Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 82 / Thursday, April 29, 2010 / Notices 22581 

A copy of the application may be 

obtained by agencies directly from the 

Applicant. If an agency does not file 

comments within the time specified for 

filing comments, it will be presumed to 

have no comments. One copy of an 

agency’s comments must also be sent to 

the Applicant’s representatives. 

Kimberly D. Bose, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2010–9936 Filed 4–28–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy 

[Case No. CAC–026] 

Energy Conservation Program for 

Commercial Equipment: Decision and 

Order Granting a Waiver to Daikin AC 

(Americas), Inc. (Daikin) From the 

Department of Energy Commercial 

Package Air Conditioner and Heat 

Pump Test Procedures 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Decision and order. 

SUMMARY: This notice publishes the U.S. 

Department of Energy’s (DOE) decision 

and order in Case No. CAC–026, which 

grants Daikin a waiver from the existing 

DOE test procedure applicable to 

commercial package central air 

conditioners and heat pumps. The 

waiver is specific to the Daikin variable 

capacity VRV–WIII (commercial) watersource multi-split heat pumps. As a 

condition of this waiver, Daikin must 

use the alternate test procedure set forth 

in this notice to test and rate its VRV– 

WIII multi-split products. 

DATES: This decision and order is 

effective April 29, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 

Michael G. Raymond, U.S. Department 

of Energy, Building Technologies 

Program, Mailstop EE–2J, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 586–9611. E-mail: 

Michael.Raymond@ee.doe.gov. Betsy 

Kohl, U.S. Department of Energy, Office 

of General Counsel, Mail Stop GC–71, 

1000 Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0103, (202) 586– 

9507; E-mail: 

Elizabeth.Kohl@hq.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 

accordance with Title 10 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations (10 CFR) 

431.401(f)(4), DOE gives notice that it 

issues the decision and order set forth 

below. In this decision and order, DOE 

grants Daikin a waiver from the existing 

DOE commercial package air 

conditioner and heat pump test 

procedures for its VRV–WIII multi-split 

products. The waiver requires Daikin 

use the alternate test procedure 

provided in this notice to test and rate 

the specified models from its VRV–WIII 

multi-split product line. The capacities 

of the Daikin VRV–WIII multi-split heat 

pumps range from 72,000 Btu/hr to 

252,000 Btu/hr. The applicable test 

procedure for Daikin’s commercial 

VRV–WIII multi-split heat pumps with 

capacities less than 135,000 Btu/hr is 

ISO Standard 13256–1 (1998). There is 

no applicable test procedure for the 

larger-capacity Daikin VRV–WIII heat 

pumps. Today’s decision prohibits 

Daikin from making any representations 

concerning the energy efficiency of 

these products unless the product has 

been tested consistent with the 

provisions and restrictions in the 

alternate test procedure set forth in the 

decision and order below, and the 

representations fairly disclose the test 

results. 42 U.S.C. 6314(d). 

Distributors, retailers, and private 

labelers are held to the same standard 

when making representations regarding 

the energy efficiency of these products. 

42 U.S.C. 6293(c). 

Issued in Washington, DC, on April 22, 

2010. 

Cathy Zoi, 

Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy. 

Decision and Order 

In the Matter of: Daikin AC 

(Americas), Inc. (Daikin) (Case No. 

CAC–026). 

Background 

Title III of the Energy Policy and 

Conservation Act (EPCA) sets forth a 

variety of provisions concerning energy 

efficiency, including Part A of Title III 

which establishes the ‘‘Energy 

Conservation Program for Consumer 

Products Other Than Automobiles.’’ 42 

U.S.C. 6291–6309. Part A–1 of Title III 

provides for a similar energy efficiency 

program titled ‘‘Certain Industrial 

Equipment,’’ which includes large and 

small commercial air conditioning 

equipment, package boilers, storage 

water heaters, and other types of 

commercial equipment. 42 U.S.C. 6311– 

6317. 

Today’s notice involves commercial 

equipment under Part A–1. The statute 

specifically includes definitions, test 

procedures, labeling provisions, and 

energy conservation standards. It also 

provides the Secretary of Energy (the 

Secretary) with the authority to require 

information and reports from 

manufacturers. 42 U.S.C. 6311–6317. 

The statute authorizes the Secretary to 

prescribe test procedures that are 

reasonably designed to produce test 

results that reflect energy efficiency, 

energy use, and estimated annual 

operating costs, and that are not unduly 

burdensome to conduct. 42 U.S.C. 

6314(a)(2). 

For commercial package airconditioning and heating equipment, 

EPCA provides that ‘‘the test procedures 

shall be those generally accepted 

industry testing procedures or rating 

procedures developed or recognized by 

the Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration 

Institute or by the American Society of 

Heating, Refrigerating and AirConditioning Engineers, as referenced in 

ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1 and in 

effect on June 30, 1992.’’ 42 U.S.C. 

6314(a)(4)(A). Under 42 U.S.C. 

6314(a)(4)(B), the Secretary must amend 

the test procedure for a covered 

commercial product if the applicable 

industry test procedure is amended, 

unless the Secretary determines, by rule 

and based on clear and convincing 

evidence, that such a modified test 

procedure does not meet the statutory 

criteria set forth in 42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2) 

and (3). 

On December 8, 2006, DOE published 

a final rule adopting test procedures for 

commercial package air-conditioning 

and heating equipment, effective 

January 8, 2007. 71 FR 71340). DOE 

adopted the International Organization 

for Standardization (ISO) Standard 

13256–1–1998, ‘‘Water-source heat 

pumps—Testing and rating for 

performance—Part 1: Water-to-air and 

brine-to-air heat pumps,’’ for small 

commercial package water-source heat 

pumps with capacities < 135,000 British 

thermal units per hour (Btu/h). Id. at 

71371. Pursuant to this rulemaking, 

DOE’s regulations at 10 CFR 

431.95(b)(3) incorporate by reference 

ISO Standard 13256–1–1998. In 

addition, Table 1 of 10 CFR 431.96 

directs manufacturers of commercial 

package water-source air conditioning 

and heating equipment to use the 

appropriate procedure when measuring 

the energy efficiency of those products. 

The cooling capacities of Daikin’s 

commercial VRV–WIII multi-split heat 

pump products at issue in the waiver 

petition range from 72,000 Btu/hr to 

252,000 Btu/hr. The Daikin products 

with capacities ≥ 135,000 Btu/hr are not 

covered by this waiver because there is 

no DOE test procedure for water-source 

heat pumps with capacities ≥ 135,000 

Btu/hr. 

In addition, DOE’s regulations allow a 

person to seek a waiver for a particular 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

22582 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 82 / Thursday, April 29, 2010 / Notices 

basic model from the test procedure 

requirements for covered commercial 

equipment if: (1) That basic model 

contains one or more design 

characteristics which prevent testing 

according to the prescribed test 

procedures, or (2) the prescribed test 

procedures may evaluate the basic 

model in a manner so unrepresentative 

of its true energy consumption 

characteristics as to provide materially 

inaccurate comparative data. 10 CFR 

431.401(a)(1). A waiver petition must 

include any alternate test procedures 

known to the petitioner to evaluate 

characteristics of the basic model in a 

manner representative of its energy 

consumption. 10 CFR 431.401(b)(1)(iii). 

The Assistant Secretary for Energy 

Efficiency and Renewable Energy 

(Assistant Secretary) may grant a waiver 

subject to conditions, including 

adherence to alternate test procedures. 

10 CFR 431.401(f)(4). Waivers remain in 

effect pursuant to the provisions of 10 

CFR 431.401(g). 

The waiver process also allows any 

interested person who has submitted a 

petition for waiver to file an application 

for interim waiver from the applicable 

test procedure requirements. 10 CFR 

431.401(a)(2). An interim waiver may be 

granted if the Assistant Secretary 

determines that the applicant will 

experience economic hardship if the 

application for interim waiver is denied, 

if it appears likely that the petition for 

waiver will be granted, and/or if the 

Assistant Secretary determines that it 

would be desirable for public policy 

reasons to grant immediate relief 

pending a determination on the petition 

for waiver. 10 CFR 431.401(e)(3). An 

interim waiver remains in effect for 180 

days or until DOE issues its 

determination on the petition for 

waiver, whichever occurs first. The 

interim waiver may be extended by DOE 

for an additional 180 days. 10 CFR 

431.401(e)(4). 

On November 10, 2009, Daikin filed a 

petition for waiver and an application 

for interim waiver from the test 

procedures applicable to small and large 

commercial package air-cooled airconditioning and heating equipment. 

The applicable test procedure is ISO 

Standard 13256–1–1998, specified in 

Tables 1 and 2 of 10 CFR 431.96. Daikin 

asserted that the two primary factors 

that prevent testing of multi-split 

variable speed products, regardless of 

manufacturer, are the same factors 

stated in the waivers that DOE granted 

to Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics 

USA, Inc. (Mitsubishi) for a similar line 

of commercial multi-split airconditioning systems: 

• Testing laboratories cannot test 

products with so many indoor units; 

and 

• There are too many possible 

combinations of indoor and outdoor 

units to test. Mitsubishi, 72 FR 17528 

(April 9, 2007); Samsung, 72 FR 71387 

(Dec. 17, 2007); Fujitsu, 72 FR 71383 

(Dec. 17, 2007); Daikin, 73 FR 39680 

(July 10, 2008); Daikin, 74 FR 15955 

(April 8, 2009); Sanyo, 74 FR 16193 

(April 9, 2009); Daikin, 74 FR 16373 

(April 10, 2009); and LG, 74 FR 66330 

(December 15, 2009). 

On January 29, 2010, DOE published 

Daikin’s petition for waiver in the 

Federal Register, seeking public 

comment pursuant to 10 CFR 

431.3401(b)(1)(iv), and granted the 

application for interim waiver. 75 FR 

4795. DOE received no comments on the 

Daikin petition. 

In a similar case, DOE published a 

petition for waiver from Mitsubishi for 

products very similar to Daikin’s multisplit products. 71 FR 14858 (March 24, 

2006). In the March 24, 2006, Federal 

Register notice, DOE also published and 

requested comment on an alternate test 

procedure for the MEUS products at 

issue. DOE stated that if it specified an 

alternate test procedure for MEUS in the 

subsequent decision and order, DOE 

would consider applying the same 

procedure to similar waivers for 

residential and commercial central air 

conditioners and heat pumps, including 

such products for which waivers had 

previously been granted. Id. at 14861. 

Comments were published along with 

the Mitsubishi decision and order in the 

Federal Register on April 9, 2007. 72 FR 

17528. Most of the comments were 

favorable. One commenter indicated 

that a waiver was unnecessary. 

However, the commenter did not 

present a satisfactory method of testing 

the products. Id. at 17529. Generally, 

commenters agreed that an alternate test 

procedure is necessary while a final test 

procedure for these types of products is 

being developed. Id. The Mitsubishi 

decision and order included the 

alternate test procedure adopted by 

DOE. Id. 

Assertions and Determinations 

Daikin’s Petition for Waiver 

Daikin seeks a waiver from the DOE 

test procedures for this product class on 

the grounds that its VRV–WIII multisplit heat pumps contain design 

characteristics that prevent them from 

being tested using the current DOE test 

procedures. As stated above, Daikin 

asserts that the two primary factors that 

prevent testing of multi-split variable 

speed products, regardless of 

manufacturer, are the same factors 

stated in the waivers that DOE granted 

to Mitsubishi, Fujitsu General Ltd. 

(Fujitsu), Samsung Air Conditioning 

(Samsung), Sanyo and LG for similar 

lines of commercial multi-split airconditioning systems: (1) Testing 

laboratories cannot test products with so 

many indoor units; (2) there are too 

many possible combinations of indoor 

and outdoor unit to test. 

The Daikin VRV–WIII systems have 

operational characteristics similar to the 

commercial multi-split products 

manufactured by Mitsubishi, Samsung, 

Fujitsu, LG and Sanyo. As indicated 

above, DOE has granted waivers for 

these products. The VRV–WIII system 

can be connected to the complete range 

of Daikin ceiling-mounted, concealed, 

ducted, corner, cassette, wall-mounted 

and floor-mounted and other indoor fan 

coil units. Each of these units has nine 

different indoor static pressure ratings 

as standard. Additional pressure ratings 

are available. There are over one million 

combinations possible with the Daikin 

VRV–WIII system. Consequently, Daikin 

requested that DOE grant a waiver from 

the applicable test procedures for its 

VRV–WIII product designs until a 

suitable test method can be prescribed. 

DOE believes that the Daikin VRV–WIII 

equipment, and equipment for which 

waivers have previously been granted, 

are alike with respect to the factors that 

make them eligible for test procedure 

waivers. DOE therefore grants Daikin a 

VRV–WIII multi-split product waiver 

similar to the multi-split product 

waivers already issued to other 

manufacturers. 

Previously, in addressing Mitsubishi’s 

R410A CITY MULTI VRFZ products, 

which are similar to the Daikin products 

at issue here, DOE stated: 

To provide a test procedure from which 

manufacturers can make valid 

representations, [DOE] is considering setting 

an alternate test procedure for MEUS in the 

subsequent Decision and Order. Furthermore, 

if DOE specifies an alternate test procedure 

for [Mitsubishi], DOE is considering applying 

the alternate test procedure to similar 

waivers for residential and commercial 

central air conditioners and heat pumps. 

Such cases include Samsung’s petition for its 

DVM products (70 FR 9629, February 28, 

2005), Fujitsu’s petition for its Airstage 

variable refrigerant flow (VRF) products (70 

FR 5980, February 4, 2005), and 

[Mitsubishi]’s petition for its R22 CITY 

MULTI VRFZ products. (69 FR 52660, 

August 27, 2004). 

71 FR 14861. 

Daikin did not include an alternate 

test procedure in its petition for waiver. 

However, in response to two recent 

petitions for waiver from Mitsubishi, 

DOE specified an alternate test 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 82 / Thursday, April 29, 2010 / Notices 22583 

procedure that Mitsubishi could use to 

test and make valid energy efficiency 

representations for its R410A CITY 

MULTI products and its R22 multi-split 

products. Alternate test procedures 

related to the Mitsubishi petitions were 

published in the Federal Register on 

April 9, 2007. 72 FR 17533. 

DOE understands that existing testing 

facilities have a limited ability to test 

multiple indoor units simultaneously. It 

also understands that it is impractical to 

test some variable refrigerant flow zoned 

systems because of the number of 

possible combinations of indoor and 

outdoor units. DOE further notes that 

after the waiver granted Mitsubishi’s 

R22 multi-split products, AHRI formed 

a committee to develop a testing 

protocol for variable refrigerant flow 

systems. The committee developed 

AHRI Standard 1230—2009: 

‘‘Performance Rating of Variable 

Refrigerant Flow (VRF) Multi-Split AirConditioning and Heat Pump 

Equipment.’’ AHRI has adopted the 

standard. 

DOE issues today’s decision and order 

granting Daikin a test procedure waiver 

for its commercial VRV–WIII [watersource?] multi-split heat pumps. As a 

condition of this waiver, Daikin must 

use the alternate test procedure 

described below. This alternate test 

procedure is the same in all relevant 

particulars as the one that DOE applied 

to the Mitsubishi waiver. 

Alternate Test Procedure 

The alternate test procedure permits 

Daikin to designate a tested combination 

for each model of outdoor unit. The 

indoor units designated as part of the 

tested combination must meet specific 

requirements. For example, the tested 

combination must have between two to 

five indoor units so that it can be tested 

in available test facilities. The tested 

combination must be tested according to 

the applicable DOE test procedure, as 

modified by the provisions of the 

alternate test procedure as set forth 

below. 

The alternate DOE test procedure also 

allows Daikin to represent the products’ 

energy efficiency. These representations 

must fairly disclose the test results. The 

DOE test procedure, as modified by the 

alternate test procedure set forth in this 

decision and order, provides for 

efficiency rating of a non-tested 

combination in one of two ways: (1) At 

an energy efficiency level determined 

using a DOE-approved alternative rating 

method; or (2) at the efficiency level of 

the tested combination utilizing the 

same outdoor unit. 

As in the Mitsubishi waiver, DOE 

believes that allowing Daikin to make 

energy efficiency representations for 

non-tested combinations by adopting 

the alternative test procedure is 

reasonable because the outdoor unit is 

the principal efficiency driver. The 

current DOE test procedure for 

commercial products tends to rate these 

products conservatively because it does 

not account for their multi-zoning 

feature. The multi-zoning feature of 

these products enables them to cool 

only those portions of the building that 

require cooling. Products with a multizoning feature are expected to use less 

energy than units controlled by a single 

thermostat, which cool the entire home 

or commercial building regardless of 

whether only portions need cooling. 

The multi-zoning feature would not be 

properly evaluated by the current test 

procedure, which requires full-load 

testing. Full load testing requires the 

entire building to be cooled. Products 

using a multi-zoning feature and 

subjected to full-load testing would be 

at a disadvantage because they are 

optimized for highest efficiency when 

operating with less than full loads. The 

alternate test procedure will provide a 

conservative basis for assessing the 

energy efficiency of such products. 

With regard to the laboratory testing 

of commercial products, some of the 

difficulties associated with the existing 

test procedure are avoided by the 

alternate test procedure’s requirements 

for choosing the indoor units to be used 

in the manufacturer-specified tested 

combination. For example, in addition 

to limiting the number of indoor units, 

another requirement is that all the 

indoor units must be subjected the same 

minimum external static pressure. This 

requirement enables the test lab to 

manifold the outlets from each indoor 

unit into a common plenum that 

supplies air to a single airflow 

measuring apparatus. This eliminates 

situations in which some of the indoor 

units are ducted and some are nonducted. Without this requirement, the 

laboratory must evaluate the capacity of 

a subgroup of indoor coils separately 

and then sum the separate capacities to 

obtain the overall system capacity. 

Measuring capacity in this way would 

require that the test laboratory be 

equipped with multiple airflow 

measuring apparatuses. It is unlikely 

that any test laboratory would be 

equipped with the necessary number of 

such apparatuses. Alternatively, the test 

laboratory could connect its one airflow 

measuring apparatus to one or more 

common indoor units until the 

contribution of each indoor unit had 

been measured. That would be so timeconsuming as to be impractical. 

Furthermore, DOE stated in the March 

24, 2006 notice publishing the 

Mitsubishi petition for waiver that if it 

decided to specify an alternate test 

procedure for Mitsubishi it would 

consider applying the procedure to 

waivers for similar residential and 

commercial central air conditioners and 

heat pumps produced by other 

manufacturers. 71 FR 14861. As noted 

above, most of the comments received 

by DOE in response to the March 2006 

notice supported the proposed alternate 

test procedure. 72 FR 17529. 

Commenters responding to that prior 

notice generally agreed that an alternate 

test procedure is appropriate for an 

interim period while a final test 

procedure for these products is being 

developed. Id. 

For the reasons discussed above, DOE 

believes Daikin’s VRV–WIII multi-split 

products cannot be tested using the 

procedure prescribed in 10 CFR 431.96 

(ISO Standard 13256–1 (1998) and 

incorporated by reference in DOE’s 

regulations at 10 CFR 431.95(b)(3). After 

careful consideration, DOE has decided 

to prescribe the alternate test procedure 

first developed for the Mitsubishi 

waiver for Daikin’s commercial multisplit products. The alternate test 

procedure for the Daikin products must 

include the modifications described 

above. 

Consultations With Other Agencies 

DOE consulted with the Federal Trade 

Commission (FTC) staff concerning the 

Daikin petition for waiver. The FTC staff 

did not have any objections to issuing 

a waiver to Daikin. 

Conclusion 

After careful consideration of all the 

materials submitted by Daikin, the 

absence of any comments, and 

consultation with the FTC staff, it is 

ordered that: 

(1) The petition for waiver filed by 

Daikin (Case No. CAC–026) is hereby 

granted as set forth in the paragraphs 

below. 

(2) Daikin shall not be required to test 

or rate its VRV–WIII multi-split air 

conditioner and heat pump models 

listed below on the basis of the test 

procedure cited in 10 CFR 431.96, 

specifically, ISO Standard 13256–1 

(1998) (incorporated by reference in 10 

CFR 431.95(b)(3)). Instead, it shall be 

required to test and rate such products 

according to the alternate test procedure 

as set forth in paragraph (3). 

VRV–WIII Series Outdoor Units 

• Models RWEYQ72PTJU, 

RWEYQ84PTJU. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

22584 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 82 / Thursday, April 29, 2010 / Notices 

• Compatible Indoor Units For Above 

Listed Outdoor Units: 

Æ FXAQ Series wall mounted indoor 

units with nominally rated capacities of 

7,000, 9,000, 12,000, 18,000 and 24,000 

Btu/hr. 

Æ FXLQ Series floor mounted indoor 

units with nominally rated capacities of 

12,000, 18,000 and 24,000 Btu/hr. 

Æ FXNQ Series concealed floor 

mounted indoor units with nominally 

rated capacities of 12,000, 18,000 and 

24,000 Btu/hr. 

Æ FXDQ Series low static ducted 

indoor units with nominally rated 

capacities of 7,000, 9,000, 12,000, 

18,000 and 24,000 Btu/hr. 

Æ FXSQ Series medium static ducted 

indoor units with nominally rated 

capacities of 7,000, 9,000, 12,000, 

18,000, 24,000, 30,000, 36,000 and 

48,000 Btu/hr. 

Æ FXMQ–M Series high static ducted 

indoor units with nominally rated 

capacities of 30,000, 36,000, 48,000, 

72,000 and 96,000 Btu/hr. 

Æ FXMQ–P Series high static ducted 

indoor units with nominally rated 

capacities of 7,000, 9,000, 12,000, 

18,000, 24,000, 30,000, 36,000 and 

48,000 Btu/hr. 

Æ FXMQ–MF Series Outdoor Air 

Processing indoor units with nominally 

rated capacities of 48,000, 72,000 and 

96,000 Btu/hr. 

Æ FXTQ–P Series Vertical Air 

Handler indoor units with nominally 

rated capacities of 12,000, 18,000, 

24,000, 30,000, 36,000, 42,000, 48,000 

and 54,000 Btu/hr. 

Æ FXZQ Series recessed cassette 

indoor units with nominally rated 

capacities of 7,000, 9,000, 12,000, 

18,000 and 24,000 Btu/hr. 

Æ FXFQ Series recessed cassette 

indoor units with nominally rated 

capacities of 12,000, 18,000, 24,000, 

30,000 and 36,000 Btu/hr. 

Æ FXHQ Series ceiling suspended 

indoor units with nominally rated 

capacities of 12,000, 24,000 and 36,000 

Btu/hr. 

(3) Alternate test procedure. 

(A) Daikin is required to test the 

products listed in paragraph (2) above 

according to the test procedure for 

central air conditioners and heat pumps 

prescribed by DOE at 10 CFR part 431 

(ISO Standard 13256–1 (1998) 

(incorporated by reference in 10 CFR 

431.95(b)(3)), except that Daikin shall 

test a tested combination selected in 

accordance with the provisions of 

subparagraph (3)(B). For every other 

system combination using the same 

outdoor unit as the tested combination, 

Daikin shall make representations 

concerning the VRV–WIII products 

covered in this waiver according to the 

provisions of subparagraph (C) below. 

(B) Tested combination. The term 

tested combination means a sample 

basic model comprised of units that are 

production units, or are representative 

of production units, of the basic model 

being tested. For the purposes of this 

waiver, the tested combination shall 

have the following features: 

(i) The basic model of a variable 

refrigerant flow system used as a tested 

combination shall consist of an outdoor 

unit that is matched with between two 

and five indoor units. For multi-split 

systems, each of these indoor units shall 

be designed for individual operation. 

(ii) The indoor units shall: 

(a) Represent the highest sales model 

family, or another indoor model family 

if the highest sales model family does 

not provide sufficient capacity (see b); 

(b) Together, have a nominal cooling 

capacity that is between 95 percent and 

105 percent of the nominal cooling 

capacity of the outdoor unit; 

(c) Not, individually, have a nominal 

cooling capacity greater than 50 percent 

of the nominal cooling capacity of the 

outdoor unit; 

(d) Operate at fan speeds that are 

consistent with the manufacturer’s 

specifications; and 

(e) Be subject to the same minimum 

external static pressure requirement. 

(C) Representations. In making 

representations about the energy 

efficiency of its VRV–WIII multi-split 

products, for compliance, marketing, or 

other purposes, Daikin must fairly 

disclose the results of testing under the 

DOE test procedure in a manner 

consistent with the provisions outlined 

below: 

(i) For VRV–WIII multi-split 

combinations tested in accordance with 

this alternate test procedure, Daikin may 

make representations based on these test 

results. 

(ii) For VRV–WIII multi-split 

combinations that are not tested, Daikin 

may make representations based on the 

testing results for the tested 

combination and that are consistent 

with either of the two following 

methods: 

(a) Representation of non-tested 

combinations according to an 

alternative rating method approved by 

DOE; or 

(b) Representation of non-tested 

combinations at the same energy 

efficiency level as the tested 

combination with the same outdoor 

unit. 

(4) This waiver shall remain in effect 

from the date this order is issued, 

consistent with the provisions of 10 CFR 

431.401(g). 

(5) This waiver is issued on the 

condition that the statements, 

representations, and documentary 

materials provided by the petitioner are 

valid. DOE may revoke or modify the 

waiver at any time if it determines that 

the factual basis underlying the Petition 

for Waiver is incorrect, or the results 

from the alternate test procedure are 

unrepresentative of the basic models’ 

true energy consumption characteristics. 

Issued in Washington, DC on April 22, 

2010. 

Cathy Zoi, 

Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy. 

[FR Doc. 2010–9972 Filed 4–28–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy 

[Case No. RF–012] 

Energy Conservation Program for 

Consumer Products: Decision and 

Order Granting a Waiver to Electrolux 

Home Products, Inc. From the 

Department of Energy Residential 

Refrigerator and Refrigerator-Freezer 

Test Procedure 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Decision and order. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Energy (DOE) gives notice of the 

decision and order (Case No. RF–012) 

that grants to Electrolux Home Products, 

Inc. (Electrolux) a waiver from the DOE 

electric refrigerator and refrigeratorfreezer test procedure for certain basic 

models containing relative humidity 

sensors and adaptive control anti-sweat 

heaters. Under today’s decision and 

order, Electrolux shall be required to 

test and rate its refrigerator-freezers with 

adaptive control anti-sweat heaters 

using an alternate test procedure that 

takes this technology into account when 

measuring energy consumption. 

DATES: This Decision and Order is 

effective April 29, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 

Michael G. Raymond, U.S. Department 

of Energy, Building Technologies 

Program, Mailstop EE–2J, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 586–9611, E-mail: 

AS_Waiver_Requests@ee.doe.gov. Betsy 

Kohl, U.S. Department of Energy, Office 

of the General Counsel, Mail Stop GC– 

71, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES