Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 61949

transcript shall be kept of any such 

hearing.

§ 431.217 Disposition of petitions. 

(a) After the submission of public 

comments under § 431.213(a), the 

Secretary shall prescribe a final rule or 

deny the petition within 6 months after 

the date the petition is filed. 

(b) The final rule issued by the 

Secretary or a determination by the 

Secretary to deny the petition shall 

include a written statement setting forth 

his findings and conclusions, and the 

reasons and basis therefor. A copy of the 

Secretary’s decision shall be sent to the 

petitioner and the affected State agency. 

The Secretary shall publish in the 

Federal Register a notice of the final 

rule granting or denying the petition 

and the reasons and basis therefor. 

(c) If the Secretary finds that he 

cannot issue a final rule within the 6-

month period pursuant to paragraph (a) 

of this section, he shall publish a notice 

in the Federal Register extending such 

period to a date certain, but no longer 

than one year after the date on which 

the petition was filed. Such notice shall 

include the reasons for the delay.

§ 431.218 Effective dates of final rules. 

(a) A final rule exempting a State 

standard from Federal preemption will 

be effective: 

(1) Upon publication in the Federal 

Register if the Secretary determines that 

such rule is needed to meet an ‘‘energy 

emergency condition’’ within the State; 

(2) Three years after such rule is 

published in the Federal Register; or 

(3) Five years after such rule is 

published in the Federal Register if the 

Secretary determines that such 

additional time is necessary due to the 

burdens of retooling, redesign or 

distribution. 

(b) A final rule withdrawing a rule 

exempting a State standard will be 

effective upon publication in the 

Federal Register.

§ 431.219 Request for reconsideration. 

(a) Any petitioner whose petition for 

a rule has been denied may request 

reconsideration within 30 days of 

denial. The request shall contain a 

statement of facts and reasons 

supporting reconsideration and shall be 

submitted in writing to the Secretary. 

(b) The denial of a petition will be 

reconsidered only where it is alleged 

and demonstrated that the denial was 

based on error in law or fact and that 

evidence of the error is found in the 

record of the proceedings.

(c) If the Secretary fails to take action 

on the request for reconsideration 

within 30 days, the request is deemed 

denied, and the petitioner may seek 

such judicial review as may be 

appropriate and available. 

(d) A petitioner has not exhausted 

other administrative remedies until a 

request for reconsideration has been 

filed and acted upon or deemed denied.

§ 431.220 Finality of decision. 

(a) A decision to prescribe a rule that 

a State energy conservation standard or 

other requirement not be preempted is 

final on the date the rule is issued, i.e., 

signed by the Secretary. A decision to 

prescribe such a rule has no effect on 

other regulations of covered equipment 

of any other State. 

(b) A decision to prescribe a rule 

withdrawing a rule exempting a State 

standard or other requirement is final on 

the date the rule is issued, i.e., signed 

by the Secretary. A decision to deny 

such a petition is final on the day a 

denial of a request for reconsideration is 

issued, i.e., signed by the Secretary.

Subpart Q—[Removed]

■ 13. Subpart Q is removed.

[FR Doc. 04–17729 Filed 10–20–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–U

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy 

10 CFR Part 431 

[Docket No. EE–RM/TP–99–470] 

RIN 1904–AB02 

Energy Efficiency Program for Certain 

Commercial and Industrial Equipment: 

Test Procedures and Efficiency 

Standards for Commercial Packaged 

Boilers

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to Part C of title III 

of the Energy Policy and Conservation 

Act (EPCA), the Department of Energy 

(DOE or the Department) promulgates a 

rule prescribing test procedures to rate 

the energy efficiency of commercial 

packaged boilers and definitions 

relevant to this equipment. The rule also 

recodifies energy conservation 

standards prescribed by EPCA for 

commercial packaged boilers so that 

they are located contiguous with the test 

procedures that DOE promulgates today.

DATES: This rule is effective November 

22, 2004. The incorporation by reference 

of certain publications listed in this rule 

is approved by the Director of the 

Federal Register as of November 22, 

2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mohammed Khan, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Mail Station, EE–2J, 

1000 Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586–7892, 

FAX (202) 586–4617, e-mail: 

Mohammed.Khan@ee.doe.gov, or 

Francine Pinto, Esq., U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of General Counsel, Mail 

Station, GC–72, 1000 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585, 

(202) 586–9507, e-mail: 

Francine.Pinto@hq.doe.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final 

rule incorporates, by reference, into 

Subpart E of Part 431, two test 

procedures contained in industry 

standards referenced by the American 

Society of Heating, Refrigerating and 

Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. 

(ASHRAE) and the Illuminating 

Engineering Society of North America 

(IES) Standard 90.1 (‘‘ASHRAE/IES 

Standard 90.1’’) for commercial 

packaged boilers. Those industry 

standards are: the Hydronics Institute 

(HI) Division of the Gas Appliance 

Manufacturer’s Association (GAMA) 

Boiler Testing Standard BTS–2000, 

‘‘Method to Determine Efficiency of 

Commercial Space Heating Boilers’’

(which supersedes the ASHRAE 

Standard 90.1 referenced 1989 HI 

Standard, ‘‘Testing and Rating Standard 

for Heating Boilers,’’ 6th Edition, 1989); 

and American Society of Mechanical 

Engineers (ASME) PTC 4.1–1964/RA–

1991, ‘‘Power Test Codes for Steam 

Generating Units.’’

You can view copies of these 

standards in the resource room of the 

Building Technologies Program, room 

1J–018 at the U.S. Department of 

Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, 

SW., Washington, DC 20585, between 

the hours of 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

Please call Ms. Brenda Edwards-Jones at 

(202) 586–2945, for additional 

information regarding visiting the 

resource room. 

You can purchase copies of the HI 

Standard BTS–2000 from Hydronics 

Institute Division of GAMA, P.O. Box 

218, Berkeley Heights, NJ 07922, http:/

/www.gamanet.org/publist/ 

hydroordr.htm; and Standards ANSI 

Z21.47–1998 and UL 727–1994 from 

Global Engineering Documents, 15 

Inverness Way East, Englewood, CO 

80112, http://global.ihs.com/

respectively.

61950 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

I. Introduction 

A. Authority 

B. Background 

C. Summary of the Final Rule 

II. Discussion 

A. General 

B. Commercial Packaged Boilers: 

Definitions and Scope of Coverage 

1. Definitions—General 

a. Background 

b. Meaning of Terms Used 

2. Method of Shipment and Assembly 

3. Application 

4. Capacity 

5. High Pressure Steam and High 

Temperature Water Boilers 

C. Commercial Packaged Boiler Test 

Procedures for the Measurement of 

Energy Efficiency 

1. Test Procedure and Test Conditions for 

Low Pressure Steam and Hot Water 

Boilers 

2. Provisions for Condensing Boilers 

3. Modular Boilers and Multiple Boilers 

4. Outdoor Boilers 

D. Effect of Amended Test Procedure on 

Measured Energy Efficiency 

III. Procedural Requirements 

A. Review Under Executive Order 12866 

B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act 

C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction 

Act

D. Review Under the National 

Environmental Policy Act 

E. Review Under Executive Order 13132 

F. Review Under Executive Order 12988 

G. Review Under the Uniform Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 

H. Review Under the Treasury and General 

Government Appropriations Act, 1999 

I. Review Under Executive Order 12630 

J. Review Under the Treasury and General 

Government Appropriations Act, 2001 

K. Review Under Executive Order 13211 

L. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal 

Energy Administration Act of 1974 

M. Congressional Notification 

N. Approval by the Office of the Secretary

I. Introduction 

A. Authority 

Title III of the Energy Policy and 

Conservation Act (EPCA) sets forth a 

variety of provisions designed to 

improve energy efficiency. Part B of title 

III (42 U.S.C. 6291–6309) provides for 

the ‘‘Energy Conservation Program for 

Consumer Products other than 

Automobiles.’’ Part C of Title III (42 

U.S.C. 6311–6317) provides for a 

program similar to Part B which is 

entitled ‘‘Certain Industrial Equipment’’

and which includes commercial air 

conditioning equipment, packaged 

boilers, water heaters, and other types of 

commercial equipment. 

DOE publishes today’s final rule 

pursuant to Part C which specifically 

provides for definitions, test procedures, 

labeling provisions, energy conservation 

standards, and authority to require 

information and reports from 

manufacturers. See 42 U.S.C. 6311–

6317. With regard to test procedures, 

Part C generally authorizes the Secretary 

of Energy to prescribe test procedures 

that are reasonably designed to produce 

results which reflect energy efficiency, 

energy use and estimated operating 

costs, and that are not unduly 

burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 

6314) With respect to some commercial 

equipment for which EPCA prescribes 

energy conservation standards, 

including commercial packaged boilers, 

this statute 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 Air Conditioning 

Engineers, as referenced in ASHRAE/

IES Standard 90.1 and in effect on June 

30, 1992.’’ (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(4)(A)) 

Further, if such an industry testing or 

rating procedure is amended, DOE must 

revise its test procedures to be 

consistent with the amendment, unless 

the Secretary determines, based on clear 

and convincing evidence, that to do so 

would not meet certain general 

requirements spelled out in the statute 

for test procedures. (42 U.S.C. 

6314(a)(4)(B)) Before prescribing any 

test procedures for such equipment, the 

Secretary must publish them in the 

Federal Register and afford interested 

persons at least 45 days to present data, 

views and arguments. (42 U.S.C. 

6314(b)) Effective 360 days after a test 

procedure rule applicable to any 

covered commercial equipment, such as 

a commercial packaged boiler, is 

prescribed, no manufacturer, 

distributor, retailer or private labeler 

may make any representation in writing 

or in broadcast advertisement respecting 

the energy consumption or cost of 

energy consumed by such equipment, 

unless it has been tested in accordance 

with the prescribed procedure and such 

representation fairly discloses the 

results of the testing. (42 U.S.C. 6314(d)) 

Finally, under the terms of Part C of title 

III of EPCA, the Secretary is authorized 

to require manufacturers of covered 

commercial products to submit 

information and reports for a variety of 

purposes, including ensuring 

compliance with requirements. See 42 

U.S.C. 6316(b)(1). 

B. Background 

DOE began implementation of Part C 

of title III of EPCA by establishing 10 

CFR part 431. Part 431 is entitled 

‘‘Energy Efficiency Program for Certain 

Commercial and Industrial Equipment.’’

Eventually, part 431 will include 

commercial heating, air conditioning 

and water heating products. It will 

consist of: Test procedures, Federal 

energy conservation standards, labeling, 

and certification and enforcement 

procedures. Today DOE proposes 

amendments to part 431 in order further 

to implement Part C of title III of EPCA.

As a first step in the process that led 

to today’s final rule, DOE convened 

public workshops on April 14 and 15, 

1998, and October 18, 1998, to solicit 

views and information from interested 

persons to aid in developing proposed 

rules that would address test 

procedures, certification and 

enforcement procedures, and EPCA’s 

coverage for this equipment. The 

workshop discussions and comments 

focused on the following issues for 

packaged boilers specifically: 

(1) The definition of commercial 

packaged boiler; 

(2) Whether the efficiency standards 

and test procedures prescribed by EPCA 

apply only to boilers used in certain 

applications, to boilers below a certain 

capacity, and to low pressure boilers; 

(3) The test procedures to be adopted; 

(4) Adoption of separate testing 

provisions for condensing boilers, 

modular boilers, multiple boilers, or 

boilers designed for low temperature 

applications; and 

(5) Testing and rating of a boiler 

designed for both steam and hot water 

applications. 

After considering both oral and 

written comments, on August 9, 2000, 

DOE published a Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking and Public Hearing 

(‘‘proposed rule’’ or ‘‘NOPR’’) (65 FR 

48838) to implement the energy 

efficiency standards and test procedures 

mandated by EPCA for commercial 

packaged boilers. 65 FR 48838. The 

NOPR requested data, comments, and 

information regarding the proposed 

regulations. DOE conducted a public 

workshop/hearing (the public hearing) 

on September 20, 2000, to receive oral 

comments, and DOE also accepted 

written comments. In formulating 

today’s final rule, DOE considered these 

comments and have incorporated 

recommendations where appropriate. 

Section II below discusses the 

comments that questioned or disagreed 

with the Department’s positions as 

presented in the NOPR. 

Energy conservation standard levels 

were not at issue in these proceedings. 

The NOPR merely proposed to recodify 

into the Department’s regulations on 

efficiency requirements for commercial 

packaged boilers the energy 

conservation standard levels that had 

been established in 42 U.S.C. 6313(a) of 

EPCA for this equipment. 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 61951

1These efficiency levels are under review by the 

Department as discussed in the notice of final 

rulemaking for commercial equipment, entitled, 

‘‘Energy Efficiency Program for Commercial and 

Industrial Equipment: Efficiency Standards for 

Commercial Heating, Air Conditioning and Water 

Heating Equipment,’’ 66 FR 3336, 3349–3352 

(January 12, 2001).

C. Summary of the Final Rule 

Today’s final rule incorporates the 

following for commercial packaged 

boilers: (1) Clarification of EPCA’s 

definition and coverage, (2) energy 

efficiency test procedures, and (3) 

energy conservation standards. The 

commercial packaged boilers covered 

under today’s final rule: (1) Are low 

pressure steam and hot water heating 

boilers (steam boilers with a pressure of 

15 psi gauge (psig) or less and hot water 

boilers with a pressure of 160 psig or 

less and water temperature of 250° F or 

less), (2) having a rated maximum input 

capacity of 300,000 Btu per hour (Btu/

hr) or more, and (3) that are, ‘‘to any 

significant extent,’’ distributed in 

commerce for the heating, space 

conditioning or service water heating in 

buildings. High pressure steam and high 

temperature water boilers (steam boilers 

with a pressure higher than 15 psig, and 

water boilers with a pressure above 160 

psig or a water temperature exceeding 

250° F, or both) are not covered by the 

test procedures and standards in today’s 

rule. This final rule also provides, in 

essence, that the person or entity that 

specifies the major component parts 

used in an assembled boiler is 

responsible for the boiler’s compliance 

with EPCA efficiency requirements. 

Today’s final rule incorporates the 

test procedures contained in the 

commercial boiler testing standard HI 

BTS–2000 from the Hydronics Institute 

Division of GAMA (Incorporated by 

reference, see § 431.85) (including its 

provisions for testing condensing 

boilers) to determine the energy 

efficiency of commercial packaged 

boilers under EPCA. And the rule 

allows, as an alternative during a two 

year transition period, the use of ASME 

PTC 4.1–1964 (R1991) to test steel 

boilers under EPCA, since many 

manufacturers have traditionally used 

that procedure to test such boilers. 

Finally, so that the efficiency test 

procedures and standards for 

commercial packaged boilers will be in 

the same place in our regulations, this 

rule recodifies elsewhere in part 431 the 

minimum energy efficiency levels 

prescribed in 42 U.S.C. 6313(a) of 

EPCA.1 Also, because DOE is combining 

in 10 CFR part 431 the existing 

requirements for electric motors with 

the new requirements for commercial 

equipment such as packaged boilers, 

DOE is placing today’s new rules in 

Subpart E rather than in Subpart K as 

proposed in the NOPR, using different 

section numbers than it proposed.

II. Discussion 

A. General 

Representatives of eight organizations, 

comprising trade associations (the 

American Gas Association and GAMA), 

manufacturers (A.O. Smith Water 

Products Co. and Bock Water Heaters), 

private research/consulting entities (the 

Gas Technology Institute (GTI), Arthur 

D. Little Inc. (ADL), and BR 

Laboratories, Inc. (BR Labs)), and a state 

government energy agency (the 

California Energy Commission (CEC)), 

attended the public hearing on 

September 20, 2000. The American 

Society of Testing and Materials 

(ASTM) did not attend the public 

hearing but submitted written 

comments. GAMA and CEC also 

submitted written statements in advance 

of the hearing. 

The following summarizes the issues 

addressed in the preamble of the NOPR 

and discusses in detail the points on 

which significant comments were 

presented during and after the public 

hearing. 

B. Commercial Packaged Boilers: 

Definitions and Scope of Coverage 

1. Definition—General 

a. Background 

EPCA defines ‘‘packaged boiler’’ as ‘‘a 

boiler that is shipped complete with 

heating equipment, mechanical draft 

equipment, and automatic controls; 

usually shipped in one or more 

sections.’’ (42 U.S.C. 6311(11)(B)) As 

discussed in the NOPR and as further 

discussed below, ASHRAE/IES 

Standard 90.1–1989, refers to five test 

standards for commercial heating 

boilers. The definitions for packaged 

boiler or boiler assembly in three of the 

four standards are essentially the same 

as, but not identical to, EPCA’s 

definition with respect to the heating 

equipment and controls. The fourth 

standard defines only the type of lowpressure boilers that it covers and the 

fifth does not define packaged boilers. 

The NOPR discussed in detail 

whether EPCA’s efficiency requirements 

for commercial packaged boilers apply 

only to certain types of boilers based on 

their method of shipment and assembly, 

application (e.g., space heating/

conditioning, service water heating, 

industrial processing, and utility 

applications), capacity (size), and 

operating characteristics (e.g., low 

pressure steam and hot water heating 

boilers, high temperature hot water 

boilers, and high pressure steam 

boilers). The Department’s proposed 

resolution of these issues was reflected 

in the NOPR’s proposed definitions of 

‘‘commercial packaged boiler’’ and 

‘‘packaged boiler.’’ The issues were 

further addressed in comments on the 

NOPR, which are discussed below in 

the following subsections: method of 

shipment and assembly; application; 

capacity; and high pressure steam and 

high temperature water boilers. But first 

the Department addresses comments 

that raised questions as to the meaning 

of terms used in the NOPR’s definition 

of ‘‘commercial packaged boiler.’’

b. Meaning of Terms Used 

GAMA suggested that in the NOPR’s 

definition for ‘‘commercial packaged 

boiler’’ (proposed § 431.352), the phrase 

‘‘capacity of 300,000 Btu/hr or more’’

should be replaced with ‘‘input rating of 

300,000 Btu/hr or more.’’ GAMA stated 

that the word ‘‘capacity’’ is imprecise 

because it specifies neither input nor 

output. (GAMA, No. 2EE at p. 1). At the 

public hearing, GAMA explained that 

‘‘capacity’’ in this context has more than 

one meaning. It means the output 

capacity to most people, but could mean 

input to a minor segment of the 

industry. GAMA stated that, as used in 

the definition, however, the 300,000 

Btu/hr value should be the input rating 

of the boiler. Otherwise commercial 

boilers with input ratings of 

approximately 300,000 to 375,000 Btu/

hr would not be covered by the 

proposed Federal regulations, since 

those boilers would have an output 

capacity of less than 300,000 Btu/hr. 

(GAMA, Tr. 35–38). CEC supported 

GAMA’s suggestion, stating in part that 

the rated input has always been: (1) 

Used to define the size of gas appliances 

in the ANSI Z21 series of standards, (2) 

intended as the basis for defining 

capacity in ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1, 

and (3) what the State of California 

believes is the basis for preemption of 

state efficiency requirements. (CEC, Tr. 

35, 39). BR Laboratories, Inc. supported 

GAMA’s position. (BR Labs., Tr. 39). 

For a number of reasons, the 

Department agrees with the above 

comments that it should define 

‘‘capacity’’ in terms of input rating. 

First, we accept the representations that 

rated input has been the capacity 

measure for differentiating efficiency 

requirements in voluntary standards. 

Particularly relevant here is that 

ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1–1989 

delineated categories of boilers (and 

prescribed efficiency requirements) by 

reference to the 300,000 Btu/hr value, 

without mentioning input or output, 

61952 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

whereas the corresponding portion of 

Standard 90.1–1999 explicitly states 

that such size categories are based on 

‘‘input.’’ We believe this change was 

designed to clarify rather than alter the 

scope of the applicable efficiency 

requirements. Because EPCA’s 

efficiency requirements for commercial 

boilers are based on these same 

provisions in ASHRAE 90.1, and also 

use the 300,000 Btu/hr level as a cut-off 

for differentiating efficiency 

requirements, ASHRAE’s categorization 

of commercial boiler sizes by reference 

to input strongly suggests that boiler 

‘‘capacity’’ in EPCA means input 

capacity. Second, the Department 

believes that, because EPCA provides 

efficiency standards for boilers that are 

consumer (residential) products if they 

have an ‘‘input rate’’ of less than 

300,000 Btu/hr, (42 U.S.C. 6291–6292), 

the ‘‘capacity’’ of commercial boilers to 

which Section 342(a)(4) of EPCA refers 

is also the input rate. To begin with, the 

most reasonable construction of EPCA is 

that the capacities of residential and 

commercial boilers must be measured in 

a uniform manner under the statute. If 

the term ‘‘capacity’’ in EPCA were 

construed as providing standards for 

commercial boilers with an output rate 

of 300,000 BTU/hr or more, there would 

be a gap between the capacities of the 

largest consumer boiler and the smallest 

commercial boiler for which EPCA 

prescribes standards. We do not believe 

Congress intended such a result. 

For these reasons, we construe the 

term ‘‘capacity,’’ as applied to 

commercial packaged boilers in section 

42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(4)(C)–(D) of EPCA, to 

mean the rated input not the output 

capacity. To clarify this point, we are 

including in our definition of 

‘‘commercial packaged boiler,’’ in 10 

CFR 431.82, the parenthetical ‘‘(rated 

maximum input)’’ to modify the term 

‘‘capacity.’’

CEC suggested that we delete the 

phrases ‘‘HVAC & WH product’’ and ‘‘to 

any significant extent’’ from the 

proposed definition of ‘‘commercial 

packaged boiler.’’ (CEC, No. 6 at pp. 3 

and 5). DOE believes that it should not 

simply delete the term ‘‘HVAC & WH 

product’’ from this definition, but 

should instead replace it in the final 

rule. The Department proposed to 

include ‘‘HVAC & WH product’’ in the 

definition of ‘‘commercial packaged 

boiler’’ in order to incorporate by 

reference the qualifications set forth in 

EPCA’s definition of ‘‘industrial 

equipment.’’ (42 U.S.C. 6311(2)(A)) 

Therefore, to clarify the regulatory 

language and respond to CEC’s 

comments the definition of ‘‘commercial 

packaged boiler’’ in today’s final rule 

includes the term ‘‘industrial 

equipment,’’ in place of ‘‘HVAC & WH 

product,’’ and we will incorporate the 

EPCA definition of ‘‘industrial 

equipment’’ elsewhere in 10 CFR Part 

431. We address use of the term ‘‘to any 

significant extent’’ in Section II–B–3 

below. 

2. Method of Shipment and Assembly 

As discussed in the NOPR, steel and 

copper boilers are usually shipped as 

completely assembled units. Cast iron 

boilers, however, are occasionally 

shipped from the boiler manufacturer’s 

factory completely assembled and 

wired, or in separate sections for 

assembly at the job site, but are usually 

sold through boiler distributors who 

either ship all the necessary sections out 

of their inventories, or have 

manufacturers ship some or all of the 

components, directly to the customer for 

assembly at the customer’s site. Such 

boilers typically conform to a 

predefined design, which consists of 

sections specified by the manufacturer 

of the cast iron boiler section, i.e., the 

boiler manufacturer, and may include a 

burner, for example, that has been 

produced by another manufacturer. The 

boiler manufacturer will test and 

guarantee the efficiency of such a boiler. 

Sometimes, however, a vendor or 

installer will sell a commercial boiler 

that consists of a combination of 

sections that has not been specified by 

a boiler manufacturer. 65 FR 48841–42. 

In summary, boilers are shipped in the 

following three ways: (1) As completely 

assembled units; (2) in sections that 

conform to a design specified by the 

manufacturer; and (3) in a combination 

of sections not specified by the 

manufacturer. 

In the NOPR, DOE stated that it 

believes boilers distributed in these 

three ways whether directly by 

manufacturers or by distributors, fit 

within EPCA’s definition of packaged 

boiler. Accordingly, DOE proposed to 

adopt EPCA’s definition of packaged 

boiler, but with added language to 

clarify that if a commercial packaged 

boiler is shipped in more than one 

section, it will be covered even if the 

sections are produced by more than one 

manufacturer or originated or shipped at 

different times and from more than one 

location. DOE also indicated in the 

preamble of the NOPR that it does not 

believe EPCA’s requirements for 

‘‘packaged boilers’’ apply to customdesigned, field-constructed boiler 

systems which generally require 

alteration, cutting, drilling, threading, 

welding or similar tasks by the installer. 

DOE received no comments on these 

points. Therefore, the definition of 

‘‘packaged boiler’’ in the final rule 

contains the language proposed in the 

NOPR. But to make the rule more 

explicit, DOE has added language to 

provide that field constructed, custom 

designed boilers are not included. 

At the public hearing, GAMA again 

addressed the issue of who would be 

responsible for the testing and the 

efficiency rating of a commercial 

packaged boiler does not consist of 

manufacturer specified sections. DOE 

had stated, in essence, in the NOPR that 

if a vendor sells a commercial packaged 

boiler with components that are not 

specified and approved by a boiler 

manufacturer, DOE would consider the 

vendor to be the manufacturer of the 

boiler. GAMA stated at the hearing that 

it may be necessary to create, in the 

regulation, a special definition of a 

manufacturer. (GAMA, Tr. 45). CEC 

stated that in California a distributor or 

contractor on occasion will change the 

burner in a commercial packaged boiler 

shipped by the boiler manufacturer. 

CEC believes that such distributor or 

contractor should be responsible for the 

boiler’s efficiency rating and supports 

GAMA’s suggestion of having a 

definition of manufacturer that would 

make the regulation self-contained on 

this point. (CEC, Tr. 28, 43, 46–47). 

The Department agrees that the 

regulations should define the term 

‘‘manufacturer’’ with respect to 

commercial packaged boilers so as to 

clarify that any vendor or installer who 

sells a commercial packaged boiler that 

has components not specified by the 

boiler manufacturer is responsible for 

the testing and efficiency rating of that 

equipment. In such circumstances, the 

vendor or installer will be treated as a 

manufacturer for purposes of applying 

EPCA’s requirements because it would 

be performing a manufacturing function. 

The Department will not treat such a 

firm merely as a distributor, retailer, or 

installer of such equipment. In addition, 

this definition of ‘‘manufacturer’’ in the 

final rule makes clear that the boiler 

manufacturer is responsible for 

complying with EPCA’s requirements 

where the boiler consists of the 

components that the manufacturer has 

specified. Therefore, DOE is prescribing 

in § 431.82 of today’s final rule a 

definition of ‘‘manufacturer for 

commercial packaged boilers’’ that 

incorporates EPCA’s definition of this 

term and clarifies it as just described. 

3. Application 

As explained in detail in the NOPR, 

we believe that the intent of EPCA is to 

apply the term ‘‘packaged boiler’’ to 

commercial boilers used in buildings for 

space conditioning and service water 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 61953

heating. 65 FR 48842. Accordingly, the 

proposed definition for commercial 

packaged boilers included only boilers 

distributed ‘‘to any significant extent’’

for these purposes. 

The Department received no comment 

on the portion of the NOPR that directly 

addressed this issue. The CEC, however, 

suggested deletion of the phrase ‘‘to any 

significant extent’’ from the proposed 

definition of ‘‘commercial packaged 

boiler’’ (CEC, Tr. 66) because it believes 

the definition would be complete 

without it. As indicated in the NOPR, 65 

FR 48842, inclusion of this phrase in the 

definition makes clear that the types of 

boilers used almost exclusively for 

industrial process heating or utility 

applications, and rarely sold for heating, 

space conditioning, or service water 

heating in buildings, are not covered by 

the standards and test procedures 

prescribed by EPCA for a ‘‘packaged 

boiler.’’ Accordingly we are not altering 

the proposed definition in this respect. 

4. Capacity

At the April 1998 workshop, 

participants discussed whether the DOE 

test procedure should apply only to 

packaged boilers that had a rated 

capacity below some upper limit. In the 

NOPR, we included no upper limit on 

capacity in the proposed definition of 

‘‘commercial packaged boiler,’’ stating 

that we had no grounds to conclude that 

EPCA covers only boilers below a 

certain size. Nevertheless, given the 

limited quantities of high-capacity 

boilers used for space heating, and their 

large size, we solicited comments on 

whether there is an upper limit on 

capacity above which the proposed 

testing procedure would be unduly 

burdensome to conduct. 

At the public hearing, GAMA stated 

that it still believed that the DOE testing 

and certification requirements should be 

limited to low pressure steam and hot 

water boilers having inputs of eight 

million Btu/hr or less. (GAMA, No. 2EE 

at pp. 1–2, and Tr. 49–56). GAMA stated 

that an upper limit of eight million Btu/

hr would cover the vast majority of 

boilers sold in the U.S. for use in space 

heating of commercial buildings, and 

covered under ASHRAE standard 90.1, 

and that those boilers could be tested 

according to the test procedure in the 

HI–1989 standard under a controlled 

laboratory setting, as in the current 

industry certification programs. GAMA 

stated that for large buildings with a 

large heating load, it is more reasonable 

to use a modular boiler system or a 

multiple boiler system (consisting of 

several smaller boilers) than a single 

large boiler. Also, GAMA stated its view 

that low pressure boilers above eight 

million Btu/hr are usually custom 

designed for specific applications and 

constructed on site from a variety of 

separately supplied components in 

accordance with detailed engineering 

requirements. These boilers cannot be 

tested for efficiency until after they are 

constructed and made operational at the 

site, and such field tests are different 

from the testing of a completed 

packaged boiler unit under controlled 

laboratory conditions. 

GAMA agreed that the I=B=R 

Directory (GAMA’s directory of ratings 

for boilers and other heating equipment) 

does show a few boilers with sizes over 

eight million Btu/hr. GAMA stated that 

a manufacturer lists such boilers in the 

Directory to indicate its capability of 

building one at that large size, and 

usually will build only a few each year. 

GAMA stated that the testing of those 

large boilers at a manufacturer’s facility 

in accordance with the HI standard is 

extremely difficult, and that is the 

reason that all manufacturers of cast 

iron steam and hot water boilers obtain 

those boilers’ ratings based on the steam 

test only. GAMA stated that the larger 

size cast iron boilers usually are part of 

a family series of boilers with the same 

design and construction. According to 

GAMA, in the HI certification program 

it typically obtains the efficiency rating 

of those large size boilers by 

extrapolating or interpolating the tested 

efficiency ratings of two boilers in the 

same family series, picked near the 

extreme ends (in size, one at the small 

end, the other at the large end) of the 

family. GAMA stated this type of 

projection of the efficiency of a boiler in 

a family series is based on the boiler 

industry’s long experience. GAMA 

stated that the manufacturer offers, in 

essence, a given model in a variety of 

inputs, where not every input is tested 

for the efficiency rating. 

BR Labs stated that a boiler assembled 

in the field is normally tested there, and 

suggested that field testing might be 

warranted to obtain the efficiency rating 

of large size boilers. BR Labs also stated 

that it is common to make steel (fire 

tube or water tube) boilers having an 

input greater than 8 million Btu/hr for 

use by institutions, and that those 

boilers are designed in part for space 

heating. Furthermore, according to BR 

Labs, boilers larger than five to six 

million Btu/hr are commonly tested at 

the manufacturer’s facility. (BR Labs, Tr. 

44–45 and 57–58). CEC asserted that the 

statute clearly applies to all packaged 

boilers without any limitation with 

respect to size, but that DOE has the 

authority to make the test requirements 

for large boilers different from those for 

the small ones. (CEC, Tr. 61). 

The foregoing discussion essentially 

raises two issues. One is the extent to 

which EPCA’s definition of ‘‘packaged 

boiler,’’ and its efficiency requirements 

for that product, cover low pressure 

boilers with inputs greater than eight 

million Btu/hr. The second is whether, 

assuming such products are covered, 

DOE’s test procedure should make 

special provision for them. 

On the first issue, as stated above, the 

Department said in the NOPR that it had 

no grounds to conclude that EPCA 

covers only boilers below a certain size. 

There is nothing in the record that 

would justify DOE changing this 

position, or concluding that its earlier 

interpretation of EPCA was incorrect. 

Accordingly today’s final rule contains 

no upper limit on the size of 

commercial packaged boilers that are 

covered by the rule. GAMA, however, in 

arguing that the DOE test procedure 

should not cover boilers with rated 

inputs above eight million Btu/hr, 

asserted that such boilers are rarely used 

for space heating and comfort 

conditioning, and are usually customdesigned and field-constructed. 

Pursuant to the definitions of ‘‘packaged 

boiler’’ and ‘‘commercial packaged 

boiler,’’ in section 431.82, today’s final 

rule covers only boilers that are 

distributed ‘‘to any significant extent’’

for heating, space conditioning or 

service water heating in buildings, and 

excludes from coverage boilers that are 

custom-designed and field-constructed. 

These limitations on coverage exclude 

from the scope of the DOE test 

procedure all or most of the boilers 

GAMA asserts should be excluded. 

As to the feasibility of testing boilers 

with rated inputs over eight million 

Btu/hr that would remain subject to the 

test procedure, ANSI Standard Z21.13 

covers low pressure steam and hot water 

boilers with up to 12,500,000 Btu/hr 

rated input. That standard has been 

used by gas boiler manufacturers for 

several decades, indicating that testing 

of gas boilers for efficiency at rated 

inputs of eight to 12.5 million Btu/hr 

has been conducted without major 

difficulty. Most of the boilers listed in 

the directory of the HI 1998 I=B=R 

Ratings for Heating Boilers, which 

includes cast iron, steel, and copper 

boilers made by 21 commercial boiler 

manufacturers, had a nameplate input of 

under seven million Btu/hr. This 

substantiates GAMA’s statement that 

most boilers certified by the HI are 

under eight million Btu/hr. However, 

one manufacturer listed models of its 

cast iron gas boilers at inputs of up to 

9.5 million Btu/hr, and a major cast iron 

boiler manufacturer listed models of oil 

and gas fired boilers at inputs of up to 

61954 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

approximately 16 to 17.6 million Btu/hr. 

According to Section 5.2.1 of the 1989 

HI Standard, the overall efficiency tests 

‘‘shall be conducted on at least the 

smallest and largest assembly of a series 

to be catalogued, where a consistent 

geometry exists throughout the series.’’

In addition, the combustion efficiency 

test can always be conducted during an 

overall efficiency test. This indicates 

that the two manufacturers of boilers 

larger than eight million Btu/hr 

obtained the efficiency ratings for each 

boiler series that contained one or more 

of these larger boilers through 

interpolating data from tests that 

included the actual testing of at least 

one of these large boilers. Therefore, it 

appears that the eight million Btu/hr 

value suggested by GAMA is not the 

limiting value above which the 

laboratory test cannot be conducted 

under the HI–1989 test standard. The 

Department notes also the BR Labs 

comment that steel boilers with 

capacities above eight million Btu/hr 

can be tested at the manufacturer’s 

facility. 

Based on the foregoing, the DOE test 

procedure in today’s rule is not limited 

to packaged boilers below a specified 

upper limit in capacity, and contains no 

special provision for boilers over 8 

million Btu/hr rated input. DOE notes, 

however, that the rules for commercial 

products allow a firm to determine a 

product’s efficiency through use of 

calculation methods rather than testing, 

and to seek a waiver of the test 

procedure for a particular basic model. 

These provisions should give sufficient 

alternatives to firms that believe they 

cannot test these large boilers under the 

DOE test procedure.

5. High Pressure Steam and High 

Temperature Water Boilers 

Participants in the April and October 

1998 workshops expressed differing 

opinions on the coverage of high 

pressure steam and high temperature 

water boilers, referred to here as ‘‘high 

pressure boilers.’’ In the NOPR, DOE 

stated that since no language in EPCA 

excludes packaged high pressure boilers 

from coverage under the statute, and 

since DOE believed high pressure 

packaged boilers are sometimes used for 

heating buildings, under the proposed 

rule EPCA’s efficiency requirements 

would apply to packaged high pressure 

boilers which, ‘‘to any significant 

extent,’’ are distributed for use for space 

conditioning in buildings. However, 

DOE stated that there may not be clearcut criteria for distinguishing a 

packaged high pressure boiler that can 

be used for space conditioning, and the 

limited quantities and large sizes of 

packaged high pressure boilers 

employed in space heating may make 

testing under the proposed DOE 

procedure unduly burdensome. 

Therefore, DOE solicited comments on 

the options of limiting application of 

EPCA efficiency requirements to those 

packaged high pressure boilers that are 

principally designed for heating 

buildings, or limiting coverage of 

packaged high pressure boilers to a 

specific maximum working pressure, 

such as 150 psig, above which one is 

unlikely to use it for commercial space 

heating. 65 FR 48843. 

In comments on the NOPR, GAMA 

again stated its belief that high pressure 

boilers should be excluded from DOE 

testing requirements, because they are 

typically utilized for industrial process 

or power applications, not for 

commercial space heating applications. 

(GAMA, No. 2EE at p. 3). 

The Department has further reviewed 

this issue, considering the statements 

from GAMA at the public hearing 

together with the comments from the 

participants at the earlier workshops. 

First, the Department again consulted 

the ASHRAE Handbook for HVAC 

Systems and Equipment. As stated in 

Chapter 10, Steam Systems, of the 2000 

ASHRAE HVAC System and Equipment 

Handbook (Handbook), one of the most 

important decisions in the selection of 

a steam system is the design pressure. 

The Handbook states that on the basis 

of investment and operating cost 

considerations, energy efficiency, and 

control stability, the pressure should be 

held to the minimum values above the 

atmospheric pressure that accomplishes 

the required heating task, and that space 

heating and domestic water heating can 

best be accomplished, directly or 

indirectly, with low pressure steam less 

than 15 psig or hot water temperature 

less than 250 °F. High pressure steam is 

required only for loads such as dryers, 

presses, molding dies, power drives, 

and other processing, manufacturing, 

and power requirements, and there are 

significant increases in investment and 

operating cost associated with a high 

pressure system. 

The Department also reviewed the 

definition of ‘‘boiler’’ in ASHRAE/IES 

Standard 90.1–1999. In the 1989 version 

of the Standard, ‘‘boiler’’ was defined as 

a ‘‘self-contained appliance for 

supplying steam or hot water.’’ In the 

1999 version of the standard, the 

definition was revised to ‘‘a selfcontained low-pressure appliance for 

supplying steam or hot water.’’ The 

Department believes the revised 

definition indicates that the consensus 

of the subcommittee on mechanical 

equipment of the ASHRAE Standard 

Project Committee 90.1R, whose 

members represent a wide range of 

interests in the HVAC industry, is that 

low pressure boilers are the boilers used 

for space heating in most commercial 

buildings, and that use of high pressure 

boilers for this purpose is not common. 

Finally, representatives of the relevant 

industries (GAMA, the Council of 

Industrial Boiler Owners and the 

American Boiler Manufacturers 

Association) uniformly stated that high 

pressure boilers are not commonly used 

in space heating applications in 

commercial buildings. 

On the basis of the above comments 

and information, the Department has 

decided upon further review of this 

issue that high pressure boilers are not 

currently covered by the standards and 

test procedures prescribed in EPCA. For 

reasons indicated in the NOPR and 

elsewhere in this notice, these 

requirements apply only to packaged 

boilers that are distributed to any 

significant extent for heating, space 

conditioning, or service water heating in 

buildings. The Department has now 

concluded that the information in the 

record demonstrates that high pressure 

boilers are not distributed to a 

significant extent for these purposes. 

Accordingly, the efficiency standards in 

today’s final rule do not apply to these 

boilers, nor does the rule include a test 

procedure for high pressure steam and 

high temperature hot water boilers, as 

proposed in the NOPR. Instead, the rule 

prescribes only a test procedure for 

commercial packaged low pressure 

steam and hot water boilers, commonly 

referred to as ASME Section IV Heating 

Boilers. The Department may revisit the 

issue of EPCA’s coverage of packaged 

high pressure boilers at a future date if 

some of the circumstances discussed 

above were to change—if, for example, 

ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1 were to 

incorporate efficiency standards and test 

procedures for this equipment or 

additional information indicates that a 

significant number of these boilers are 

sold for use in heating and space 

conditioning in commercial buildings. 

C. Commercial Packaged Boiler Test 

Procedures for the Measurement of 

Energy Efficiency 

EPCA requires that the test 

procedures for measuring the efficiency 

of commercial packaged boilers be those 

generally accepted industry testing or 

rating procedures that were developed 

or are recognized by the American 

Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air 

Conditioning Engineers, Inc., as 

referenced in ASHRAE/IES Standard 

90.1 and in effect on June 30, 1992. (42 

U.S.C. 6314(a)(4)(A)). Also, if such an 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 61955

industry test procedure or rating 

procedure for commercial packaged 

boilers is amended, DOE must adopt 

such revisions unless it determines that 

to do so would not produce test results 

which are reasonably designed to reflect 

energy efficiency, energy use, and 

estimated operating costs, or that the 

revised procedures would be unduly 

burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 

6314(a)(4)(B)) 

The version of ASHRAE Standard 

90.1 in effect on June 30, 1992, 

referenced five industry test standards 

that apply to gas-fired boilers or oil-fired 

boilers or both. These are the ANSI 

Standard Z21.13–1987 for gas-fired 

boilers (revised as ANSI Z21.13–1991 

with Addendum ANSI Z21.13–1993a); 

the HI Testing and Rating Standard for 

Heating Boilers, sixth edition, 1989, for 

gas and oil-fired boilers (HI 1989); 

ASME Power Test Codes (PTC) 4.1–

1964 (reaffirmed R1991) for Steam 

Generating Units for fossil fuel boilers 

(revised in 1998 as ASME PTC 4–1998, 

Fired Steam Generators, issued on 

December 31, 1999); the Underwriters 

Laboratory Standard 795–1973 for gas 

heating equipment (UL 795, revised in 

1994 as UL 795–94); and the 

Underwriters Laboratory Standard UL 

Standard 726–1990 for oil-fired boilers 

(UL 726).

DOE evaluated the five referenced 

standards and presented those analyses 

in the April and October 1998 

workshops. On the basis of this 

evaluation and the comments from the 

workshop attendees, in the NOPR we 

proposed the adoption of specific test 

procedures. DOE received comments on 

these proposals during the September 

2000 public hearing and in writing. 

As discussed above, the Department 

has determined that high pressure steam 

and high temperature water boilers are 

not covered at present by EPCA’s 

requirements for test procedures and 

standards for packaged boilers. 

Therefore, today’s rule does not contain 

test procedures or standards for these 

products, nor does DOE discuss below 

any comments it received as to the test 

procedures DOE should adopt for them. 

Also, DOE received no comments on our 

statement in the NOPR that DOE would 

not provide special test provisions for 

boilers designed for low temperature 

application. Therefore, DOE adheres to 

this rationale and position in the final 

rule and does not further discuss this 

issue. Finally, in the NOPR, the 

Department proposed an approach for 

testing, rating and reporting on boilers 

capable of supplying either hot water or 

steam. DOE received no comments on 

this approach and therefore it is 

implementing it in today’s final rule. 

1. Test Procedure and Test Conditions 

for Low Pressure Steam and Hot Water 

Boilers 

On the basis of discussions during the 

two earlier workshops, in the NOPR 

DOE proposed to adopt, in large part, 

the HI–1989 standard as the uniform 

test standard for both gas and oil fired 

low pressure heating boilers. And 

because gas fired boilers have 

commonly been tested under ANSI 

Z21.13, DOE proposed to adopt certain 

test conditions specified in the ANSI 

standard as modifications to the HI–

1989 standard. In addition to this, DOE 

proposed in the NOPR to allow 

manufacturers the alternative of using 

the Simplified Efficiency Test (Short 

Form) of ASME PTC 4.1, with some 

modifications that would ensure 

comparability between the two test 

procedures. 

No commenter objected to adoption of 

HI–1989, with modifications, as the 

DOE test procedure, and none suggested 

that this test procedure would affect the 

efficiencies of boilers as measured using 

any other test procedure referenced in 

ASHRAE 90.1 in 1992. At the 

September 2000 public hearing 

however, GAMA stated that HI had 

developed a revised test standard, BTS–

2000, ‘‘Method to Determine Efficiency 

of Commercial Space Heating Boilers,’’

which is based on the 1989 HI standard, 

and will replace that standard. 

Moreover, GAMA stated that the draft 

BTS–2000 standard adopts the DOE 

provisions as described in the NOPR, 

and recommended that DOE reference 

the new industry standard in place of 

the HI–1989 standard. GAMA agreed 

that it would submit the final version of 

the standard in the near future for 

review by DOE and by other 

stakeholders as requested by CEC. 

(GAMA, No. 2EE at pp. 2–3, and Tr. 71–

80; CEC, Tr. 76–80). Also, GAMA stated 

that, in referencing the HI–1989 

standard in the proposed rule, DOE had 

ignored certain sections in the standard 

that are important and needed to 

establish tolerances for the test data and 

duration of each test, and should be 

included in the referencing language. 

Those sections are Section 5.2.5 on 

derating the gas power burner rating 

based on the oil efficiency test, Section 

9.1 on input range and definition of 

equilibrium conditions, and Section 9.2 

on length of test. (GAMA, No. 2EE at pp. 

2–3). 

GAMA provided the Department with 

a draft version of the BTS–2000 

standard in October 2000 (GAMA, No. 

3), and a final version, dated January 

2001, in April 2001. A comparison of 

the final version of BTS–2000 to the HI–

1989 standard with respect to the test 

procedure for commercial heating 

boilers showed close agreement between 

the two documents. In addition, BTS–

2000: (1) Incorporated the modifications 

to the HI–1989 standard proposed in the 

NOPR on the inlet and outlet boiler 

water temperatures for hot water boilers; 

(2) included a test procedure for 

condensing boilers that follows the test 

method prescribed in the ASHRAE 

standard 103–1993, as proposed in the 

NOPR (except the specification on 

boiler water inlet temperature); and (3) 

revised the test setup with respect to the 

test stack and the location for the 

measurement of flue gas temperature 

and flue gas sampling for gas-fired 

boilers for indoor installation to agree 

with the provisions in the ANSI Z21.13 

and the ANSI Z21.13a–1993 addendum. 

Specifically, with respect to the latter, 

BTS–2000 (a) differentiates the setup for 

the test flue stack depending on whether 

the boiler input rate is below or above 

400,000 Btu/hr, and (b) changes the flue 

gas measurement plane from the 

location inside the insulated flue pipe 

section 12 inches downstream of the 

flue collar or outlet from the boiler 

(requirement in HI–1989), to 

‘‘immediately before the flue gases’

discharge from the boiler’’ (specification 

in ANSI Z21.13). (The latter change 

eliminates the need for the HI–1989 

requirement to insulate 12 inches of the 

test flue pipe of gas fired boilers, 

contained in the NOPR by virtue of the 

proposal to incorporate HI–1989 as the 

DOE test procedure.) 

Pursuant to the statute, 42 U.S.C. 

6314(a)(4)(B), the Department reviewed 

the amendments to the HI–1989 

standard as contained in the BTS–2000 

standard. The Department determined 

that the revisions to the HI–1989 

standard in BTS–2000 are substantively 

the same as what was proposed in the 

NOPR. We have no basis to conclude 

that the test procedure in BTS–2000 

either is not reasonably designed to 

produce results that reflect energy 

efficiency, energy use and estimated 

operating costs, or is unduly 

burdensome to conduct. Moreover, 

because BTS–2000 is essentially the 

same as the test procedure proposed in 

the NOPR, it would not alter the 

measured efficiencies that would have 

resulted from the proposed test 

procedure and would have little or no 

effect on efficiencies measured using the 

existing test procedures. See 65 FR at 

48843–45. Nor has any evidence been 

presented that use of BTS–2000 or the 

proposed test procedure would render 

non-compliant a commercial boiler 

previously measured as minimally 

61956 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

complying with the applicable EPCA 

standard. For all of these reasons, the 

Department is referencing the BTS–2000 

standard in today’s final rule instead of 

the HI–1989 standard as was proposed 

in the NOPR.

As described above, GAMA also 

stated that the rule language should 

include several sections (5.2.5, 9.1, and 

9.2) of the HI–1989 standard. The 

proposed rule language on test 

procedures did not reference Section 

5.2.5 since it is part of Section 5.2 of HI–

1989 on the approval procedure of a 

boiler’s rating, which does not concern 

the test method. Also, sections 9.1 and 

9.2 were already explicitly specified as 

part of the proposed rule language in 

Section 431.362(d)(1)(i), Test 

Measurements for Packaged Low 

Pressure Steam and Hot Water Boilers. 

See 65 FR 48851. In prescribing the use 

of BTS–2000 in today’s final rule, DOE 

has retained the references to sections 

9.1 and 9.2. 

In its comments, GAMA also asserted 

that the proposed optional test standard, 

the ASME PTC 4.1, has the following 

problems: (1) It lacks ‘‘tolerances for 

input, pressure, number of tests 

required, and when the boiler has 

achieved steady state conditions;’’ (2) 

the test duration of four hours is too 

long for a combustion test, and the 

locations ‘‘of temperature, pressure, flue 

sampling, and stack configuration are 

not specified;’’ (3) it is a test standard 

for the acceptance test of a boiler after 

it is installed in the field where the test 

conditions are less controllable than a 

laboratory test; and (4) it has been 

replaced by the standard ASME PTC 4–

1998 (issued on December 31, 1999), 

which is vastly different from the 

original ASME PTC 4.1. For these 

reasons, GAMA claimed that test results 

based on the ASME PTC 4.1 standard 

would be less accurate than results 

based on the HI–1989 standard. It also 

asserted that boilers in the same 

category should all be tested using a 

consistent procedure. GAMA therefore 

recommended that Section 431.362(c)(v) 

of the proposed rule, Alternative Test 

Procedure for Testing Low Pressure 

Steam and Hot Water boilers, which 

allows the use of PTC 4.1, be deleted. 

However, GAMA also suggested that for 

large boilers or boilers that are 

assembled in the field, field testing as 

per ASME PTC 4.1 might be allowed as 

an option. (GAMA, No. 2EE at p. 3 and 

Tr. 81–89). CEC stated that it generally 

opposes the inclusion of alternate test 

procedures since there is always 

confusion as to who has the option of 

choosing the test procedure—the 

manufacturer or the enforcing agency—

but in this case it has no objection. CEC 

also suggested that DOE require one test 

method for testing certain types of 

boilers, and another method for other 

types, rather than allowing all products 

to use either method. (CEC, No. 2FF at 

p. 2 and Tr. 87–89). 

The Department evaluated the new 

ASME PTC 4–1998 standard for possible 

adoption. As stated by GAMA, the new 

PTC 4–1998 is a completely re-written 

document and is vastly different from 

the PTC 4.1 in both style and details, 

even though the principles behind the 

test procedures remain unchanged. As 

stated in the Foreword to the standard, 

the PTC 4 committee made the decision 

to discourage the almost universal use 

of the abbreviated test procedure (The 

Short Form) in PTC 4.1. Therefore, the 

Short Form is no longer included in the 

new standard. After reviewing the PTC 

4–1998 standard and analyzing its effect 

on entities that would be required to use 

it, the Department believes that, without 

the abbreviated test procedure, the new 

test standard is too burdensome an 

undertaking for testing the small (in 

comparison with the size of the steam 

boilers or generators in an utility plant) 

packaged low pressure steam and hot 

water boilers employed for commercial 

space heating. Therefore, the 

Department has decided that the new 

ASME PTC 4–1998 should not be 

adopted in today’s final rule as a test 

procedure for commercial packaged 

boilers used for commercial space 

heating purposes. 

The Department considered the 

comments of GAMA with respect to the 

accuracy of the tests under the ASME 

PTC 4.1 standard. DOE believes that 

Section 3.13 of ASME PTC 4.1, which 

references the relevant ASME Power 

Test Codes, adequately specifies the 

required accuracy in instruments and 

measurement. DOE agrees with GAMA, 

however, that the test run duration that 

ASME PTC 4.1 states as preferable, four 

hours, may be longer than needed for 

the smaller packaged steel boilers 

employed for space heating, and that 

when the test is conducted in the field 

after a boiler is installed, test conditions 

such as the room temperature and the 

boiler inlet water temperature may be 

different from the conditions in a testing 

laboratory. But DOE believes that with 

appropriate modifications to address 

such problems, including the 

modifications proposed in the NOPR, 

the abbreviated test procedure of ASME 

PTC 4.1 is sound. 

Nevertheless, test results for products 

being rated under the same efficiency 

standard should be comparable, and 

DOE believes there would be some 

differences in the results obtained from 

the PTC 4.1 procedure and BTS–2000. 

Moreover, BTS–2000 is a sound, easy to 

follow, and up-to-date procedure that is 

readily available to manufacturers. By 

contrast, the abbreviated test procedure 

is not incorporated in a currently 

available standard, and the Foreword to 

PTC 4–1998 states that the PTC 4 

committee decided to discourage its use. 

On the other hand, as discussed in the 

NOPR, the American Boiler 

Manufacturers Association stated that 

its members use PTC 4.1 more 

frequently to test steel boilers, and the 

Council of Industrial Boiler Owners 

(CIBO) stated that its members lack 

familiarity with the HI–1989 standard. 

To the extent these firms are concerned 

about steel boilers used for industrial 

processes but which are rarely used for 

space conditioning and service water—

and that seems particularly true for 

CIBO members—such boilers are not 

covered by today’s requirements. Some 

manufacturers of steel boilers, 

moreover, have used the HI–1989 

standard, the predecessor to BTS–2000, 

as shown by the listing of their boilers 

in the Hydronics Institute I=B=R rating 

directory (three manufacturers in the 

January 2001 directory). In addition, 

DOE believes BTS–2000 and ASME PTC 

4.1 are essentially similar, and the 

differences between them are not 

fundamental. DOE is confident that, to 

the extent manufacturers need to 

convert from use of PTC 4.1 to BTS–

2000, doing so will not be difficult, and 

will cause only limited and certainly 

not undue burdens. Nevertheless, DOE 

believes it would be reasonable to allow 

a transition period during which 

manufacturers of steel boilers can 

become familiar with BTS–2000 and 

assure that their products will comply 

with EPCA standards using that 

procedure. 

Based on all of these considerations, 

DOE has decided in today’s final rule to 

prescribe BTS–2000 as the DOE test 

procedure for all commercial packaged 

boilers, but to allow the use of ASME 

PTC 4.1, with modifications, as an 

optional test procedure for steel boilers 

for two years after the publication of 

this notice. During this period, 

manufacturers may use either BTS–2000 

or the ASME PTC 4.1 abbreviated test 

procedure to determine the efficiency of 

steel boilers under EPCA, but if they use 

the PTC 4.1 procedure their tests must 

meet the following criteria: 

(1) The minimum duration of a test 

run after steady state operation is 

achieved shall be 30 minutes. (This 

specification is the same as in BTS–

2000.) 

(2) The boiler inlet water temperature 

shall be at 35° F to 80° F, except that 

when a boiler is tested in the field after 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 61957

installation the temperature may be as 

recommended by the manufacturer, but 

not more than 140° F. (The 35° F to 80°

F range was proposed in the NOPR as 

a condition of using PTC 4.1. DOE 

believes the additional specification 

will allow for field tests under 

conditions that cannot be controlled as 

they are in a test facility. In any event, 

DOE agrees with the participants in the 

workshops and the public hearing, who 

pointed out that variations in the boiler 

inlet water temperature have a very 

small effect on the combustion 

efficiency value of a non-condensing 

boiler.)

(3) For hot water boilers, the boiler 

outlet water temperature shall be at 

180°F ± 2°F. 

(4) For steam boilers, steam pressure 

must range from atmospheric (zero psig) 

to two psig. 

(5) In the heat loss method of ASME 

PTC 4.1 for calculating efficiency, the 

radiation loss term (and other minor 

loss terms) shall be set to zero to obtain 

the combustion efficiency (of 100 

percent minus percent flue loss). These 

modifications to the abbreviated test 

procedure should correct the problems 

we believe exist with this procedure. 

2. Provisions for Condensing Boilers 

In the NOPR, DOE stated that 

condensing boilers are significantly 

more energy efficient than noncondensing boilers and a test procedure 

should be readily available to allow 

manufacturers to rate their products 

accordingly. In addition, a test 

procedure is needed for evaluating 

design options underlying any future 

minimum efficiency standards. The 

Department proposed to adopt the 

steady state test procedure for 

condensing boilers as prescribed in the 

ASHRAE 103–1993 standard. ASHRAE/

IES Standard 90.1 does not directly 

reference an industry test standard for 

the testing of condensing boilers, but it 

references the DOE test procedure for 

residential boilers with input of less 

than 300,000 Btu/hr, which, in turn, 

references the ASHRAE 103–1993 

standard. DOE proposed to adopt the 

procedure specified in sections 7.2.2.4, 

7.8, 9.2 and 11.3.7 of ASHRAE standard 

103–1993 with two modifications. Of 

relevance here, one of these 

modifications was that the boiler inlet 

water temperature be restricted to 

80°F±5°F instead of the range of 35°F to 

80°F specified for non-condensing 

boilers, since the inlet water 

temperature influences the amount of 

condensate produced and, thus, needs 

to be more accurately specified. 

At the September 2000 public 

hearing, no objection was posed to the 

proposed testing method for condensing 

boilers. However, the revised Hydronics 

Institute Boiler Testing Standard BTS–

2000 added a test method for 

condensing boilers similar to the one 

proposed in the NOPR, except that it 

does not restrict inlet water temperature 

to 80°F±5°F. (See sections 8.5.2, 

9.1.2.1.4, 10.2.2, 10.2.3, 11.1.17, 11.1.18, 

11.1.19, and 11.2.2 of BTS–2000.) Since 

the Department is adopting the BTS–

2000 standard in today’s final rule, 

ASHRAE Standard 103–1993 need not 

be referenced in order to provide a 

procedure for the testing of condensing 

boilers. But the final rule does provide 

that, for purposes of the DOE test 

procedure, in sections 8.5.2 and 

9.1.2.1.4 of BTS–2000, the boiler inlet 

water temperature shall be at 80°F±5°F 

instead of the 80°F±10°F currently 

specified in the BTS–2000 standard. 

3. Modular Boilers and Multiple Boilers 

A modular boiler system consists of a 

group of identical individual boilers 

installed as a system. A multiple boiler 

system consists of a group of individual 

boilers, of different design or different 

sizes or both, installed as a system. In 

the preamble of the NOPR, the 

Department stated that the efficiency 

rating for a packaged modular boiler 

system with individual modules or 

boilers of identical design and 

construction may be based on the rating 

of only one boiler module in the system. 

For a multiple boiler system where the 

individual boilers are of different 

designs, we stated that each boiler of a 

different design would be considered a 

separate packaged boiler and be 

required to meet the minimum 

efficiency standard prescribed for that 

product. 

At the September 2000 public 

hearing, GAMA raised the question of 

why the Department proposed that a 

modular system would consist of 

individual boilers of 400,000 Btu/hr 

input or less. (GAMA, Tr. 90–91). DOE 

believes that this question results from 

a misunderstanding of our position. 

DOE had stated in the NOPR’s preamble 

that ‘‘a modular boiler assembly * * * 

consist[s] of * * * boilers * * * usually

of less than 400,000 Btu/hr input each.’’

65 FR 48847 (emphasis added). This 

language was part of an explanation of 

how DOE intended to treat modular 

boilers under the regulations. DOE did 

not propose a definition of modular 

boilers, nor was it DOE’s intention, 

either in the language just quoted or 

elsewhere in the preamble, to indicate 

that our treatment of modular boilers 

would depend on the size of their 

constituent units. Furthermore, the 

Department is not imposing such 

criterion in today’s final rule. The word 

‘‘usually’’ does not exclude from the 

category of modular boiler any system 

consisting of units each with an input 

of greater than 400,000 Btu/hr. 

4. Outdoor Boilers 

In a comment submitted to the 

Department after the September 2000 

public hearing, GAMA stated that the 

BTS–2000 standard specifies flue pipe 

and connection requirements for testing 

power gas and oil boilers, and for gasfired boilers designed for indoor 

installations (following the ANSI Z21.13 

standard), but does not specify any vent 

requirement for gas-fired boilers 

designed for outdoor installations. 

GAMA also stated that manufacturers 

currently test both indoor and outdoor 

gas-fired boilers in accordance with the 

requirements of the ANSI Z21.13 

standard, which specifically states that 

no test vent apparatus (other than that 

provided by the manufacturer) is 

required for gas-fired outdoor boilers. 

The Department believes that GAMA’s 

comment needs to be addressed in 

today’s final rule, because the test 

procedure in the rule should address 

venting for gas fired outdoor boilers. 

The current industry practice for testing 

gas-fired outdoor boilers is the ANSI 

Z21.13–1991 standard, which is 

referenced by ASHRAE Standard 90.1. 

Since DOE is not referencing the ANSI 

Z21.13–1991 standard in this rule, DOE 

is including the following language from 

Section 2.1.5 of the ANSI Z21.13 

standard in section 431.86 of today’s 

final rule: ‘‘A gas-fired boiler for 

outdoor installation with a venting 

system provided as part of the boiler 

must be tested with the venting system 

in place.’’

D. Effect of Amended Test Procedure on 

Measured Energy Efficiency 

As to rulemakings to amend test 

procedures, section 323(e) of EPCA, 42 

U.S.C. 6293(e), provides that DOE shall 

determine whether the amended test 

procedure would alter the measured 

energy efficiency of any covered 

product. If the amendment does alter 

measured efficiency, the Secretary must 

determine the average efficiency level 

under the new test procedure of 

products that minimally complied with 

the applicable energy conservation 

standard prior to the test procedure 

amendment, and must set the standard 

at that level. (42 U.S.C. 6293(e)(2)) In 

addition, any existing model of a 

product that complied with the 

previously applicable standard would 

be deemed to comply with the new 

standard. (42 U.S.C. 6293(e)(3)) These 

provisions prevent changes in a test 

61958 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

procedure from indirectly altering the 

applicable Federal energy conservation 

standard. They also prevent products 

that complied with standards using the 

previous test procedure from being 

forced out of compliance by the new test 

procedure. 

EPCA provides that the DOE test 

procedures for commercial packaged 

boilers shall be those industry test 

procedures recognized by ASHRAE and 

referenced in ASHRAE Standard 90.1 

and in effect on June 30, 1992. 42 U.S.C. 

6314(a)(4)(A). For these products, the 

version of ASHRAE Standard 90.1 in 

effect on June 30, 1992, contains five 

industry test standards that apply to gasfired boilers or oil-fired boilers or both. 

65 FR 48838, 48843. Until today, 

therefore, since DOE had not adopted a 

test procedure for these products under 

EPCA, there was no single existing test 

procedure that manufacturers were 

required to use for these products. In 

practice, however, particular industry 

test procedures were generally used for 

particular types of boilers. 65 FR 48844. 

In the rule published today, DOE is 

adopting, in part, a test procedure based 

on a combination of the existing 

ASHRAE standards in effect on June 30, 

1992. Since 42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(4)(A) 

provides that the DOE test procedures 

for boilers shall be those referenced in 

ASHRAE Standard 90.1 and in effect on 

June 30, 1992, the statute itself 

sanctions the adoption of provisions of 

any of these referenced test procedures. 

Thus, adoption today of a combination 

of these test procedures does not 

represent a change or amendment to the 

existing ‘‘required’’ test procedure for 

purposes of 42 U.S.C. 6293(e) when that 

section refers to an ‘‘amended test 

procedure.’’

In addition, today’s final rule 

provides for DOE adoption of BTS–

2000, which in substance consists of the 

combination of ASHRAE referenced 

standards just referred to, but with one 

minor modification. For gas-fired 

products, BTS–2000 requires use of an 

equation for calculating flue loss instead 

of providing for use of a nomogram. 

This slight change has no effect on the 

measured energy efficiency. Thus, while 

this modification is a test procedure 

amendment within the meaning of 42 

U.S.C. 6293(e), DOE need not take 

further action under that provision 

because this amendment does not alter 

the measured energy efficiency. 

Today’s final rule also contains two 

modifications to ASME PTC 4.1, another 

of the five industry test procedures in 

effect on June 30, 1992, and referenced 

in ASHRAE Standard 90.1. DOE is 

making both of these modifications in 

response to comments that it received 

on the NOPR. The first, a reduction in 

the minimum duration of a part of the 

test, will not alter the measured energy 

efficiency. The second, a relaxation of 

the required inlet water temperature 

when a manufacturer tests a boiler after 

installing it, will have only a de 

minimus effect on the measured 

combustion efficiency and should not 

put any models that are currently in 

compliance out of compliance. Thus, 

DOE will not take further action under 

42 U.S.C. 6293(e) with regard to either 

of these modifications to ASME PTC 

4.1. 

III. Procedural Requirements 

A. Review Under Executive Order 12866 

The Office of Information and 

Regulatory Affairs of the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) has 

determined that today’s regulatory 

action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866, 

‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review,’’ 58 

FR 51735 (October 4, 1993). 

Accordingly, this action was not subject 

to review under the Executive Order. 

B. Review Under the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires preparation 

of an initial regulatory flexibility 

analysis for any rule that by law must 

be proposed for public comment, unless 

the agency certifies that the rule, if 

promulgated, will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. As required by 

Executive Order 13272, ‘‘Proper 

Consideration of Small Entities in 

Agency Rulemaking,’’ 67 FR 53461 

(August 16, 2002), DOE published 

procedures and policies on February 19, 

2003, to ensure that the potential 

impacts of its rules on small entities are 

properly considered during the 

rulemaking process (68 FR 7990). DOE 

has made its procedures and policies 

available on the Office of General 

Counsel’s Web site: http://

www.gc.doe.gov.

DOE reviewed today’s rule under the 

provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act and the procedures and policies 

published on February 19, 2003, and 

certified in the NOPR that the proposed 

rule would not impose a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. (64 FR 69597). 

We received no comments on this issue, 

and after considering the potential small 

entity impact of this final rule, DOE 

affirms the certification that this rule 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. Accordingly, DOE has not 

prepared a regulatory flexibility analysis 

for this rulemaking. DOE will transmit 

the certification and supporting 

statement of factual basis to the Chief 

Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 

Business Administration for review 

pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b). 

C. Review Under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act 

This rulemaking will impose no new 

information or record keeping 

requirements. Accordingly, OMB 

clearance is not required under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 

3501 et seq.) 

D. Review Under the National 

Environmental Policy Act 

DOE has determined that this rule 

falls into a class of actions that are 

categorically excluded from review 

under the National Environmental 

Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et 

seq.) and the Department’s 

implementing regulations at 10 CFR part 

1021. Specifically, this rule amends an 

existing rule without changing the 

environmental effect of the rule being 

amended, and, therefore, is covered by 

the Categorical Exclusion in paragraph 

A5 to subpart D, 10 CFR part 1021. 

Accordingly, neither an environmental 

assessment nor an environmental 

impact statement is required. 

E. Review Under Executive Order 13132 

Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism,’’

64 FR 43255 (August 4, 1999) imposes 

certain requirements on agencies 

formulating and implementing policies 

or regulations that preempt State law or 

that have federalism implications. The 

Executive Order requires agencies to 

examine the constitutional and statutory 

authority supporting any action that 

would limit the policymaking discretion 

of the States and carefully assess the 

necessity for such actions. The 

Executive Order also requires agencies 

to have an accountable process to 

ensure meaningful and timely input by 

State and local officials in the 

development of regulatory policies that 

have federalism implications. On March 

14, 2000, DOE published a statement of 

policy describing the intergovernmental 

consultation process it will follow in the 

development of such regulations (65 FR 

13735). DOE has examined today’s rule 

and has determined that it does not 

preempt State law and does not have a 

substantial direct effect on the States, on 

the relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. No further action 

is required by Executive Order 13132. 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 61959

F. Review Under Executive Order 12988 

With respect to the review of existing 

regulations and the promulgation of 

new regulations, section 3(a) of 

Executive Order 12988, ‘‘Civil Justice 

Reform’’ (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), 

imposes on Federal agencies the general 

duty to adhere to the following 

requirements: (1) Eliminate drafting 

errors and ambiguity; (2) write 

regulations to minimize litigation; and 

(3) provide a clear legal standard for 

affected conduct rather than a general 

standard and promote simplification 

and burden reduction. Section 3(b) of 

Executive Order 12988 specifically 

requires that Executive agencies make 

every reasonable effort to ensure that the 

regulation: (1) Clearly specifies the 

preemptive effect, if any; (2) clearly 

specifies any effect on existing Federal 

law or regulation; (3) provides a clear 

legal standard for affected conduct 

while promoting simplification and 

burden reduction; (4) specifies the 

retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately 

defines key terms; and (6) addresses 

other important issues affecting clarity 

and general draftsmanship under any 

guidelines issued by the Attorney 

General. Section 3(c) of Executive Order 

12988 requires Executive agencies to 

review regulations in light of applicable 

standards in section 3(a) and section 

3(b) to determine whether they are met 

or it is unreasonable to meet one or 

more of them. DOE has completed the 

required review and determined that, to 

the extent permitted by law, this rule 

meets the relevant standards of 

Executive Order 12988. 

G. Review Under the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4) 

requires each Federal agency to assess 

the effects of Federal regulatory actions 

on State, local, and tribal governments 

and the private sector. With respect to 

a proposed regulatory action that may 

result in the expenditure by State, local 

and tribal governments, in the aggregate, 

or by the private sector of $100 million 

or more (adjusted annually for 

inflation), section 202 of the Act 

requires a Federal agency to publish 

estimates of the resulting costs, benefits, 

and other effects on the national 

economy (2 U.S.C. 1532(a),(b)). The Act 

also requires a Federal agency to 

develop an effective process to permit 

timely input by elected officers of State, 

local, and tribal governments on a 

proposed ‘‘significant intergovernmental 

mandate,’’ and requires an agency plan 

for giving notice and opportunity for 

timely input to potentially affected 

small governments before establishing 

any requirements that might 

significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. On March 18, 1997, DOE 

published a statement of policy on its 

process for intergovernmental 

consultation under the Act (62 FR 

12820) (also available at http://

www.gc.doe.gov). The rule published 

today does not contain any Federal 

mandate, so these requirements do not 

apply. 

H. Review Under the Treasury and 

General Government Appropriations 

Act, 1999

Section 654 of the Treasury and 

General Government Appropriations 

Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105–277) requires 

Federal agencies to issue a Family 

Policymaking Assessment for any rule 

that may affect family well-being. This 

rule would not have any impact on the 

autonomy or integrity of the family as 

an institution. Accordingly, DOE has 

concluded that it is not necessary to 

prepare a Family Policymaking 

Assessment. 

I. Review Under Executive Order 12630 

DOE has determined pursuant to 

Executive Order 12630, ‘‘Governmental 

Actions and Interference with 

Constitutionally Protected Property 

Rights,’’ 53 FR 8859 (March 18, 1988) 

that this regulation would not result in 

any takings which might require 

compensation under the Fifth 

Amendment to the United States 

Constitution. 

J. Review Under the Treasury and 

General Government Appropriations 

Act, 2001 

The Treasury and General 

Government Appropriations Act, 2001 

(44 U.S.C. 3516, note) provides for 

agencies to review most disseminations 

of information to the public under 

guidelines established by each agency 

pursuant to general guidelines issued by 

OMB. OMB’s guidelines were published 

at 67 FR 8452 (February 22, 2002), and 

DOE’s guidelines were published at 67 

FR 62446 (October 7, 2002). DOE has 

reviewed today’s notice of final 

rulemaking under the OMB and DOE 

guidelines and has concluded that it is 

consistent with applicable policies in 

those guidelines. 

K. Review Under Executive Order 13211 

Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use,’’ 66 FR 28355 (May 

22, 2001) requires Federal agencies to 

prepare and submit to the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs 

(OIRA), Office of Management and 

Budget, a Statement of Energy Effects for 

any proposed significant energy action. 

A ‘‘significant energy action’’ is defined 

as any action by an agency that 

promulgated or is expected to lead to 

promulgation of a final rule, and that: 

(1) Is a significant regulatory action 

under Executive Order 12866, or any 

successor order; and (2) is likely to have 

a significant adverse effect on the 

supply, distribution, or use of energy, or 

(3) is designated by the Administrator of 

OIRA as a significant energy action. For 

any proposed significant energy action, 

the agency must give a detailed 

statement of any adverse effects on 

energy supply, distribution, or use 

should the proposal be implemented, 

and of reasonable alternatives to the 

action and their expected benefits on 

energy supply, distribution, and use. 

Today’s regulatory action would not 

have a significant adverse effect on the 

supply, distribution, or use of energy 

and, therefore, is not a significant 

energy action. Accordingly, DOE has not 

prepared a Statement of Energy Effects. 

L. Review Under Section 32 of the 

Federal Energy Administration Act of 

1974 

We stated in the NOPR the reasons 

why section 32 of the Federal Energy 

Administration Act of 1974, as amended 

by the Federal Energy Administration 

Authorization Act of 1977, 15 U.S.C. 

788, (the FEAA) does not apply to the 

commercial standards incorporated into 

the proposed rule, except for ASHRAE 

Standard 103–1993. We received no 

comments on this issue. 

As we stated and discussed in the 

NOPR, today’s rule incorporates certain 

commercial standards which EPCA 

requires to be used. These standards are 

referenced in ASHRAE Standard 90.1–

1989 and amendments thereto. Because 

DOE has very limited discretion to 

depart from the standards referenced in 

ASHRAE 90.1, Section 32 of the FEAA 

does not apply to them. 

In the NOPR, we also stated that the 

final rule would include ASHRAE 

Standard 103–1993, ‘‘Method of Testing 

for Annual Fuel Utilization Efficiency of 

Residential Central Furnaces and 

Boilers,’’ a test standard which includes 

testing method for condensing boilers. 

We stated that DOE would comply with 

the requirements of section 32 for this 

particular standard since it is not 

referenced in the ASHRAE Standard 

90.1. However, today’s rule does not 

include ASHRAE Standard 103–1993. 

Instead, we are relying on the revised 

Hydronics Institute Boiler Testing 

Standard BTS–2000 which now has a 

method for testing condensing boilers. 

61960 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

This standard is referenced in ASHRAE 

Standard 90.1. Accordingly, there is 

now no reason for DOE to fulfill the 

consultation requirements of section 32 

with respect to Standard 103–1993. 

Today’s rule does not contain 

industry standards to which Section 32 

applies. 

M. Congressional Notification 

As required by 5 U.S.C. 801, DOE will 

report to Congress on the promulgation 

of today’s rule prior to its effective date. 

The report will state that it has been 

determined that the rule is not a ‘‘major 

rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

N. Approval of the Office of the 

Secretary 

The Secretary of Energy has approved 

publication of today’s rule.

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 431 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Commercial products, 

Energy conservation, Incorporation by 

reference.

Issued in Washington, DC, on July 27, 

2004. 

David K. Garman, 

Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy.

■ For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, Title 10, Part 431 of the Code 

of Federal Regulations is amended as set 

forth below:

PART 431—ENERGY EFFICIENCY 

PROGRAM FOR CERTAIN 

COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL 

EQUIPMENT

■ 1. The authority citation for Part 431 

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6311–6316.

■ 2. Subpart E is added to read as 

follows:

Subpart E—Commercial Packaged Boilers 

Sec. 

431.81 Purpose and scope. 

431.82 Definitions concerning commercial 

packaged boilers. 

Test Procedures 

431.85 Materials incorporated by reference. 

431.86 Uniform test method for the 

measurement of energy efficiency of 

commercial packaged boilers. 

Energy Conservation Standards 

431.87 Energy conservation standards and 

their effective dates.

Subpart E—Commercial Packaged 

Boilers

§ 431.81 Purpose and scope. 

This subpart contains energy 

conservation requirements for certain 

commercial packaged boilers, pursuant 

to Part C of Title III of the Energy Policy 

and Conservation Act. (42 U.S.C 6311–

6316)

§ 431.82 Definitions concerning 

commercial packaged boilers. 

The following definitions apply for 

purposes of this subpart E, and of 

subparts A and J through M of this part. 

Any words or terms not defined in this 

section or elsewhere in this part shall be 

defined as provided in 42 U.S.C. 6311. 

Combustion efficiency for a 

commercial packaged boiler means the 

efficiency descriptor for packaged 

boilers, determined using test 

procedures prescribed under § 431.86 

and equals to 100 percent minus percent 

flue loss (percent flue loss is based on 

input fuel energy). 

Commercial packaged boiler means a 

type of packaged low pressure boiler 

that is industrial equipment with a 

capacity, (rated maximum input) of 

300,000 Btu per hour (Btu/hr) or more 

which, to any significant extent, is 

distributed in commerce: 

(1) For heating or space conditioning 

applications in buildings; or 

(2) For service water heating in 

buildings but does not meet the 

definition of ‘‘hot water supply boiler’’

in this part. 

Condensing boiler means a 

commercial packaged boiler that 

condenses part of the water vapor in the 

flue gases, and that includes a means of 

collecting and draining this condensate 

from its heat exchanger section. 

Flue condensate means liquid formed 

by the condensation of moisture in the 

flue gases. 

Manufacturer of a commercial 

packaged boiler means any person who 

manufactures, produces, assembles or 

imports such a boiler, including any 

person who: 

(1) Manufactures, produces, 

assembles or imports a commercial 

packaged boiler in its entirety; 

(2) Manufactures, produces, 

assembles or imports a commercial 

packaged boiler in part, and specifies or 

approves the boiler’s components, 

including burners or other components 

produced by others, as for example by 

specifying such components in a 

catalogue by make and model number or 

parts number; or 

(3) Is any vendor or installer who sells 

a commercial packaged boiler that 

consists of a combination of 

components that is not specified or 

approved by a person described in 

paragraph (1) or (2) of this definition. 

Packaged boiler means a boiler that is 

shipped complete with heating 

equipment, mechanical draft equipment 

and automatic controls; usually shipped 

in one or more sections and does not 

include a boiler that is custom designed 

and field constructed. If the boiler is 

shipped in more than one section, the 

sections may be produced by more than 

one manufacturer, and may be 

originated or shipped at different times 

and from more than one location. 

Packaged high pressure boiler means 

a packaged boiler that is: 

(1) A steam boiler designed to operate 

at a steam pressure higher than 15 psi 

gauge (psig); or 

(2) A hot water boiler designed to 

operate at a water pressure above 160 

psig or at a water temperature exceeding 

250° F, or both; or 

(3) A boiler that is designed to be 

capable of supplying either steam or hot 

water, and designed to operate under 

the conditions in paragraphs (1) and (2) 

of this definition. 

Packaged low pressure boiler means a 

packaged boiler that is: 

(1) A steam boiler designed to operate 

at or below a steam pressure of 15 psig; 

or 

(2) A hot water boiler designed to 

operate at or below a water pressure of 

160 psig and a temperature of 250 °F; or

(3) A boiler that is designed to be 

capable of supplying either steam or hot 

water, and designed to operate under 

the conditions in paragraphs (1) and (2) 

of this definition. 

Test Procedures

§ 431.85 Materials incorporated by 

reference. 

(a) The Department incorporates by 

reference the following test procedures 

into subpart E of part 431. The Director 

of the Federal Register has approved the 

material listed in paragraph (b) of this 

section for incorporation by reference in 

accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 

CFR part 51. Any subsequent 

amendment to this material by the 

standard-setting organization will not 

affect the DOE test procedures unless 

and until DOE amends its test 

procedures. The Department 

incorporates the material as it exists on 

the date of the approval and a notice of 

any change in the material will be 

published in the Federal Register. 

(b) List of test procedures 

incorporated by reference.

(1) The Hydronics Institute (HI) of 

GAMA Boiler Testing Standard BTS–

2000, ‘‘Method to Determine Efficiency 

of Commercial Space Heating Boilers,’’

published January 2001 (HI BTS–2000), 

IBR approved for § 431.86. 

(2) The American Society of 

Mechanical Engineers Power Test Codes 

for Steam Generating Units, ASME PTC 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 61961

4.1–1964, Reaffirmed 1991 (Including 

1968 and 1969 Addenda) (‘‘ASME PTC 

4.1’’), IBR approved for § 431.86. 

(c) Availability of references.

(1) Inspection of test procedures. The 

test procedures incorporated by 

reference are available for inspection at: 

(i) National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). For 

information on the availability of this 

material at NARA, call 202–741–6030, 

or go to: http://www.archives.gov/

federal_register/

code_of_federal_regulations/ 

ibr_locations.html.

(ii) U.S. Department of Energy, Office 

of Energy Efficiency and Renewable 

Energy, Hearings and Dockets, ‘‘Test 

Procedures and Efficiency Standards for 

Commercial Packaged Boilers,’’ Docket 

No. EE–RM/TP–99–470, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585. 

(2) Obtaining copies of Standards.

Anyone can purchase a copy of HI BTS–

2000 from the Hydronics Institute 

Division of GAMA, P.O. Box 218, 

Berkeley Heights, NJ 07922, or http://

www.gamanet.org/publist/

hydroordr.htm; and a copy of ASME 

PTC 4.1–1964/RA–1991 from Global 

Engineering Documents, 15 Inverness 

Way East, Engelwood, CO 80112, 800–

854–7179.

§ 431.86 Uniform test method for the 

measurement of energy efficiency of 

commercial packaged boilers. 

(a) Scope. This section provides test 

procedures that must be followed for 

measuring, pursuant to EPCA, the 

steady state combustion efficiency of a 

gas-fired or oil-fired commercial 

packaged boiler. These test procedures 

apply to packaged low pressure boilers 

that have rated input capacities of 

300,000 Btu/hr or more and are 

‘‘commercial packaged boilers, but do 

not apply under EPCA to ‘‘packaged 

high pressure boilers.’’

(b) Definitions. For purposes of this 

section, the Department incorporates by 

reference the definitions specified in 

Section 3.0 of the HI BTS–2000 

(Incorporated by reference, see 

§ 431.85), with the exception of the 

definition for the terms ‘‘packaged 

boiler’’, ‘‘condensing boilers’’, and 

‘‘packaged low pressure steam’’ and 

‘‘hot water boiler’’. 

(c) Test Method for Commercial 

Packaged Boilers—General. After 

October 23, 2006, follow the provisions 

in this paragraph (c) for all testing of 

packaged low pressure boilers that are 

commercial packaged boilers. Prior to 

that date, follow either the provisions of 

this paragraph (c) or of paragraph (d) of 

this section to test steel boilers, but 

follow the provisions of this paragraph 

for all other commercial packaged 

boilers. 

(1) Test Setup.

(i) Classifications: If employing boiler 

classification, you must classify boilers 

as given in Section 4.0 of the HI BTS–

2000 (Incorporated by reference, see 

§ 431.85). 

(ii) Requirements: Conduct the 

combustion efficiency test as given in 

Section 5.2 (Combustion Efficiency 

Test) of the HI BTS–2000 (Incorporated 

by reference, see § 431.85). 

(iii) Instruments and Apparatus:

(A) Follow the requirements for 

instruments and apparatus in sections 6 

(Instruments) and 7 (Apparatus), of the 

HI BTS–2000 (Incorporated by 

reference, see § 431.85), with the 

exception of section 7.2.5 (flue 

connection for outdoor boilers) which is 

replaced with paragraph (c)(1)(iii)(B) of 

this section: 

(B) Flue Connection for Outdoor 

Boilers: For oil-fired and power gas 

outdoor boilers, the integral venting 

means may have to be revised to permit 

connecting the test flue apparatus 

described in section 7.2.1 of BTS–2000. 

A gas-fired boiler for outdoor 

installation with a venting system 

provided as part of the boiler must be 

tested with the venting system in place. 

(iv) Test Conditions: Use test 

conditions from Section 8.0 (excluding 

8.5.2, 8.5.3, and 8.6.2) of HI BTS–2000 

(Incorporated by reference, see § 431.85) 

for the combustion efficiency testing, 

and use paragraph (c)(1)(iv)(A) of this 

section when testing a condensing 

boiler:

(A) Water Temperatures for 

Condensing Boilers—For condensing 

boilers the outlet temperature shall be 

180°F±2°F and the inlet temperature 

shall be 80°F±5°F at all times during the 

test. (See also paragraphs (c)(2)(i) and 

(ii) of this section for condensing 

boilers.). 

(B) [Reserved] 

(2) Test Measurements.

(i) Measure for combustion efficiency 

according to sections 9.1 (excluding 

sections 9.1.1.2.3 and 9.1.2.2.3), 9.2 and 

10.2 of the HI BTS–2000 (Incorporated 

by reference, see § 431.85), except that 

for condensing boilers, replace the 

boiler water inlet temperature in section 

9.1.2.1.4 of the HI BTS–2000 standard 

with the inlet temperature specified in 

paragraph (c)(1)(iv)(A) of this section. 

(ii) Procedure for the Measurement of 

Condensate for a Condensing Boiler.

Collect flue condensate as specified in 

Section 9.2.2 of HI BTS–2000 

(Incorporated by reference, see 

§ 431.85). Measure the condensate from 

the flue gas under steady state operation 

for the 30 minute collection period 

during the 30 minute steady state 

combustion efficiency test. Flue 

condensate mass shall be measured 

immediately at the end of the 30 minute 

collection period to prevent evaporation 

loss from the sample. The humidity of 

the room shall at no time exceed 80 

percent. Determine the mass of flue 

condensate for the steady state period 

by subtracting the tare container weight 

from the total container and flue 

condensate weight measured at the end 

of the test period. 

(iii) A Boiler That is Capable of 

Supplying Either Steam or Hot Water.

(A) Testing. For purposes of EPCA, 

measure the combustion efficiency of a 

commercial packaged boiler capable of 

supplying either steam or hot water 

either by testing the boiler in the steam 

mode or by testing it in both the steam 

and hot water modes. 

(B) Rating. If testing the boiler only in 

the steam mode, use the efficiency 

determined from such testing to rate the 

boiler for both the steam and water 

modes. If testing the boiler in both 

modes, rate the boiler’s efficiency for 

each mode based on the testing in that 

mode. 

(3) Calculation of Combustion 

Efficiency. Use the calculation 

procedure for the combustion efficiency 

test specified in Section 11.2 (including 

the specified subsections of 11.1) of the 

HI BTS–2000 (Incorporated by 

reference, see § 431.85). 

(d) Steel Commercial Packaged 

Boilers—Alternative Test Method. Until 

October 23, 2006, follow either the 

provisions of this paragraph (d), or of 

paragraph (c) of this section, to test steel 

commercial packaged boilers. 

(1) Test setup. Instead of using HI 

BTS–2000 as specified in paragraph 

(c)(1) of this section, conduct the 

combustion efficiency test for steel 

packaged low pressure boilers that are 

commercial packaged boilers using the 

Abbreviated Efficiency Test (Simplified 

Efficiency Test or The Short Form) as 

specified in ASME PTC 4.1 

(Incorporated by reference, see 

§ 431.85). If selecting the ASME PTC 4.1 

procedure for conducting the required 

combustion efficiency test for steel 

boilers, conduct the test under 

conditions as specified in paragraphs 

(d)(1)(i) and (ii) of this section. 

(i) Use the test procedure for the 

efficiency test from ASME PTC 4.1 

(Incorporated by reference, see 

§ 431.85). Conduct the combustion 

efficiency test with the Abbreviated 

Efficiency Test (Simplified Efficiency 

Test or The Short Form) for gas and oil 

fuels described in Section 1.07 of ASME 

61962 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

PTC 4.1 (Incorporated by reference, see 

§ 431.85). 

(ii) Test Conditions for the 

Combustion Efficiency.

(A) Steam pressure for steam boilers—

Test must be made at atmospheric 

pressure or at a pressure not exceeding 

2 psig. 

(B) Water temperature for hot water 

boilers—The inlet temperature must be 

35 °F to 80 °F, except that when a boiler 

is tested in the field after installation the 

inlet temperature may be as 

recommended by the manufacturer, but 

must not exceed 140 °F. The outlet 

temperature shall be 180 °F ± 2 °F. 

(C) After steady state operation is 

achieved, the minimum duration of a 

test run shall be 30 minutes. 

(2) Test Measurements. Use the test 

procedure from Section 5, Efficiency by 

Heat Loss Method, of ASME PTC 4.1 

(Incorporated by reference, see 

§ 431.85). Use the test conditions as 

specified in paragraph (d)(1) of this 

section. For a boiler that is capable of 

supplying either steam or hot water, 

follow paragraph (c)(2)(iii) of this 

section. 

(3) Calculation of Combustion 

Efficiency. Use the heat loss method for 

gas or oil fuel as specified in Section 7.3 

and the Test Forms for the Abbreviated 

Efficiency Test, PTC 4.1–a (Summary 

Sheet) and PTC 4.1–b (Calculation 

Sheet), of ASME PTC 4.1 to determine 

the combustion efficiency, except that 

the following specific heat loss terms (as 

listed in Section 7.3 of ASME PTC 4.1) 

to 0: sections 7.3.2.03 (moisture in fuel), 

7.3.2.01 (combustible in dry refuse), 

7.3.2.10 (radiation to surroundings), 

7.3.2.05 through 7.3.2.09 and 7.3.2.11 

through 7.3.2.14 (unmeasured losses) 

must be set. (Incorporated by reference, 

see § 431.85) 

Energy Efficiency Standards

§ 431.87 Energy conservation standards 

and their effective dates. 

Each manufacturer of a commercial 

packaged boiler manufactured on or 

after January 1, 1994, must meet the 

following energy efficiency standard 

levels: 

(a) For a gas-fired packaged boiler 

with a capacity (rated maximum input) 

of 300,000 Btu/hr or more, the 

combustion efficiency at the maximum 

rated capacity must be not less than 80 

percent. 

(b) For an oil-fired packaged boiler 

with a capacity (rated maximum input) 

of 300,000 Btu/hr or more, the 

combustion efficiency at the maximum 

rated capacity must be not less than 83 

percent.

[FR Doc. 04–17730 Filed 10–20–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–U

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy 

10 CFR Part 431

[Docket No. EE–RM/TP–99–460] 

RIN 1904–AA97

Energy Efficiency Program for Certain 

Commercial and Industrial Equipment: 

Test Procedures and Efficiency 

Standards for Commercial Air 

Conditioners and Heat Pumps

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy.

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Energy Policy 

and Conservation Act (EPCA), the 

Department of Energy (the Department) 

promulgates a rule that accomplishes 

three objectives. First and principally, 

the rule sets forth test procedures to rate 

the energy efficiency of commercial air 

conditioners and heat pumps. Second, 

for ease of reference by commercial air 

conditioner manufacturers, this rule 

also includes the energy conservation 

standards prescribed by EPCA for 

commercial equipment that the 

Department has not amended. Third, 

also for ease of reference by commercial 

air conditioner manufacturers, the rule 

moves commercial air conditioning and 

heat pump minimum efficiency levels to 

a separate subpart.

DATES: This direct final rule is effective 

December 20, 2004, unless significant 

adverse or critical comments are 

received by November 22, 2004. If the 

effective date is delayed, a timely notice 

will be published in the Federal 

Register. The incorporation by reference 

of certain publications listed in this rule 

is approved by the Director of the 

Federal Register as of December 20, 

2004.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by docket number EE–RM/

TP–99–460 and/or RIN number 1904–

AA97, by any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• E-mail: CommACHeatPumpDirect

FinalRuleComments@ee.doe.gov.

Include EE–RM/TP–99–460 and/or RIN 

1904–AA97 in the subject line of the 

message. 

• Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards-Jones, 

U.S. Department of Energy, Building 

Technologies Program, Mailstop EE–2J, 

Direct Final Rule for Commercial AC 

and Heat Pumps, EE–RM/TP–99–460 

and/or RIN 1904–AA97, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC, 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 586–2945. Please 

submit one signed paper original. 

• Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda 

Edwards-Jones, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Building Technologies Program, 

Room 1J–018, 1000 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC, 20585. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the agency name and 

docket number or Regulatory 

Information Number (RIN) for this 

rulemaking. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received, go to the U.S. 

Department of Energy, Forrestal 

Building, Room 1J–018 (Resource Room 

of the Building Technologies Program), 

1000 Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC, (202) 586–9127, 

between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

Please call Ms. Brenda Edwards-Jones at 

the above telephone number for 

additional information regarding 

visiting the Resource Room. Please note:

The Department’s Freedom of 

Information Reading Room (formerly 

Room 1E–190 at the Forrestal Building) 

is no longer housing rulemaking 

materials.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mohammed Khan, Project Manager, U.S. 

Department of Energy, Office of Energy 

Efficiency and Renewable Energy, 

Building Technologies Program, 

Forrestal Building, EE–2J, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121, (202) 586–

7892, FAX (202) 586–4617, e-mail: 

Mohammed.Khan@ee.doe.gov, or 

Francine Pinto, Esq., U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of General Counsel, 

Forrestal Building, GC–72, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586–9507, 

e-mail: Francine.Pinto@hq.doe.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

direct final rule incorporates, by 

reference, into Subpart F of Part 431, 

four test procedures for air conditioners 

and heat pumps contained in industry 

standards referenced by the American 

Society of Heating, Refrigerating and 

Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. 

(ASHRAE) and the Illuminating 

Engineering Society of North America 

(IES or IESNA) Standard 90.1 

(ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1). Two of 

these industry standards were published