1 Report from the Commercial HVAC, WH, and Refrigeration Working Group to the Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee August 30, 2013

Subject: Certification Requirements for HVAC, WH, and Refrigeration Equipment

Summary

We recommend that ASRAC approve our recommendations for

--

A proposed rule on model groupings and certification. An extension of time to develop recommendations on a verification program proposed rule and to discuss possible issues concerning the existing enforcement regulations.

Background

History

On February 26, 2013, the Department of Energy (DOE) Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee (ASRAC) established the Commercial HVAC, WH, and Refrigeration Working Group (Working Group) to negotiate certification requirements for commercial heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning (HVAC), water heating (WH), and refrigeration equipment. The Working Group was directed to provide a progress report by June 24, 2013, and a final report by August 30, 2013, with recommendations for ASRAC to adopt.

The first meeting of the Working Group was held on April 30 to develop ground rules for the negotiations, discuss the scope of the subjects to be negotiated, and prepare a schedule of meetings to meet the August 30, 2013 deadline for the recommendations to ASRAC. Among other provisions, the Working Group adopted Ground Rules requiring that ther e be “no more than 2 negative votes” to have the necessary consensus to adopt a recommendation. They also agreed that abstentions would not count as a negative vote. In addition, the Group discussed the scope of the rulemaking issues to be negotiated and decided that they could not effectively negotiate the certification requirements without first resolving interrelated issues, particularly Alternative Efficiency Determination Methods (AEDMs). The Working Group agreed to begin the negotiations with these other issues before addressing the certification issues.

AEDMs

Meetings were held on May 14 - 15, May 29 - 30

, and June 10 - 11, to resolve the AEDM issues. On June 24, the Working Group submitted a report to ASRAC with2

recommendations that DOE proceed with a notice of proposed rulemaking on AEDMs based on the unanimous consensus of the Working Group reflected in the report. ASRAC agreed, and the Department is currently drafting the proposed rule.

Basic Models and Certification

Recommendations. Subsequent meetings of the full Working Group were held on July
1 -2, July 17 - 18, July 31 - August 1, August 7 - 8, and August 26 - 28. A subset of Working Group members met on August 14 (boilers and motors) and August 20 (boilers).
In addition, some Working Group members have been meeting informally with each other and with the constituencies they represent. As a result of these meetings, the Working Group reached consensus on basic model groupings for determining and certifying ratings and the certification process. The discussions at those meetings covered a broad range of issues from the confidentiality of information submitted to DOE to the process for evaluating equipment efficiency when a piece of optional equipment would increase energy use during a test but provide increased energy efficiency over the life of the product. Because of the many different kinds of equipment covered by this rulemaking, over 120 separate recommendations were voted on by the Group during the meetings ; virtually all were adopted unanimously, with only one having one negative vote, and one having two negative votes. Although abstentions do not count as negative votes, we note that there was only one recommendation having two abstentions, and one having one abstention. Each of the recommendations adopted by the Working Group and the votes recorded are contained in Attachment 1 to this report.

One of the key issues of this phase of the negotiation was how various product features are treated with respect to the basic model definition. The recommendation of the Working Group is for DOE to issue an enforcement policy to exclude certain identified features (e.g., economizers) of certain products from Departmental testing; however, such an exclusion would only apply when a n otherwise identical model (one that is identical in all other features; e.g., everything is the same except that it does not have an economizer) is available in the manufacturer’s product line for sale at all times. In any case where a manufacturer does not offer an otherwise identical model, the model with that feature (e.g., an economizer) would be subject to Departmental testing. Implicit in this policy is an allowance for manufacturers to incorporate features that impact energy efficiency/energy consumption without reflecting that impact in the efficiency/consumption ratings for that basic model.

High Static Indoor Blowers/Oversized Motors. There is one issue presented in Attachment 1 that warrants special attention because of the way it is being handled. The issue involves the use of HVAC basic models and how to account for the use of high static indoor blowers and oversized motors; these are indoor fan assemblies that include a motor that drives the fan that can deliver higher external static pressure than the standard indoor fan assembly sold with the equipment. Because of the time necessary to work out the details for determining the relative efficiency of these high static assemblies compared to the standard assembly sold with the equipment, the Working Group unanimously agreed to a conceptual approach to the problem so that a recommendation3

could be sent to ASRAC. This approach is necessary because of the December 31, 2013 deadline for implementation of DOE’s existing certification regulations. The recommendation is that DOE issue enforcement guidance indicating that units will be tested with the base motor, provided that all motors used within the model grouping have the same or better relative efficiency performance as the motor included with the base unit. The affected interests will work informally with DOE over the next month on the details for establishing that relative efficiency via a guidance document. Because they agree on the need to establish the relative efficiency, they believe they just need more time to work out the complicated details. If they are unable to reach agreement on the details, ASRAC will be advised that the certification proposal for several types of HVAC equipment (small, large and very large commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment and single package vertical units) cannot be included in the proposed certification rule.

Key Points. The Working Group wanted to stress the following points about its recommendations:

The group believes that it is vital that the certification rulemaking move forward VERY quickly.

It recommends that ASRAC advise DOE to provide public notification as quickly as it can that compliance with the December 31, 2013 implementation date for certification will not be required. It agreed to implementation dates in the proposed rule based on its understanding that ASRAC would agree to permit the Working Group to review any changes
made to the proposed rule as a result of public comments so that the Group can
determine whether the final cert ification rule will deviate "significantly" from the proposed rule, triggering need for later compliance dates (based on the
certification rule instead of the AEDM rule). We recommend that ASRAC agree

to t his. The Group ’s recommendation is to address certification separately from verification, thus this proposal only addresses certification. The g roup has not yet discussed the issue of enforcement process/statistics/tolerances and requests additional time to discuss that issue.

Verification

Background. The Working Group also began discussions during the post AEDM meetings on a verification program. Because this would be a new DOE rule, a considerable amount of time has been spent talking about a wide range of alternatives for doing the testing to limit costs while achieving the necessary confidence in the test results. Because of this, many members of the Group believe they need ed to check more closely with others affected by the potential rule whose interests they represent in the negotiations.4

Recommendation. As a result, at the August 7 meeting, the Group agreed that it was unlikely to complete discussions and develop recommendations on verification testing by the end of August. Therefore, it agreed to add one day and more hours to the meeting days for its last meeting in August to resolve as much as possible before the August 30 report. It also agreed to recommend to ASRAC that the time for the completion of recommendations on verification testing be extended to October 31, 2013. The Group has scheduled another meeting for September 11 - 12 with the expectation that ASRAC will agree to the extension. It was very difficult to schedule another meeting in September because of conflicts some members have with an ASRAC meeting, an industry group meeting, and other responsibilities, but the group is prepared to add more meeting dates if necessary to try to complete its work on verification.

Key Points. The Working Group wanted to stress several important points on this

re commendation:

First, the Group wanted to note the progress already made. The members of the group split up into three product subgroups to develop specific recommendations in the following areas.

o Commercial Refrigeration Equipment: This subgroup believes it is making good progress on verification. They are approximately "mid-way" through working through the issues.

o Boiler and Water Heater Equipment: This subgroup has reached consensus in some areas, but there are some areas with significant disagreement. The subgroup is considering whether more progress may be made if boilers and water heaters are addressed separately.

o HVAC & Furnaces (except Computer Room AC (CRAC) and, Single

P ackage Vertical Units (SPVU). This subgroup is approximately threequarters of the way through verification. They are putting together a simple operations manual with more detail than the original set of bullets they have prepared. The recommendation for a proposed rule is largely based on the Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute’s current program for these products. This group stated that they will need to talk with manufacturers from the CRAC and SPVU markets before they can make recommendations about a verification program for those types of equipment. The Working Group supports continuing negotiations to address verification. The Group believes that, at the present time, continuing negotiation is the best available option. There is consensus (but it is not unanimous) among Working Group members that a verification program is needed. The concerns that there are regarding verification testing are concentrated around certain subtypes of products.5 The Working Group has scheduled a multi-day meeting in mid-September in anticipation of ASRAC approving continuation of the negotiations with respect to verification testing. The Working Group will continue meeting in product subgroups between meetings. The Working G roup expects to be able to complete a proposal for verification testing in October.

Enforcement

The Working Group has some concerns about DOE’s existing enforcement regulations. The concerns include questions about how the process works, the statistics used to determine compliance, and tolerances allowed. If ASRAC approves the extension, the Group will address these issues at its September 11 - 12 meeting and develop a recommendation for a proposed rule if one is needed.

Conclusion

There are a number of important points in support the se recommendations:

If the recommendations in this report are accepted by ASRAC, DOE could proceed to develop a proposed rule on basic model groups and certification. When consensus is reached and approved for any recommendations on verification and enforcement, a separate proposed rule(s) could be issued. As a result, there may be little if any delay on any of the issues. The basic model groups and certification recommendations relate directly to an existing DOE rule that is scheduled to go into effect at the end of this year. This rulemaking must be initiated expeditiously. Because it is a new program, DOE does not believe verification has to be covered in the rulemaking covering the other provisions. It can be issued as part of a separate rulemaking at a later date without causing any problems. Any necessary changes to the existing enforcement regulations can also be issued separately. They would not be needed as quickly as the basic model groups and certification provisions, because of the time being provided for implementation and the subsequent six-month grace period before any enforcement actions would be taken. It is important that members of the Working Group not be pushed to agree before they are comfortable with the recommendations. The Working Group has worked very well together and has achieved significant success so far, including the consensus recommendations on AEDMs that ASRAC has already approved. The Group wants to continue negotiating the verification provisions and try to achieve consensus. It has spent considerable time discussing the issue, and it has already agreed to add more days and hours to the negotiations in an effort to complete them quickly.The Facilitator is concerned that, in the last few days of negotiations, the re was increa sing evidence of a breakdown in the very good worki ng relationship s among the 

### member s of the Working Group (and the public participants). He is concerned about the
effect on the negotiations and is working to address the problems. However

, he still
believes that i t is worth continuing with the n egot iation s. He stresses that the Gro up has
made significant progress on som e very difficult issue s and that, despite the rancor , everyone wants to continue to make an effort to achieve consensus; their attitudes are generally but not unanimously positive about the chances for su ccess

.

If ASRAC approves the extension, we will advise the Committee as soon as possible, if
i ss ue s arise th at will prevent u s from me et ing any new deadline.



### John Cymbalsky Designated Federal Officer for ASRAC

Attachment

6