,000 14,400 14,800 15,200 15,600 16,000 16,400 16,800

Number of Certified PTAC Models in AHRI DirectoryCoolingCapacity(Btu/h)051015202530 6,800 7,200 7,600 8,000 8,400 8,800 9,200 9,600 10,000 10,400 10,800 11,200 11,600 12,000 12,400 12,800 13,200 13,600 14,000 14,400 14,800 15,200 15,600 16,000 16,400 16,800

Number of Certified PTHP Models in AHRI DirectoryCoolingCapacity(Btu/h)•Fortheengineeringanalysis,DOEselectedtherepresentativecoolingcapacityof9,000Btu/hbecausethiscapacityhadthehighestnumberofstandard‐sizePTACandPTHPmodelslistedinthe2013AHRIDirectory.100Engineering:Cost‐EfficiencyCurves•Cost‐efficiencyequationsforrepresentativecapacityof9,000Btu/h$300$320$340$360$380$400$420$440$460$480$5009 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5 13 13.5 14

Manufacturer Production Cost (2013$)EER(Btu/Wh)StandardSizePTAC,15,000Btu/hStandardSizePTAC,9,000Btu/hStandardSizePTHP,9,000Btu/hStandardSizePTHP,15,000Btu/h9,000Btu/hPTAC:MPC=1.78*(EER)2‐22.40*(EER)+389.159,000Btu/hPTHP:MPC=1.78*(EER)2‐22.40*(EER)+427.6215,000Btu/hPTAC:MPC=12.19*(EER)2‐208.96*(EER)+1280.915,000Btu/hPTHP:MPC=12.19*(EER)2‐208.96*(EER)+1318.1Details of the Engineering Analysis can be found in chapter 5 of the TSD101SupportingMaterial:LCC102LCCandPBPAnalysis:BaseCaseEfficiencyDistribution0123456PTAC9,000Btu/h0.0% 43.6% 24.3% 29.5% 2.1% 0.5% 0.0%PTAC15,000Btu/h0.0% 25.8% 34.8% 34.7% 2.7% 1.4% 0.7%PTHP9,000Btu/h48.5% 8.9% 30.2% 12.4% 0.0% 0.0%PTHP15,000Btu/h58.2% 0.0% 32.5% 7.9% 1.4% 0.0%0.0%10.0%20.0%30.0%40.0%50.0%60.0%70.0%

Market ShareEfficiencyLevelPTAC9,000Btu/hPTAC15,000Btu/hPTHP9,000Btu/hPTHP15,000Btu/h103LCCandPBPAnalysis:CustomerPurchasePriceEquipmentType PTAC PTHPEfficiencyLevel 9,000Btu/h 15,000Btu/h 9,000Btu/h 15,000Btu/h0* $1,193 $1,294 $1,314 $1,4111†$1,204 $1,307 $1,323 $1,4202 $1,213 $1,316 $1,340 $1,4433 $1,230 $1,339 $1,359 $1,4734 $1,249 $1,369 $1,379 $1,5095 $1,269 $1,405 $1,389 $1,5306 $1,279 $1,426* Represents Federal minimum efficiency level for PTACs. Represents Federal minimum and ASHRAEStandard 90.1-2013 baseline for PTHPs.†Represents ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 baseline for PTACs.Note: A shipping cost of $19.52 was added toeach MPC to determine the pre-markup MPC.104SupportingMaterial:ShipmentsandNIA105ShipmentsAnalysis:NewConstructionFloorspace0501001502002502010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

Millions of square feetYearHealthcareLodgingOfficeNew commercial floor space projections from AEO 2013.106NIA:UnitEnergyConsumption0200400600800100012001400160018008.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0

Annual Energy ConsumptionEERPTACs7,000Btu/h9,000Btu/h15,000Btu/h0500100015002000250030008.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0

Annual Energy ConsumptionEERPTHPs7,000Btu/h9,000Btu/h15,000Btu/h