... Department of Energy

Washington, DC 20585

June 11, 1997

PUBLIC WORKSHOP FOR WATER HEATER

ENERGY EFFICIENCY STANDARDS RULEMAKING

On May 22, 1997, the Department of Energy gave notice of a public workshop regarding energy

conservation standards for water heaters. The workshop will be held on June 24, 1997, at the

U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC. 20585-0121 in

Room 1E-245 from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. I have enclosed the "Water Heater Rulemaking

Framework" document for your review and discussion at the workshop.

The Department is convening this workshop to propose the analytical framework for developing

the standards for water heaters. This workshop would include a discussion of the different

methodologies and the relationships among various analyses. It would identify possible tools to

be used and contractor qualifications, as well as, a discussion of approaches to be taken for the

screening and engineering analysis.

If you have any questions, please contact Bryan Berringer at (202) 586-0371.

Sincerel ,/

chael J. cCabe, Drector

Ofice of Codes and Standards

Building Technology, State and

Community Programs

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

Enclosure

Printed with soy ink on recycled paper

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
Water

Heater

Rulemaking

Framewrk

: ~ii : : i :::1:::::::

. I 9.

.. ...... .......... L:,.-.

.. lll^^^^lllB^^^^^^) '+ ~U.S. Department of Energy

-,::;; 5 lli-: - "'"' ' li Office of Codes and Standards

*-HllPiBII S -v-^by)1000 Independence Ave., SW

.jil ,"y~~ .B:Washington, ::11~ DC

....... .. .

,..~:iiii~~~~~~i!~i!!!~~~::aii .::: :iiiij :[;ii:i~~. :::: 

~~..~!.~~~~I~~.' .Date: June 11,1997

Drf whe.. ....-. '.'u. ' e

Draft wheater1. Jne·,!199

Draft wheaterl.wpd June 11, 1997

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
*:;A:: i ;:* w:

. .. ..... ......

:iiiiii?'.........! ·..... ~ iil ~ i ...... i · i......-ii

...... '$......;

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
Water Heater Rulemaking Framework

Introduction .. ...................................................... 1

1.0 Preliminary Market and Technology Assessment .............................. 1

1.1 Market Assessment........................ ...............

1.2 Technology Assessment ...................... ....... * * 3

1.3 Preliminary Baseline Shipments Forecast ................ .... . 3"" 

2.0 Screening Analysis ............... . .... ... : ,.... 4

2.1 Product Classes..................... . ....... 2.2 Baseline Units . 'x'. - : " ......5 &..:.:'' ............. 

2.3 Design Options *. ::.... ::....: : .. .... * ..... *

3.0 Engineering Analysis ........... . :.. :.......... 7..:.... 

4.0 Manufacturing Costs ............................. 8

4.1 Characterizing Uncertainty ..... .. . ............. :..... 9-i:

4.2 Variability in Costs between Manufacturers.;ii. .................. 9

4.3 Costing Approach/ Engineering Analysis ........... . l ........ 10

4.4 Proprietary Design . .................. 10

5.0 Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Analysisii ,. II:: : I ......... 11

6.0 Prices ....................... ...... .... 12

6.1 Retail Prices: Life-Cycle Cost Analys;ii; .... . ............... ..... 12 6.2 Manufacturer Prices: :lnd ry Castiw ..... ........................ 13 ..........

7.0 Shipments .......... . ........................ 13

8.0 Prelim.ary National neits Analyi ................... 14 F.0 iiPuts tOS to.................. · ·. ...... 14

::: Cac:lation .0 6NiE Savings ......... ............... ' . 1......... 14

.:....er Net P i.e and Payback ........... ........ . 15 8.4 E$~aploymsntImpacts--...15 ..... 9.0 Re ::ion.i"eAR :.Op· alyses.1. ·.-....... ..................... 15

9.0 Consumerlmpa.............. ..... .... ....

°"s"onsum er NetImpa " .. ee 'n ":':'''" b * . ....... ... 1........ : : 16

Consumie ef10.1 t group Analysis........ . .. ................ 16

.10.1.1 Variati ns in Energy Prices ................... ......... 16 .1-11 10.1.2 Variations in Energy Use .............. 16

1 0 .1 .3 F it o s t In c re a s e s . . . . . . . . .... . . . . . . .. . . . . ... . . . . . . .... . ... 1 6 iiiiiii 10.1.3 FistCost lncreases 16

10.2 Con" mer Participation ....... ........................ 1..............17

-i. .,..- Flow· Fo .................................. .................. 17 !l': 'n::~'!i Cash Flow .17

12.0 Manufacturer Sub-group Analysis ................................. 1 12.1 Manufacturer Sub-groups ...... ............... .81.............. 

12.2 Competitive Impacts Assessment ................. 18

12.3 Cumulative Regulatory Burden ............... 19

Draft wheaterl.wpd June 11, -1997

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
13.0 Utility Impacts ................................................. 19

14.0 Environmental Analysis .1.................. ......................... 19

Appendices

A. Base Case Shipments Forecasts: Data Request ................. ...... A-1

B. Technology Assessment and Screening Analysis ... ... ......... B-1

(will be distributed at the June 24, 1997, workshop) .

B.1 Technology Assessment ......................... .

:

B.2 Screening Analysis ................. ... 1

C. Data Requests for Manufacturer Costs ......... ... .................. C-1

C.1 Design-Option Approach ..................... i ................ C-1

C.2 Efficiency-Level Approach ................ -14

C.3 Uncertainty and Variability in Manufacturer Costs i......... C-25

D. Financial Inputs for GRIM ........... ........ ............ D-1

. . .. .h: e. .. J

.':: .~1i!~iii:ii? , ,, . wsS.,g: : ::R:ii:?

... .::-:::::.::::::-::::::::::::::::::.:. ,::::: : .::

.,..-......i , i,, ,,,. ... ..S.

.':.... ......

*.,.:-:.:-:,.: , , ,SX~a, '.'S..'-':. S "SSg < , g i. , .. 

i g ~~~::R11~~gg.,-' .........

D .... t , e.... :,,. .... June ... ' 1 

Draft wheaterl.wpd June 11, 1997

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
13.0 UtilityImpacts ......................................................... 19

14.0 Environmental Analysis .................................................. 19

Appendices .

A. Base Case Shipments Forecasts: Data Request ............... .... A-1

B. Technology Assessment and Screening Analysis. ...... B-1

(will be distributed at the June 24, 1997, workshop) '.

B.1 TechnologyAssessment ....................

B.2 Screening Analysis ..... .... ... ... ...... ¢'

C. Data Requests for Manufacturer Costs ............... ...... C-1

C.1 Design-Option Approach . ........... .......... CC.2 Efficiency-Level Approach . ..... 4

C.3 Uncertainty and Variability in Manufacturer Costs ....... ..... . C-25

D. Financial Inputs for GRIM .......... ,......... D-1

Drf wete d Jne1..*9. '|

Drf ... ....... d J n 1 . ,;;:ti..: 

Draft wheaterl.wpd June 11, 1997 ii

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
Water Heater Rulemaking Framework

Introduction

This document describes the analytical framework for appliance standards rulemaking. The emphasis is on describing the major components of the methodology and identifying the relationships among the various sections. A diagram of the analytical framework is

shown in Figure 1. Currently, the Advisory Committee on Appliance Energy Eff ency Standards is considering cross-cutting issues which may affect the ana:sis an.ipated in

upcoming rulemakings. The Department plans to consider any recoon from the

Advisory Committee to the greatest extent possible in the igoing 's.

This document also describes the application of thei:.ticat'iamework

heater rule. Following a generic description of each pet of a typical rui ng,

a comment box has been added to discuss elements ol "'heater : rule. References

to water heaters include summaries of past events, s: . current analysis, discussion of key issues, the Department of EnergyE' (DOE'ves on these issues, and requests for additional stakeholder input. ... i

As described in this document, manufacw ar rs "".io provideaidditional performance and costing informationt:,improve i* i ;IE...'....analysis. In keeping with the Department's policies, provisions willbe madt.~iintain the confidentiality of all submitted information. if .. ,1' .. .

Unless new data is provided'.'. Departn-t will .. s the existing data previously

ben ;.f......hes.e levesi.' "T " aZ.nalyses would complete the analytical steps that precede the Adnc .fce of "'"Rulemaking (ANOPR) under the new process. However.^th "p'*:ment be'i:s| that additional data gathering will improve the current

analysis,al prolb lareas and accelerate future manufacturer and

econoisl ""-'an 'ys'e. 1t.ase of water heaters, a revised Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOP .ibi Issued o. and include all of the analyses identified in Fig. 1 si'ce a NOPR was p sy issued. Although a new ANOPR will not be issued, . NOPR analysis (asdefied in sections 1 through 8) will be provided for public i!'comment. ?

Prior to initiating a detailed impact analysis, the Department will develop information on the present and past industry structure and market characteristics of the product(s)

Draft wheaterl.wpd June 11, 1997 1

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
Figure 1: Water Heater Rulemaking Framework

Approaches Key-lnputs Analysis Kev-Outputs

Industry Review Identity Firms/ Products

Preliminary Market Quantitative Analysis Historical Information & Technology

Qualitative Analysis-inlemrews Market Firm Segmentation Characterization

Existing Technology Options

Identification &

Prototype Designs Screening Analysis .....

' -3 ,S .::: . : ' ;:i

Design-Option Approachn : : .::. :i :.' 

Cost Modie-Leveling Approacn h '

Efency-LevelApp cn |Efficiency/Pe e rformance ...

,.:alysis :'

· *S . Energy rates 'I".::' :i: ". 

.o Maintenance/Service Costs

: '' -:.:.. :'::iii: Bl : .... . _. * Average Payback with Uncertainty

.Market Survey ApproacnPice Retail P. -cs . t I| i ·* Average Lile-cycle Cost witn Uncerainly

Marke-Surey---_ -E--' Price Retail Pnrices _ ::.. .. " : l

. . : :::: --" _

Expen Forecasts- Base Case :. ....

*Other ..;

Payback

Energy savings

Expert Forecasts -Retail . Pnces yl:abNai n * Net Present Value

Models-REM. REEPS etc. hpme: - :: -. : :-.

* Housing demand * Base Cas. .. . .

* Histoical shipments . Other efficienc. :ies :.

* Product saturation Efficiy .'

* Voluntary initiatives dtbion gi. -

ANOPR Analysis ' v v .'"

- New Process : T .. . .....

:.:--. :::':::.- : -.. . .. ':Analysesg F::¥¥ :SePre-ANOPR E

* Payback Distnbution

g& &'ikfg #:>.~ : .~'.:X:X :- s--Consumer3* Life-cycle Cost Distbui

s"ffgii.,i.si..f ¢ .. c* ,, ..-- Sub-group Analysis

. || || : &g.KB.if Manulaisirstj i-es _

S·gf . .- ' Industry :i:j:::: · - En Industry cash-flow with uncertainty

Cash-flow

, ffg: ::: Costs ^wiaigs. ..... ^ -gr-s-Ca-e |...... 

.... : i: X ii j. S tarard Level Cases .*rm t

.:¥ B? i..... w S f~cbncy Distribution .Crtn ......... Ma"...... 

BRBs' ¥¥,B ;¥ ., ... tof- atllCases .... . . ... . im:a Cormp: ct t

tniews _ - R:_.::-- Manufacturer .cu..im

HousingO-e§an BnalseCa-se::::. .:::-.::::. = = - = = = = = Impacts===============E=====Sub-group Cash-flows

· fi::¥¥¥¥ H . iost (C), Price (P).

·Vonarini iatvsen: ... .R Quantity (0). Financial (F) : 

* .- 3BR s E .: f R _______-Peak-Demand Reductions

Emission rates Environmental Utility Revenue Losses .

Utility oad factors : : Utility Impacts Analysis issions Emissions

Revised NOPR

FINAL RULE Revise Analysis

Draft wheaterl.wpd June 11,1997

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
Figure 1: Water Heater Rulemaking Framework

ADoroaches Keyv-lnpus Analyvsis Kyu ts

Industry Review Idently Fims/ Products - preliminary Market

Quanitaste Analysis Histortcal Intormation &Technology

Cuallalitve Analysis--irteMiws Maket/ Firm Segmentation Characteriation

Exuting Technology Options

· I Identification &

prottype Deslns __ _ · Screening Analysis.

Doeign-Option Approach j ;

Cost Modeling Approacn h

Eicency-Levet Appoach Eiclency/Performance

Energy rates 8 .

: Malntananca/Senrce Costs

:~~~~~~~ :~~~~~~~ Average Payback with Uncertainty

i -(pwI-^kO^'"^^S at. TM * Average Lte-cycle Cost with Unofartavly

Market Survey Approacnh nc Re Pes

Expert Forecasts Base Case .. S '

eficiencies.

Payback

.. ,....... .Energy savings

Expenr Forecasts'ayi . N o, Prese nt V:Q1 Rellstail Pricetatoal Ne Pren V

Models-REM. REEPS etc.

EHistoricalf hipmenl A cCtsn aOterflteCnaes e r b

Product saturation Effcidi

*Voluntary Initiatives

Sub-group Analyses · ' k,:t.!!!:~ Bioneenng .... .4 

^:^^^ ^.i.. · .y t s.'I.:nt ~r<:lndutryca, '- 'ow with uncenaiNy

·oat (C).[Price (P).

Revis·ed NOPRage : e w.l . . Unom;r'y

FINAL RULE | Revse AnalysisRL

E Draft wheatenr.wpd June 11, 1997l

· Prolluot Saturatnironmentac , s to CEfe .:":;

(C), Priaaterl. e ... ii, T : : I

_ANOPR Analysis 'Tt ! .......... Financial' . ~

RULE .. ¢:N.:A"L Revise' Analysis+

Draft wheaten -Wpd Junell,1997~~~~~~~~~~

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
concerned. This activity will consist of both quantitative and qualitative efforts to assess

the industry and products based on publicly available information. Issues to be addressed

include the following: manufacturer market share and characteristics; trends in the

number of firms; the financial situation of manufacturers; existing non-regulatory efficiency improvement initiatives; and trends in product characteristics and retail

markets.

The information collected will serve as resource material to be used throughoutithe rulemaking. For instance, historical product shipments and prices wil.. u to help predict future prices and shipments. Market structure dataill be ly useful to

conducting the competitive impacts analysis. I ,,

The Department has initiated a market assessment ::watWr heater industr ' completed, collected information will be distributed "ent.

Are there elements not mentioned above which shid b:c':ated into the

preliminary market assessment? Can you identify. existing n riaorv efficiency improvement initiatives? ...

1.2 Technology Assessment ' : ' Information relative to existing ti' ology otions and rototype designs will be used as

input to a screening analysis. . ii:sultatioi with inteiested parties, the Department will

develop a list of design opt.ioi"" for cons..i on., tially, the candidate design options will eno s all thos hlogies c :i: be technologically feasible.

In Novei theued a Technical Support Document including supporting a| water""' (1993 TSD). The document described design

options al ter heaters; 2) electric storage water heaters; 3) oil-fired water

heates; and d) gas4- istantaneous water heaters. Appendix B of this framework, Tecnology Assess :':i Screening Analysis, updates the 1993 TSD's technology :"otions.

Note: Appendix B: ill be distributed at the June 24, 1997, workshop.

::!S: t "'-ia ry Baseline Shipments Forecast

T.eh:e'partment intends to develop a base case forecast of product shipments in absence of new standards. This forecast will require an assessment of the impacts of past and

existing non-regulatory efforts by manufacturers, utilities and other interested parties. DOE will seek information on the actual impacts of such initiatives to date, but will also

Draft wheaterl.wpd June 11, 1997 3

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
consider information presented regarding the possible impacts that any existing initiatives

might have in the future. Such information could include a demonstration of the steps

manufacturers, distribution channels, utilities or others will take to realize such voluntary

efficiency improvements.

The baseline shipments forecast will be used as input to three- subsequent analyses: the

National Benefits Analysis (Section 8.0); the Consumer Life-Cycle Analysis (Secsion

5.0); and the Consumer Sub-Group Analysis (Section 10.1). To perform the NtSional

Benefits Analysis, a forecast of shipment weighted product efficiency/i|er_ ments of

new products sold is needed to the year 2030. To assess :s. averag i on the

affected consumer population and the distribution of th Impacts o" ' r subgroups, a forecast of product shipments by efficiency,"el is needc :ne w .o !'w

standard would come into effect.

The Department will begin to prepare a strawman bas i'eitent forecast for water

heaters. This forecast will include a distribution o-:ipm: fficency level.

Historical product shipments and discussions with.p..arties invlerket-based

initiatives for increasing the sales of high effidels ie shipments

forecasts. Appendix A contains a samplep .. C'.l' ecast Daa equest" which

could be used to solicit shipment forecasts for ea"Ei..... at.. heater considered.

What existing market-based initiatives (i.e. D-M progr etc.) should DOE consider?

What other approaches could b.'iUsed to eqablish thease-case shipmentforecast?

What information sources shoh ..'ipast shipe..nt data efficiency level? Please comment

on the sample data requ.est iAppendi .....

The screeiHnists oo f tree tasks: selecting product classes; selecting

baseline-units; and rev..iwi.gand selecting design options for further analysis.

:. . g . ..: .l.. .il ' "

2.1,1. Product Classes,': -

ProAhduct types are seFprated into classes based on the type of energy used, and capacity or

:p.iformance-related..features that provide utility to the consumer and affect efficiency.

ihrernt energy -,, eficiency standards will apply to different product classes. In general,

; a se .arendeiftd usobtaineg i in discussions with appliance

|'" duactU.rs, trade associations, and other interested parties.

Draft wheaterl.wpd June 11, 1997 4

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
The product classes listed in the 1993 TSD included: 1) Gas-fired storage; 2) Electric

storage; 3) Oil-fired storage; 4) Gas-fired instantaneous and; 5) Electric instantaneous.

Electric heat pump water heaters were included as a design option for electric storage water heaters. Electric instantaneous and small storage water heaters were not analyzed. Standards will be developed only for classes 1, 2 and 3. The efficiency levels determined

for storage water heaters will apply to classes 4 and 5 according to fuel type.

The Department intends to maintain the product classes specified i.^ : .3 TSD.

Design options within the product class will be screened iording neria

specified in Section 2.3. .

Do you agree with the product classes specified? . "

2.2 Baseline Units

Defining a baseline unit is the starting point for analyzing desi f. for improving

energy efficiency. For each product class, the ba nit gen er e sents a model with the maximum allowable energy use spe l ational't:vy Conservation

Act (NAECA), as amended. Other than e:ency iijjnorprated in the baseline

unit are representative of the "low-end'i.i."nhit within'"""he":: li.

*D 9 75:!:: r:a t- - d J n .,^: ::19 

_immaelw J _F 1

D ra iii'?e : Jun ' 1

Draft wheaterl.wpd June 11, 1997

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
(a) Gas-Fired Storage Water Heaters

The Department has previously specified a baseline model of gas-fired storage water

heaters. It is described as a bottom-fired, 40-gallon, glass-lined steel tank with a 3-inch

center flue. The input rate is 34 kBtu/hr, with a pilot rated at 400 Btu/hr. The tank is

insulated with one inch of polyurethane foam. The average EF for models on the market

in 1995 was 0.564 and the average recovery was 0.764. The Department intendto use

values of 0.56 EF and 0.76 average recovery for the re-analysis. , .

Are these sound values? a

(b) Oil-Fired Storage Water Heaters -. ,

Based on discussions with oil water heater manufact"i"rs held i1995 a ba " "i

water heater was characterized. This model has a ra''iume of 32 gallons"' n

insulated with 1.5 inches of fibreglass squeezed into i :avity surrounding the

central tank. The input rate is 0.65 gallons per hour Q25 Btu/hr. It has an EF

of 0.53, the minimum allowed by NAECA. The first hour:"i i15 gallons, and the

recovery efficiency is 0.73. The tank is a cylinder 18 inches ::i: erand 32.7 inches

high, pierced by a 6 inch diameter flue along tfh ial axis. Th er motor, which

powers both the blower and oil pump, is raie':i'l:i..:282 watt No auxiliary power

is consumed during standby. ....

Is this description appropriate? l. .... ..

(c) Electric Storage Water Heaies i .

The Department intends to s'cify a basW'ie modlm The baseline is described as a 50

gallon g:lss-lined steelit 'w-ith one i : "lurethane foam. The heater has two

elem. ::hi with anin:4,500 w i e elements are interlocked so that only

one ca ""e gized ai-lt ihe baseline EF is 0.86.

Is the desAcr . .l vaid ?

2 ii esign Options

:flowing the develop'ient of an initial list of design options during the technology

i!sessment, the Department, in consultation with interested parties, will review each

.i'sign option to dtermine if it is practicable to manufacture, install and service; would

I'".!selyimpait product utility or product availability; or would have adverse impacts on

Mth'i " -fety. '.j-i Design options not eliminated in the screening process will be

:con'iered further in the engineering analysis.

Draft wheaterl.wpd June 11, 1997 6

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
The 1993 TSD identified product categories and narrowed the range of design options being considered for the development of technically feasible designs. Building on past analysis and incorporating public comments to the 1994 NOPR, a draft screening analysis is being prepared and will be provided at the June 24, 1997, workshop for review and

comment from stakeholders. Taking into consideration these inputs, the Department will

identify design options it believes should be considered for further analysis. The new rulemaking process provides for the distribution of draft analyticala i:ults for

peer and stakeholder review. These reviews will provide critical i -: iescreening

analysis.

Who would you suggest perform the peer review? ....

3.0 Engineering Analysis

The purpose of the engineering analysis is to estimate the ener b:""i potential of the

individual or combinations of design options a i-aated in te ius screening analysis. The Department, in consultatio:l tioIrs will :the most

appropriate means available to determin energy "i .Mi:, ncuding i an overall

system approach or engineering modeling. Ranges anri"taies in performance will

be established. The energy savings,':measures.developediihe engineering analysis will

be combined with end-user costs. i:he life...cycle cost analysis.

The engineering analysis invoJles adding .di'idu!?r combinations of design options to the baseli"e unit describiection 2. e "fficiency relationship will be

deve l h ow thit f:turer cos:T eving increased efficiency. The

efficiec l correspo ivarious design option combinations will be determined

from ma'ft : .data subMit a, en available, and from DOE engineering calculations ."':"- |simates w"''iilbeftained from detailed incremental cost data

disaggre ga e ipurcha parts and material, shipping/packaging and

investment. ^.t!llgMI:.::..

... .i' ...S - iil ," . ' ' :' Rfii

TIe use of a componetsed engineering analysis provides useful information including

hi:e identification of otential technological paths manufacturers could use to achieve

i:creased product e.ergy efficiency. It also allows the use of engineering models to

e.iulate the enery consumption of different design configurations under various use

i"its.. and.,. aplications.

Tli"D:partment recognizes that the manufacturer cost information derived in a

component-based analysis does not reflect the variability in design strategies and cost

structures that can exist between manufacturers. Therefore, the Department plans to

derive additional manufacturing cost estimates, using other approaches developed in

Draft wheaterl.wpd June 11, 1997 7

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
consultation with interested parties. These additional estimates could, for example, be

based on alternative assumptions as to the elements of manufacturing cost. These costs

will be used both for the engineering analysis and the manufacturer impact analysis.

Section 4.0 contains a more detailed discussion of approaches to estimating

manufacturing costs.

The 1993 TSD's cost data for the more common design options for electric and'ias-fired

storage water heaters were obtained from information provided by rn facirs to

GAMA and from a report prepared by ADM Associates. c-he cost GA AMA was

reported as a range to maintain the confidentiality of co:'provided ".ial

manufacturers. DOE used the midpoint values of thiis:ge to perl" "l eering

analysis. For oil-fired storage water heaters, cost da :for most.: gn opi

a report by ADM Associates, Inc.

Important issues arise with the current data which the' seeks to address with

stakeholders at the June 24, 1997 workshop.

1. OLD DATA: The cost data the Department urrentliCY: .. .sis based on a

1987 report by ADM Associates and a. irvey of ni" 'rers provided by

GAMA.

2. UNCERTAINTY: Uncertainty a't the::-.inufa ciring each design

option was characterized by DE for a 9%i o. .terval. This uncertainty

information was reviewed and was caed forw ihe analysis only for the

maxtech design option. ..

3. VARIABILITY: Curi data does'ot allow- r cost variations between firms

needed for the manufrer im l ;.analysi sub-groups of manufacturers.

4. APROACH: " nponent t OE currently holds could be updated

a .:''"nufactu ''"-i. submit ' "ir-.s using an efficiency level approach.

5. ''Y..:.TYPE P ' i partment is committed to considering prototypes in

''"'e" ng and e'"':jayses.

6. MOLiiie Dep^"' 'seeking comment on the selection of appropriate

.ek...'":el such :WATSIM and TANK.

,t Manufacturing Costs

*??- .ddition t beiu' sed in conjunction with the Engineering Analysis, manufacturing

qaxeni- eeded:fbor the manufacturer impact analysis and are used as one means of

' : ':"'e~tail prices. The manufacturing costs used for the industry cash flow

.i.""''--are the "average" costs of achieving a specified efficiency level - within a range

of uncertainty. For the manufacturer sub-group analysis, only those costs representative

of the subject sub-group are used.

Draft wheaterl.wpd June 11, 1997 8

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
The Department believes that the existing data set, as currently reported, cannot be used

for manufacturer impact analyses. The Department-intends to collect new cost

information from manufacturers. The data collection period is scheduled to occur during the months of July and August, 1997. DOE prefers that individual manufacturer data sets

be submitted to a third party contractor for statistical treatment and subsequent analysis.

Is the data collection time frame acceptable? Can individual manufacturers:i:mit data? .& ,,

4.1 Characterizing Uncertainty

Consistent with the process rule, DOE will place a ri the average manufacturing cost of achieving various efficiency range of cost sed

both in the industry cashflow analysis and in one appro.: erating retail prices for

the consumer life-cycle cost analysis. ..

In the 1993 TSD, DOE estimated the un for confidence level) for incremental costs provided for each"esign in this framework, DOE

is proposing a modification to future ata colleion: so that the cost estimates

reported be bound by a range. For.xampleanufact Would be asked to provide their best point estimate and a,. t*e describing the lowst and highest values they consider likely. Appendix i-escribes i.reater del two sample data requests, the

statistical treatment whic.h ild resulthe n ation provided, and possible reportigimethods ... . . rtment - with ... interested parties to discuss the

Are th!er K app'''r" m;.mve acteri it h zing uncertainty in average manufacturing costs?

.4 Variability in CQ e'tween Manufacturers

h.::e Department is c:mmitted to assessing the differential impacts of standards on

i'fferent manufac.ftrs. The detailed sub-group analysis will entail calculating cashflows .arately for e' class of manufacturer defined. If appropriate, the Government

Ct Model (GRIM) analysis will be performed for each firm (see

''.'i ' :lfor '' " a sample data input).

Draft wheaterl.wpd June 11, 1997 9

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
The Department prefers receiving disaggregated cost data from all manufacturers. The

company specific cost information will be used to perform GRIM analysis for each

manufacturer or manufacturer subgroup.

The Department is open to suggestions regarding the mechanics of generating sub-group

specific GRIM analysis which will still allow for manufacturer confidentiality and

appropriate stakeholder review. .

4.3 Costing Approach/Engineering Analysis .^. .

Three methodologies can be used to generate manufa :ring cosi these 'r:....^:

include: the DESIGN-OPTION APPROACH, report e n.mental cost

design options to a baseline model; the EFFICIENC C-,- L APPROACH, rep ig

relative costs of achieving energy efficiency improveymrin " ithe COSTASSESSMENT APPROACH which requires a "bott:'s":ctui:arcturing cost

assessment based on a detailed bill of materials. This assess": w idbe performed by

a third-party contractor. The Department will sekii.blic input':ii H'of these

approaches should be used during a rulema i.: ':.

The 1993 TSD used industry cost d.ta based o the DBE -OPTION APPROACH.

The Department believes that t...ta is nt isufficienito perform a manufacturing

impact analysis due to variatii betwee-lie desig :apths manufacturers will use.

The Dep.rtment is con ig supple"i"-existing data with new data generated

by t...E"CIENC 'ppr approaci '"te d to report cost data disaggregated into

GRIM T' -- gories: A!:'-" e;, detailed explanation of this approach appears in

Should ' "ac " da: ".rer il"ibmittal be conducted using the EFFICIENCY -

LEVEi :pproac l t 'e.s gn-option approach is used, will the data be appropriate

formanufacturer im ''" yvsis using the GRIM model?

'"" Proprietary .eiign

.... D:e:artE '- /w-ill consider in its analysis all design options that are commercially

; '""i- :'..es present in a working prototype, including proprietary designs. Proprietary

.'l '" wi'l 'be fully considered in the Department's engineering and economic analyses.

Draft wheaterl.wpd June 11, 1997 10

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
DOE is considering several proprietary designs in its technology assessment and

screening analysis (Appendix B).

Are there other proprietary designs that the Department should consider? If so, what are

they and what stage of development are they in? How should DOE collect and report

cost data for proprietary design?

a -.. 

5.0 Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Analysis i..j ...... -

The effect of standards on individual consumers incl us a chan i oper'ea

(usually decreased) and a change in purchase price (us ly i ncased). The n e

analyzed by calculating the life-cycle cost (LCC) usinri gine perfing p erforata

for energy consumption and equipment retail prices w . e. derived in a number of

ways (see Section 6.0). Inputs to the LCC calculation ic' iii'stalled consumer cost

(purchase price plus installation cost), operating expenses (ei' maintenance

costs), lifetime of the appliance and a discount rai

Under the Process Rule in the ANOPR sta ti'he : ife-ce'analysis will be

conducted using typical ranges of valuesoir appl -ce''e, fuel costs, energy

usage and discount rates. Design opts whicihave paperiods that exceed the

average life of the product or whi"i'bause lifec'ycle costncreases will not be considered

further. The detailed impact cal":ation, conducted aft the ANOPR, will have a

comprehensive assessment of ',acts on i-groups: onsumers as described in Section

10.0.

Also WiP-:.rocessR lliMhe ANOR :stage, uncertainty analysis will be conducted

on seve :ii.ical vai'e"" . ibed. During the post-ANOPR consumer analysis

(Section I103 " "ii:artme"' ' hi. auate additional parameters including: variations

in regional. e y. i:::ns .. in M::gy use and variations in installation costs.

Based on the results eiif-cycle cost analysis, DOE will select candidate standard

le1ils for analysis. Th ge of candidate standard levels will typically include: (a) the

.::st energy efficient combination of design options or most energy efficient level; (b) the

-mnbination of desiu ?options or efficiency level with the lowest life-cycle cost; and (c) a

ii ::nbination of degn options or efficiency level with a simple payback period of not

iI"II-than thre.lyiars. Additionally, candidate standard levels that incorporate

_i---'"""-l..'phnologies or fill in large gaps between efficiency levels of other candidate

.:i'evels l'"'l may be selected.

Draft wheaterl.wpd June 11, 1997 11

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
For water heaters it will be necessary to determine input values for several variables.

Retail Prices: The determination of prices for water heaters is described in Section 6.0.

Annual Hot Water Use: The engineering analysis considers the energy savings potential

of design options by referring to the Department's Test Procedure. For life-cycle cost and

payback analysis, the Department will conduct sensitivity analysis at several different

levels of annual water use and temperatures. In Section 10: Consumer Impac aithe

Department will increase the scope of the analysis to identify the cteaubpopulations and quantify their impacts.

Energy Prices: The life-cycle cost analysis will use hji" d low p"i,"s;o:pf national

average electricity, gas, and oil prices to residential foe '' A. Thtomers The ;T

present Energy Information Administration (EIA) AXiual Ener utlooed

the default source of projections for this uncertaintyi.. :sisihe Applianc

Advisory Committee (Advisory Committee) is curr..I:stigating alternative

methods of forecasting future energy prices for recor - on to the Department.

Lifetime: For the purposes of the life-cycle analys'i t O 10. 1 years for electric,

10.88 for gas, and 11.0 for oil were used for the 19I3 anally ei will be reviewed.

Discount Rate: Discount rates of 2%, 6% and. -net of inflii l be considered.

Maintenance, Service, and Installation Co " ;time artment w. donsider expected

changes to maintenance, service and intaitionri ' wat er heatters, if applicable.

This includes costs such as supplying i'ectricit o 't" ieiter, relining the vent

system or adding a condensate draim . -,

6.0 Prics.

How i i ring cosid^..ciated margins, associated with standards, are passedthrough F mli:'m: ifactures ""mers has an impact on both consumers and

manufactu"r : : nsumer an fcturer economics are linked and inversely related.

For this rea e ces us'the life-cycle cost analysis need to be reconciled

with maifacturei& :

6f Retail Prices: Lit ie Cost Analysis

.ider the Process Ri:e, at the pre-ANOPR stage, a consumer life-cycle cost curve, based

in average retail pries, is used to perform an initial selection of potential standards

'"yels. Retail pnri c are needed for a base case, absent new standards, and for all

'":ce"ncy le:v.. : be considered. Several approaches have been described to obtain

.. e :e : .-.-..:rces. Potential approaches include: 1) conducting a survey of existing prices

: m"":"arket; 2) surveying manufacturers and other market experts to predict consumer

willingness to pay higher prices; 3) applying various mark-ups over variable

manufacturing costs.

Draft wheaterl.wpd June 11, 1997 12

C

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
The Department believes that there is value in using various assumptions about cost passthrough that will be reflected in price forecast approaches. The output of this analysis

will be a table describing retail prices for each possible efficiency level which assumes

that each level represents a new minimum efficiency standard. Consistent with the

Process Rule, and building on the estimates generated by the various approaches, new

retail prices would be described within a range of uncertainty.

The Department intends to use all the approaches described above en estimates

of future prices and will conduct uncertainty analysis wihin the r r" prices

generated. The market assessment document describ..i..:ectior ""llid clude any

market pricing information currently available. Then"ufacturi .i'*...ib.. s in 

Appendix C include a request for the estimated inc ; se in retal ;rice .E:. r" l s :; 

standard. Mark-up approaches to price determinatw^ill bonducted by .r

Department and submitted for review.

Is the proposed process for generating retail prices.id`4W l interested parties be

willing to provide estimates of the future prices? How shoWonns ider the different

mark-up structures relative to distribution cmhki,

: ": " ...... ' 

DOE will use an average distribitnark- o relate t retail prices generated for the

life-cycle cost analysis and marncturer pries require to conduct the industry cashflow

analysis. Distributor mark-u re rep(oe in the sket assessment document from

Section 11. The samesr, range of generated for retail prices will be

used fl facturqerd t ce the i fs assumed constant.

Are there manufacturers be willing to provide estimates of

..: '........... . :..

6.2 MShipments ......

described in |ction 1.3, the Department intends to develop a base case forecast of

D pw shimehlts uin the absence of new standards. This initial forecast will incorporate

_ifylac f paand and exist ing non-regulatory efforts by manufacturers, utilities and

For all candidate standards levels, shipment forecasts are required in order to calculate the

national benefits of standards (energy savings and consumer life-cycle costs) and to

Draft wheater.wpa June 11, 1997 13

~::~:i~~~::::: :: :::'''i''''j~-$ :'. ':.....

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
calculate the future cashflows of manufacturers. DOE proposes to use three approaches

to conduct these forecasts including: 1) a simple spreadsheet approach to derive

shipments based on the key market drivers for the particular product; 2) larger models to

consider additional variables (i.e. retirement functions, price elasticities, etc.), and, 3)

expert judgment of rulemaking participants and observation of historical trends to

generate new forecasts.

Because models cannot adequately simulate short-term effects, DOE will plac&!

considerable weight on expert forecasts for short term shipments est.i.:tes. .:;$ipment

forecasts previously developed will be combined through. senario i.. nd a range of

uncertainty will be carried forward into both national b'its and ' "w .alysis.

Are there alternate approaches to forecasting shi"'it.:..? h' will intre.''

provide shipmentforecastsfor various efficiency 1 "

-" :::" :".

8.0 Preliminary National Benefits Analysis i ...

In Section 6.0. the life-cycle cost and en savi Fbnsumers -ivdua is

estimated. In this section, a prelimina assessn;it 'ate impacts at the

national level is conducted. Measurs'of impat to be rni'"'"e'include the average

consumer payback, the net preset ailue of.ttal consumer life-cycle costs, national

energy savings and national en"p yment .i:

..:,.': .:? . . *"- *?:%iiSWi:: .... ... iyyis:~

8.1 Inputs to Forecasts::

Analy.z'iripacts o.fc? '".nergy-e an' standards requires a comparison of

projet" : residen':l""' " Iconsumr'pon with and without standards. The cases

withoutr:At a .are ref i :.: base case projections. The forecasts contain

projections' itnergy cod" t, ofof new appliances, annual appliance shipments

and the prce" '._ sed appia". " The derivations of the base case forecast are

describ ii::eli i standards case forecasts are discussed.in Section 7.0.

Appraches to dete'rm i tail prices are described in Section 6.0.

':'e base case shipmnts forecast developed under Section 1.3 will incorporate the likely

''fects of market ri'c:es and of any non-regulatory initiatives.

:"2lCalculatio.rf Energy Savings

_:i :t ' intends to calculate national energy consumption for each year beginning

""e~""' e: tied effective date of the standards. Aggregate energy consumption will be

calculated for the base case and each candidate standards level. This calculation may be

done by one or more alternative approaches, including: 1) the use of a simple spreadsheet;

2) the use of detailed end-use energy models such as the Lawrence Berkeley National

Draft wheaterl.vpd June 11, 1997 14

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
Laboratory's Residential Energy Model (REM) or the Energy Information

Administration's National Energy Modeling System (NEMS); and 3) by multiplying shipment forecasts by unit energy savings.

For the water heater rulemaking, the Department plans to use the REM and simple

spreadsheet models.

'.:.. .. :

Do you agree with the use of these tools? !

8.3 Consumer Net Present Value and Payback . K

The national net present value of the candidate standias levels lcula

difference in LCC, base case minus standards case. cal ion is pe

Section 5.0, except that a shipment weighted LCC is d using the shipd

energy efficiency distribution forecasts.from Section "

8.4 Employment Impacts

Two impacts on employment are possible from,: g ards, direand indirect

impacts. Direct employment impacts would i- dards le change in the

number of employees at manufacturing tt .an tt pply f service firms.

These direct impacts are estimated in ,beymanuf analysis described in

Section 12.0. Indirect impacts may.-r-sult froni'oth e itres shifting among goods (substitution effect), and income...:nging, hich will Jd to a change in overall

expenditure levels (income effic:.The Diartment i urrently seeking input on

appropriate methods to estin indireci ploymeffects of standards.

:>....... . ....

ii.....~oran i i^ r modeib which can be used to assess indirect

mp

9.0 .:flRevised Pre-AOR i:.lyses

.V :der the Process Ril, based on consideration of the comments received for the

.NOPR, any necessar changes to the pre-ANOPR analyses or the candidate standards

els will be ma.. If major changes are required at this stage, interested parties will be

'"- oO _.an nity to review the revised analyses.

For water heaters, a workshop will be conducted to review and comment the analysis sections normally conducted in the pre-ANOPR stage as specified in the new process.

Draft wheaterl.wpd June 11, 1997 15

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
10.0 Consumer Impacts

10.1 Consumer Sub-group Analysis

The Department will evaluate variations in regional energy prices, variations in energy

use and variations in installation costs that might affect the net present value of a standard

to consumer sub-populations. To the extent possible, DOE will obtain estimates of the

variability in each input variable and consider this variability in its calculation of

consumer impacts. The variability in each input variable and likely sources of .:

information will be discussed with stakeholders.

10.1.1 Variations in Energy Prices X

Energy prices vary regionally across the country. DOEi-poses to " 'sitivity ?

analyses considering the fraction of consumers facin gparticular vic'.ie ...i

range in values of change of life-cycle costs for the ('ributio.q' househ:' ' o tie

calculated. The analysis will be structured to answe:4"aWs'uch as: How?~y'

households are better-off with standards and by how "'ii oW many household are

not better off and by how much?

Are you aware of data sources that the Dep i igould conIi"i"f this analysis?

Do you have suggestions on appropriatai :'wr'a tinon anidUnalysis .. methods?

Which additional variables should theiepartms i s analysis?

........ ?'-'':-:' :

10.1.2 Variations in Energy, Ir .ea

Variations in energy use r rt depend on factors such as:

climate,4 -tye of housebhi^,ple in ho c . Annual energy use can be estimated

by a 1 n base iteppted tes edure or it can be measured directly in the

field. 'nment wile sensitivity analyses to consider how differences in

energy use'i ct sub-gnsofcnsumers.

The Department is Akill ldadditional dis-aggregated water consumption data to conduct

jts sub-group analyS ...

Are you aware of iy data which reflect variations in consumers' water heater

s peration?

10613 First Cost Increases

The Department will be sensitive to first cost increases to avoid negative impacts to

identifiable population groups such as low-income, elderly, minorities etc. Additionally,

Draft wheaterl.wpd June 11, 1997 16

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
the Department will assess the likely impacts of first cost increases on product sales and

fuel switching.

The Department is sensitive to the potentially high first cost increases for high efficiency

water heaters including the potential increase in installation and maintenance costs (e.g.

venting requirement.)

What are the potential impacts of a large first cost increase on co er : ordability,

financing, etc.). Can you suggest methods and data the. efpartm use in

conducting its analysis? What information exists on d ''mer .SI .i-ung to switch It

to other product classes?

10.2 Consumer Participation

The Department will seek to inform and involve conptms cInsumer representatives

in the process of developing standards. This will include n g f consumer

representatives during the rulemaking process a ere approking direct

consumer input. .~-,.:" .. . . .: . ..... ...... .... ":: ........ ........ ... : ,

Currently, the Department is documenting vynous ma se initiatives and market

demonstration projects for higicienc|ater heat programs. Results of these

projects are expected to be aoble pr~i-o the pug.cation of the revised NOPR. In

addition, the Advisory go"ttee is ssin ssue of consumer participation and

m ay t c o hic h t w ill consider.

Thbel a ny projects which the Department should investigate ?

Are yoU b swtfcr other organizations that the Department should

contact? iugesti btanining :w.-o increased consumer input to the water

he.ating iapinn.. a..h.. re:-ss

v"' I'' . 11i.0 Industry Cas ... .low

he Departmentntends to perform an industry cashflow analysis. This analysis will use

d ^e mo aEturing costs (with uncertainty) under Section 4.0, shipments forecasts foas

Section 7.0 and price forecasts from Section 6.4. Financial information,

iequiired as an input to GRIM, will be developed based on publicly available data and

confidentially submitted manufacturer information.

Draft wheateri.wpd June 11, 1997 17

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
For discussion purposes, the Department has prepared a list of default financial values to

be used in the GRIM industry analysis. These were calculated by studying publicly

available financial statements of manufacturers and considering values used in previous

analysis. Refer to Appendix D: Financial Values for GRIM Analysis.

Are the values proposed reasonable? What range of values is appropriate? Who should

collect and maintain any confidential information ? .

, A .. ,.-.'-

12.0 Manufacturer Sub-group Analysis ;..:

12.1 Manufacturer Sub-groups - . .....

The Department intends to conduct detailed interv ieie w many manufactuires is

possible to gain insight into the potential impacts of s "t '"iDuring these interviews,

DOE will solicit information necessary to evaluate cal.fio I competitive, orn.assess 

employment and capacity impacts. Firm-specific c'iuulative:'i. .11ll also be

considered. ; .-

Which manufacturers should be actiry solicite? ealu value in grouping water

heater manufacturers into sub-groups or shoid indivR IM analysis be conducted

for each? More generally, whaould a wil execute..sub-group analysis entail?

For example, the Departmei.^ contracould devlop GRIM analysis scenarios jointly

with individual manuf and rep rit 4 in financial performance without

disclh^ ianufacut1ide ties. A kiy, manufacturers could submit complete

GRins incRRiint data. The Department's contractor would then

aggrega m sappropu"at n4eport changes in financial parameters.

12.2 Competitive Imn..ts - sessment

Lislation directs th pitment to consider any lessening of competition that is likely

'result from standaits. It further directs the Attorney General to gauge the impacts, if

.. ny, of any lessening`of competition. DOE will make a determined effort to gather and

Solport firm-specnifinancial information and impacts. The competitive analysis will

: on 'ss'g the impacts to smaller, yet significant, manufacturers.

The Department will begin consulting-the Department of Justice in the early stages of the

water heater rulemaking.

Draft wheaterl.wpd June 11, 1997 18

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
12.3 Cumulative Regulatory Burden

The Department will recognize and seek to mitigate the overlapping effects on

manufacturers of new or revised DOE standards and other regulatory actions affecting the

same products.

The Department is currently preparing enhancements to the GRIM model to add

cumulative regulatory burden calculation capabilities. The Department will rck with

the Consumer Product Safety Commission to coordinate any requi e*ntsiiat : may arise

from the flammable vapor ignition issue for gas water h ers.

Are you aware of any other regulations that would e a cumaM. thi

rulemaking? .

.......... 13.0 Utility Impacts

The analysis of utility impacts will include esti:i.-i: margina' i 'n: electric and gas

utility costs and revenues. For electric utilient win lculate three

primary measures of utility impact:, 1) avided e oin -:avoidd reliability costs, 2) generation peak load and capacity red ions, 3) i vehis analysis will be

performed by the Appliance Standards Environmental a ity Model (ASEUM). The

Department seeks views on app ate meares of impct and analytical methods to

evaluate gas utility impacts. '.i. . A. 

Do te any rens reany how a gas utility impact analysis should be

hat consider to assess the likelihood and impacts of

fuel switch

E146 s Environmentalgina"ysis

he standards' analis tracks three types of energy-related emissions: sulfur oxides

x) nitrous o tes (NOx) and carbon dioxide (CO,). The ASEUM model introduced

is used to perform the computations. The emissions of these pollutants

sparately but no monetary values are assigned. Outside the scope of the

'aimanalysis which will not be considered are other types of environmental impacts, such as emissions of particulates, carbon monoxide, air toxins, and volatile organic compounds, generation of solid wastes, and water discharges associated with energy use.

Draft wheater.wpd June 11, 1997 19

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
Are there any additional factors the Department should consider? If so, how?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.::.:g,:-

.. ........

....-. ::....:....

Draft wheaterl.wpd June 11, 1997 20

.:5~5:~:!~::~:5::~i~~5i~i~20:

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
Appendix A

Base case Shipment Forecast: Data Request (Typical)

The Department is developing a base case forecast of product shipments in the absence of

new standards. This forecast will incorporate an assessment of the impacts of past and

existing non-regulatory efforts by manufacturers, utilities, and other interested parties.

To perform the National Analysis, a forecast of shipment weighted en

improvements of new products sold is needed to the year 2030. Pleure A. 1 to

enter your forecast of changes in the shipment weightedi iencyucts sold.

The current shipment weighted efficiency of gas-fired ir heaters o. have

an EF val e of

____:. .. .... 

2000 v 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

:~ ~....... ...........

Figure A 1: Sh mnt Weighted EF of New Gas Storage Water Heaters

ease indicate whak factors/considerations influenced your forecast.

Draft wheateri.wpd June 11, 1997 A-i............

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
Appendix A (continued)

Base case Shipment Forecast: Data Request

To assess the average economic impact of standards on the affected consumer population

and to calculate the distribution of this impact to different consumer sub-groups, a

forecast of product shipments by efficiency level is needed for the year the new standard

would come into effect.

Please use Figure A.2 to profile the expected sales distribution of nej ducts by

efficiency level for the year 2003.

90 1 .......

5 30- 1

Figure A.24 ~idpment Weighted EF Distribution of New Gas Storage Water

'Heaters Sale In th Year 2003

PSjase indicate what fatos/considerations influenced your forecast.

Draft wheaterl.wpd June 11,1997 A-2

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
Appendix B

Technology Assessment and Screening Analysis (will be distributed at the June 24, 1997 workshop)

B.1 Technology Assessment

B.2 Screening Analysis

Draf w. IM.r...

. .. .. ... ... .:' ...

Draft wheaterl.wpd June 11,1997 . B-1

iii. . ~? :".:

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
:--- ' - - -i- .l .. l ,ll ,'

...s' . ._' .'

~ii$1~~ ~!~i~ ~!~!~i8i~ ·

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
Appendix C

Data Request C.1-Design-Option Approach (page 1)

Appliance Type: . Water Heater Yearly Production Volume-(a) =

Appliance Class: .:iii Gas-Fired

Rated Vollme: 40 gallons

~§ iiiii"ji'i g s S . ... '::a: i , __|_ yVa!able Costs Total Cost Uncertainty Range Conversion Costs (Fixed) Total Cost Uncertainty Range

riD 'Isit < |ei t ta(a) ._ Variable Variable Costs Total (millions of dollars) Fixed Fixed Costs

, " ':.ll f, l. ,Mateg$ l . .Overhead Costs (e) (+/- percentage) () Capital Product (i) Costs ) perentage) (k)

Htc:.)9. .i .(d) ':S'f (

( $ per Unit) Maximum Minimum Costs(g),(h) Design Costs (millions) Maximum Minimum

DOE Anticipated l)siglio.pns (2, 1213 [41 1 1 151 16] (7) [81 [9], [101 III

I Baseline : !: .

C 2 Heat Traps ,.f.,

CD 3 R-16 Insulation

4 4 R-25 Insulation .

5 Advanced Insulation . .::. ;. 9 

-4 6111D

7 Fue Damper (electro-mechancial) ':i: 6:.v = = -_ _ _

8 Flue Damper (bouyancy operated) . ..... :.j :Sf ' . j ., 

9 Improved Flue Baffle _____ ^

10 Multiple Flues _____ '... : _ .

IImproved Combustion Chamber :

:

:

:ii.: ..

12 Submerged Combustion Chamber. : :a : _ __ _ 

13wo Phase Thermosiphon _____ __ .__ ______ i ___i: _

14 Side Arm HeaterS gF .... iiii! 

I Direct Vent _____:__ .:_____ s.;:

16 Power Vent ______ __.': .

17 Power. Vent w/ Flue Gas Dilution _____

18 Plastic Tank E.. _____ 

19 Condensing ________ _____

20 Pulse Condensing :_ _. ·

21 TPV Generator

22Submerged Combustion_ __ _

23 irectly Fired _ __ ___.

9C-)t

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
Data Request C.1-Design-Option Approach (page 2)

Appliance Type: Water Heater

Appliance Class:. li Gas-Fired

Rated Volume: l ::: ;..i 40 gallons ___i_;__

E.. lssirs ss.s .W eSrgy Data (when design option applied directly to Baseline) (I) Uncertainty Range

e ^1111. fl ..78? ::;:;^irl I "(n) (

0) Gas(p) Elec (q) Gas (r) Elc (s) percenage) (t)

DOE Anticipated Desi tions [131 [14) [15) 1161 [171 {181 [191 1201

1 _ Baseline _E ... sssssss'S''fi' I ________

c 2 Heat Traps I:___i |:F.. _

3 R-16 Insulation ;1 I . s

4 R-25 Insulation : ______ _ 

( Advanced Insulation i .5 . ____

7 Flue Damper (electro-mechancial) E's' 

8 Flue Damper (bouyancy operated) "f:?.' , :; : ' .. : .

9Improved Flue Baffle i

10 Multiple Flues

Improved Combustion Chamber ____ .

12 Submerged Combustion Chamber ____.. : . ..

13 Two Phase Thermosiphon _____: i.

14Side Arm Heaterl .. ::: ii S .

15Direct Vent _____ ______ |1_

16 Power Vent ________ :: ...

17 Power Vent w Flue Gas Dilution _____ __

18 Plastic Tanki___________

19 Condensing C________ __________

20 se Condensing _______

21 TPV Generator _________ __

22 Submerged Combustion __ ____

23 Directly Fired ______ ______

0 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .;

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
Data Request C.1-Design-Option Approach (page 3)

Appliance Type: ... Water Heater

·, Class: ii~ iAppliance !i:. Gas-Fired

;:: Rated Volume: 40 gallons

I Baseline ____ 'Ii::. ::' .. ;:

§ 2 Heat Trapssll . :^:: -.

o. 3 R-16 Insulation ; _ i -

4 R-25 Insulation!i!!i!"i D Comments Estimated

6. ..... : sRetail Pi.e

'::ID___________::_[1i:<' iiiiy'__.>:i______.._

7 F a a electro-mechancial) ..

H8 lue mraed)ps (bouncy_ a o t : 

19 Improved Flue Baffle ilo n .r.

R i 6Insulation :k:':

0 nsulatipe Flues

2I Improved Combustion Chamberor.! ::: :. :

12 Submerged Combustion Chamber . .ss.. s :.

13 Two Phase Thermosiphon - __ z .s . _

14 Side Arm Heater :i. Ei. E S ___ : " e

15 irect VentD m Eancy 'at)

16 Power Vent_ ____jE____ I :E__.:_I". 

17 Power Vent w/ Flue Gas Dilution ______:__ ::~:::.. .t: 

18 Plastic Tank Re s .

19 CondensingR __ ___.- _____________ 

20 Pulse Condensing ________________ .... E.

21 TPV Generator ____ 1 '-

22 Submerged Combustion Chambe " :...

T23 Directly Fired ____....._ s> '":

CA -___________ ____:'i

M ^^^'^^^

- - -

^"^"'^^"

- -

*

- -

^^^ -

^^

- -

"^^

- -

^^^^"^

-

^

-

"^^^^" - -

^^

-

^^^ -

'^^

-

*

l -

*^^ -- *^^^*^^

-

*^

-

'^*^^

-

^

-

|«^|'llilpi**^^"^*^^^^TM^**^i^*i^^^*«^^^« :i:: : _^^>_»^^.^-_~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
Data Request C1: Design-Option Approach Footnotes for Water Heaters

This data request is consistent with the historical DOE approach to gathering cost and

efficiency data. For this data request, consider design options independently, do not

combine design options. The Department will consider combinations of design options

and perform sensitivity analyses on appropriate variables as suggested by stakeholders.

Appliance Class: Gas-Fired

(a) Assume a constant production volume at the level.:anticipa' " most

common model for the year the new standard wld": come:y2002).

(b) Material costs include material and parts. ..

(c) Burdened labor rate includes direct labor and c inge-ben.+ cost .'

(d) Overhead includes factory overhead excludilepre on. Include d

and variable components.

(e) Total of columns numbered [1] through [3].

(f) Show the range of expected variable costs ex.... " aximum value (% over

column [4]) and a minimum value (% below 1olumn .

(g) For purposes of this analysis assume a 5:ye:.rregulatoi :"y f r .amo tize this

cost over 5 years)..

(h) Includes investment for such iten.i 'p. h.oachinerand .. plant upgrade

and/or expansion and tooling.:

(i) Product design conversion cots are the expens ':ts for new product design.

These may include prodi|edesign -csts and pnsable factory conversion

expenses. Also include i sts incu.ed for newproduct literature and catalogs,

product obsolescence'-d vario elated ri"keting expenses.

(j) Total of coluered [7

(k) i..low the ranf:ected fi iT'e xpressed as maximum value (% over

[9]) " a 'i-i-ium valu % below column [9]).

-(1) b'* y data' s-t.ed here (columns [12-18] should be for the design

opti' " ped direc-'' .'0t in"e model and not combined with any other design

(m) .tig 't.E ' i'" fromi . DOE test procedure, 10 CFR 430, Appendix E to

Subpart B P::4- Uniform Test Method For Measuring the Energy

J..: Consumptio iter Heaters.

.ii') Recovery Eiciency (ir,) from DOE test procedure, 10 CFR 430, Appendix E to

Subpart B :Part 430- Uniform Test Method For Measuring the Energy

. Consum pion of Water Heaters.

.StandlHeat Loss Coefficient (UA) from DOE test procedure, 10 CFR 430,

'" Aplpe:ndix E to Subpart B of Part 430- Uniform Test Method For Measuring the

" .ergy Consumption of Water Heaters.

(p) This is the gas consumption when the burner is firing.

(q) This is the electricity consumption, for fans, pumps, ignition systems, controls,

etc., when the burner is firing.

Draft wheaterl.wpd June 11, 1997 C-4

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
(r) This is the gas consumption, for the pilot, when the burner is not firing.

(s) This is the electricity consumption, for fans, pumps, ignition systems, controls,

transformer losses, etc., when the burner is not firing.

(t) Show the range of expected EF expressed as maximum and minimum values.

(u) Source for Energy Use data: test data (T), calculations (C), or estimation (E).

raft . ... J.'. 1:. 19 :.-.:.- 

Draf-.. a!e.J:-, 

Draft wheaterlwpd June 11. 1997 C-5

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
Data Request C.1.-Deisign-Option Approach (page 1)

0 Appliance Type: :. Water Heater Yearly Production Volume (a) =

Appliance Class (an !l11!! !!. Electric

Rated Volume: pjSrigll ; :i., 50 gallons . '

D '.,:,.,.:: V.^J Costs | Total Cost Uncertainty Range Conversion Costs (Fixed) Total Cost Uncertainty Range

S ill: ||:g .. .^^^^^jla.) ~ .:S)|Variable Variable Costs Total (millions of dollars) Fixed Fixed Costs

0 ,;: " a ''", ilj taii:'". Overhead Costs (e) (+/ percntage) (c) Capital Product (i) Costs(j) () - percentage) (k)

· ss::e .i"%lll ' l-.(c. 8 ) (d) ( per Unit) Maximum Minimum Cosls(g).,(l) Design Costs (inillions) Maximum Minimum

DOE Anticipated Design Op ':. [21 [31 [4] [51 161 (7) [8) [91 [101 [I1)

- I1 Baseline *s 11 ,l?:/i_______.. 

O'D= 2 Heat Traps _.:.ii! i i:: ! S I.

3 R-25 Insulation "f s ___ ___!________ __ _ _ ____ 

4 Advanced Insulation iiiii i.______ ____ ___ : ::*

( 5 Plastic Tank ''_ ........ 

6 Baseboard 'iiiiii liii

7Off-Peak .'"'i'iiiii ii:,

8 Add-On Heat Pump .l i i . -

9 ntergral Heat Pump ' s

10 Retun Air Heat Pump " l R ,> ii.. ;

_:i '' f ...........- f R_ :': ::. .

'<i::i~iiiipici ' .' :,''*S:.

_______________________________i__________________ _______ _^ .I..__,__;...___ _______~....-.-.-

';i. :

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
Data Request Cs pesign-Option Approach (page 2)

0 Appliance Type: Water Heater

D Appliance Class Electric

alted Volume: l 50 gallons

S " | -:^ En er (when applied directly to Baseline) (I) Uncertainty Range

'IPl '· ' 'lr) '': UA On-Cycle Off-Cycle Total EF

I ~ ~ "i~~~~~~$i ..-. (nK ) (°) Elec(p) Elec(q) (+/-percentage) (r)

W , . U W Maximum Minimum

DOE Anticipated Design O p s [131 [14] 1151 [161 [17] [181

C I Baseline .. _ :

(D 2 Heat Traps .':.--:____

3 R-25 Insulation ..

4 Advanced Insulation __________

4 I 5 Plastic Tank.:

6Baseboard_______

7 Off-Peak . .... .. > .

8 Add-On Heat Pump _____

9 Intergral Heat Pump ___________ - _>3_:3::: 

10 Return Air Heat Pump ______ _

_ 3 '3 ':3i, .

:*1~~~~~~ ":it -<C -e:::.

4~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~: .::,~~>.,;: ~

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
Data Request C.1-Design-Option Approach (page 3)

:0 Appliance Type: Water Heater

_ii 3'' .k R Insulation... . Appliance Class Electric

< Rated Volume: . ... ''.. .'..:..50 gallons

mM

a§ ^III;. ..t i 1

t (s) Notes Increase in

Retail Price

DOE Anticipated Desig i..ions l 191 20) (21

__ ..... Baseline ~:._% .... ,

CT) 2 Heat Traps

3 R-25 Insulation .

' 4 Advanced Insulation ;'I J'" :..:$!i__ $':":

5 Plastic Tank ":

6 Baseboard

7 Off-Peak , '": . _?:' 

8 Add-On Heat Pump:.

9 Intergral Heat Pump .i::: .. 

10 Return Air Heat Pump' .. : .. :

,oi ......... .

ii!!?... c· ~ ....

:ti

4-"

O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
Appliance Class: Electric

(a) Assume a constant production volume at the level anticipated for the most

common model for the year the new standard would come into effect (2002).

(b) Material costs include material and parts.

(c) Burdened labor rate includes direct labor and fringe-benefits costs.

(d) Overhead includes factory overhead excluding depreciation. Includes both fixed

and variable components. "'

(e) Total of columns numbered [1] through [3]. i

(f) Show the range of expected variable costs expressedas maxi ue (% over

column [4]) and a minimum value (% below col "4]).

(g) For purposes of this analysis assume a 5 year reatitory life 'i: this

cost over 5 years).

(h) Includes investment for such items as produc.i".nach Wry and pla:

and/or expansion and tooling.

(i) Product design conversion costs are the expens la~ ' for new product design.

These may include product redesign costs and...- tctory conversion

expenses. Also includes costs incurred for new produti re and catalogs,

product obsolescence, and various related aketing . exp: 

(j) Total of columns numbered [7] & [8"

(k) Show the range of expected fixed I's exp ma a ... xii.nm value (% over

column [9]) and a minimum vathe(% be,' Ii -

(1) The energy data here'reported|iere (colnns [ 1uld be for the design

option applied directly to:a"aline miel and notombined with any other design

options.

(m) Energy Factor (EF) frItDOE te oceduO d CFR 430, Appendix E to

(n) kcvy Efficiaj ( :rom DOe2ist procedure, 10 CFR 430, Appendix E to

Suipartof Pa inif rmt" Test Method For Measuring the Energy pConu of Wa.: . atr.

(o) St'ag Coefint -:ss (UA) from DOE test procedure, 10 CFR 430,

ipl"pendix':i:S"iiart B f Part 430- Uniform Test Method For Measuring the

. Energy Con:s : of Water Heaters.

.(. 'This is the ely consumption when the element(s) are on.

) This is the el.tricity consumption, such as for transformer losses, when the

element(s) a'e not on.

. Show the.inge of expected EF expressed as maximum and minimum values.

: '. Sourcif.r Energy Use data: test data (T), calculations (C), or estimation (E).

Draft wheaterl.wpd June 11, 1997 C-9

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
Data Request C.1-Design-Option Approach (page 1)

C Appliance Type: : '.. Water Heater Yearly Production Volume (a) =

Appliance Class (ast Oil-Fired

Rated Volume: 32 gallons

CD :illl .l: ____. . V Costs Total Cost Uncertainty Range Conversion Costs (Fixed) Total Cost Uncertainty Range

a .Illlj; ka 1 t m .... I a) Variable Variable Costs Total (millions of dollars) Fixed Fixed Costs

'Jl .. . ' l' :.: L . t Overhead Costs (e) (+/- percentage) (f) Capital Product (i) Costs (j) (+- percentage) (k)

.. ill;;i, I^.H^ ^ y(d) 'f)(C) (S per Unit) Maximum Minimum Costs(g).(h) Design Costs (millions) Maximum Minimum

DOE Anticipated Design :i' s .: i ,5] 121 [4] 3 [6] (7) [81 [9] [101 [11

c_ I Baseline , : 

2 Heat Traps_-

3 R-8 Foam Insulation ' i _:_

4 R-16 Insulation .. i .: ..

( 5 R-25 Insulation i ''

"6 Advanced Insulation '

7 Multilple Flues ' ii:.: .

8 Improved Flue Baffle ::i _____ i.

9 Multilple Flues ':."!E_

10Air Atomized Burner .| _____ e,

I Interrupted Ignition:'i j , .... : .

12 Improved Motor Efficiency

_ ::: ~. ,i~ilil'^ s~f:>. y fc^E~slo$. ,:,fjliillij IF'~........................................ ~ : 

0 EEi

0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ iia~ ~~i::..

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
Data Request C.1-Design-Option Approach (page 2)

0 Appliance Type: Water Heater

Appliance Class (ai iOil-Fired

Rated Volume: >il 32 gallons

"! ~iijE. .'Enei J:_a (when design option applied directly to Baseline) () Uncertainty Range

* :!:: -:.~.:~ 'r '2J ) UA On-Cycle Off-Cycle Total EF

(n) (o) Oil (p) Elec (q) Elec (r) (+ percentage) (s)

'II. .5·· P' ^^ffi B wu/Ar W W Maximum Minimum

DOE Anticipated Design' 'ons 13] [141 151 1161 1171 [181 119]

c II Baseline : .:: 

cD 2 Heat Traps _ . ' g... 

- .- 3 R-8 Foam Insulation g "' . .' _ii 

cD 4 R-16 Insulation "::Ej.SSi' ::: . iii|^i|i. ,. 

4 _5 R-25 Insulation ..

6 Advanced Insulation

7 Mulilple Flues ' .

8 Improved Flue Baffle. "::iii::

9 Mullilpic Flues IS' E : , : ..

10 Air Atomized Burner _____: '' . :: .. 

II Interrupted Ignition :: : i

12 Improved Motor Efficiency ____._. _s _ : :! : : i :.. iiZ:;:..

4_ . - Morl ,__ ,s__ v ___ :l I__^ gjS; :!.. f 

0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ·~~~~~~~~~~~~~':

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
Data Request C.1-Design-Option Approach (page 3)

C0 Appliance Type: Water IHeater

Appliance Class (a Oil-Fired

Rated Volume: 3 g.32allons

¥ii!':',i~i:i',i',i!!!'¢!i':; ii?' ... ......... $ r '11 , ' : .. l l' >:':in'"~1 ata Comments Estimated

C· ":I:/lc. * I :iI rce (t) Notes Increase in

Retail Price

DOE Anlicipalcd Dcsi1 ln's ii 1201 1211 [221

c aseline il ... ^ .....:;.:..:. s....... :.... I Baseline ____________________________________

CD 2 Heat Traps . ___:___.':s _'".'.____

3 R-8 Foam Insulation ... _";,::::::_:__:_ _i_..____

4 R-16 Insulation .... .

-4 5 R-25 Insulation 1i881-----3 1

6 Advanced Insulation s: ! ...... 

7 Multilple Flues:: .... "::... ... 

8 Improved Flue Baffle :.. J 

9 Multilple Flues ".i - * i .

10 Air Atomized Burner :': ; i:. ..- .

II Interrupted Ignition : . :

12 Imroved Motor Efficien:cy_ ___, ..il : . l: 

. .,:~.::~:~ ...............

:i:'.;:"..........

:' ii.................................

9:''':''' I

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
Appliance Class: Oil-Fired

(a) Assume a constant production volume at the level anticipated for the most

common model for the year the new standard would come into effect (2002).

(b) Material costs include material and parts.

(c) Burdened labor rate includes direct labor and fringe-benefits costs.

(d) Overhead includes factory overhead excluding depreciation. Includes both fixed

and variable components. v

(e) Total of columns numbered [1] through [3]. -

(f) Show the range of expected variable costs express:d as maI " alue (% over

column [4]) and a minimum value (% below co|i [4]). ti

(g) For purposes of this analysis assume a 5 year .iulatory li t hi s

cost over 5 years).

(h) Includes investment for such items as produ2 acm~ ery and plan..

and/or expansion and tooling.

(i) Product design conversion costs are the expen 't .for new product design.

These may include product redesign costs and.pi"''ctory conversion

expenses. Also includes costs incurred for new produ i and catalogs,

product obsolescence, and various relat." dceting ' ex"' ::

(j) Total of columns numbered [7] & 8 ..

(k) Show the range of expected fixe di ts exm , maxum value (% over

column [9]) and a minimum vae (% be y

(1) The energy data here reportei (coinns :here [ i ltiould be for the design

option applied directly t|eline mGel and no combined with any other design

options.

(m) Energy Factor (EF) fj. DOE tirocedul 0 CFR 430, Appendix E to

Sb...part B of Pa..' U:Unifom"d For Measuring the Energy

Cm pt Heaters

(n) o Efficr rom DO test procedure, 10 CFR 430, Appendix E to

S'"'i of Part'" '"-'m Test Method For Measuring the Energy

(o) a CoeFint (UA) from DOE test procedure, 10 CFR 430,

.:::i'pendi" "i..part B of Part 430- Uniform Test Method For Measuring the

| Energy Consu"i : oof Water Heaters.

This is the oi ption when the burner is firing.

This is the e tricity consumption, for fans, pumps, controls, ignition systems,

etc., when I:e burner is firing.

.This is thiielectricity consumption, for fans, pumps, ignition systems, controls,

transf::er :..... losses, etc., when the burner is not firing.

X^IllSbllw' the range of expected EF expressed as maximum and minimum values.

i: ouiiource for Energy Use data: test data (T), calculations (C), or estimation (E).

Draft wheaterl.wpd June 11, 1997 C-13

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
Data Request C.2-Efficiency-Level Approach (page 1)

0 Appliance Type: .:: ilis||:::i: y.. Water Heater Yearly Production Volume (a) =

; Appliance Class (|*|||l . - Gas-Fired

Rated Volume: 'KI1Y ;!i 1 ;iiii _ : .40 O gallons

iii| s1s_:ii Variable Costs I , Cost Uncertainty Range Conversion Costs (Fixed) Total Cost Uncertainty Range

. ! :

.Hi z ii __i_!: Costs per Unit (a) " iVariable Costs Total (millions of dollars) Fixed Fixed Costs

:: : : : ieri~al La~bor 0 . '. fl i '"| :) (+/- percentage) (g) Capital Product () Costs (k) (+/- percentage) (I)

:i>!:'.:.; ~(d) .;ll':. :'er Unit) Maximum Minimum Costs(h),(i) Design Costs (millions) Maximum Minimum

Energy Factor (b) [iT ::":' [21 | i ' [4] [51 [6] (7) [81 (91 [o10 [11

.57 _ _:. i .58 ____ _ ss: :!.1___10sssiiiii_ _ _ [21_ 

.64 . .. ,:::i::i. ~ ...

.60 ______ _________

(0

co .62 _ _ _ , -

.64 __________ ..... > ___S '-y.. 

.67 -_.:_._ _ : _:_ _:j,

.70 _ _ f__ ::: ::

.75 __________ _____. _s__

.80'j /i s .. . -iiili s -

.90 -_ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ,.6o S ~ ~ s S ........ :drii fs!] SSS 'j;i~: .iiiiii.iiiiii:: ~ .........

0or._ _.

P~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~::i::v..:::::¥~.''~~:$.:!~5!:s~~s :i:'.:~~~...

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
Data Request C.2-Efficiency-Level Approach (page 2)

O Appliance Type:- :: .. :....... Water Heater

Appliance Class (an '' Gas-Fired H " " ~::' "..il. *·"'"'· asF ......... -... Rated Volume: ii'i . gallons. _

:(e . Energy Data OfCylellll: 

D RlUi (tl r) UA iiptn-Cycle |I;|. .-. :'1 Off-Cycle Energy Data Comments Esiimated

*§d$~ ^Ili?11 ~ ~(n) GasBr Gas b (q) Elec (r) Source (s) Notes () Increase in

B. "/u/hr :i. W Retail Price

.56 :::: : .

Energy Factor (b) [._'.. [13] [_ !' [16] [171 [_81_[_191 [201

: .58.._ . __

( .62 ... :::. =:'_*_s____::::E:! 

.64 ., ::: .l.:.: 

.70 __ _ _ _ _ I '' I'

.75 _ -: : :s I

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.85* . 705 ::.:: s....':i:.~ .. ~.:......... q::.':ss;::. _ ]]iis~,.. ..

n0 0 :

..:'.:.. :::::,. . ;~.. .:q.: . :, ""~:"~~~~~~~~~··:::..:.:,L!-!,?;"iiiiiiii

!i ..... ~:*.;:ili?:...':~ ....... ? .~·r~:'s:.~i;?.._,;5,...

................ ~~~~~~···j

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
Data Request C2: Efficiency-Level Approach Footnotes

This approach consists of letting the manufacturers supply cost and corresponding

efficiency data using any design options or design option combinations they choose.

Appliance Class: Gas-Fired

(a) Assume a constant production volume at the level anticipated for the m..:

common model for the year the new standard would come inti*:feci2002).

(b) Energy Factor (EF) from DOE test procedure, 10 R 4304 " xE to

Subpart B of Part 430- Uniform Test Method Fo:r"asurin'gie"n

Consumption of Water Heaters.

(c) Material costs include material and parts. X .

(d) Burdened labor rate includes direct labor and..fge-e fits costs.

(e) Overhead includes factory overhead excluding.ration. Includes boii fied

and variable components.

(f) Total of columns numbered [1] through [3]. .. (g) Show the range of expected variable costs expressed :" i

"' i.m value (% over

column [4]) and a minimum value (% bel olumn [4]

(h) For purposes of this analysis assume. uatory lir , amortize this

cost over 5 years). .. '

(i) Includes investment for such ites as proQic"'ti:ry and plant upgrade

and/or expansion and tooling.i . . I 

(j) Product design conversiqo-i-ots are thicexpensie costs for new product design.

These may include pro-it desig osts andj epensable factory conversion

expenses. Also includ^osts inc.. d for niproduct literature and catalogs,

product obsoles d vario. . i:ke ting expenses.

(k) T..toE f colu .. "..red [7]

(I) i h rangef ed fixed costs expressed as maximum value (% over

"''[) ~and a' "'.:.alue (% below column [9]).

(mn) Recov:.ienc y r DOE test procedure, I0 CFR 430, Appendix E to

Su'b'"": i430:: - :30 - 'i: Test Method For Measuring the Energy

Coiisurn'pt~ea idWater Heaters.

(n) E Standby Heat Siiefficient (UA) from DOE test procedure, 10 CFR 430,

Appendix E t p B of Part 430- Uniform Test Method For Measuring the

i Energy Consuption of Water Heaters.

:i':) This is the as consumption when the burner is firing.

I..... This is thetectricity consumption, for fans, pumps, ignition systems, controls,

, etc., w.i the burner is firing.

:':Jii Tii: the gas consumption, for the pilot, when the burner is not firing.

'" i isi T: the electricity consumption, for fans, pumps, ignition systems, controls,

transformer losses, etc., when the burner is not firing.

(s) Source for Energy Use data: test data (T), calculations (C), or estimation (E).

(t) List design options used to achieve this efficiency.

Draft wheaterl.wpd June 11,1997 C-16

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
1. Baseline

2. Heat Traps

3. R-16 Insulation

4. R-25 Insulation

5. Advanced Insulation

6. ED

7. Flue Damper (electromechanical)

8. Flue Damper (bouyancy operated)

9. Improved Flue Baffle

10. Multiple Flues

11. Improved Combustion Chamber

12. Submerged Combustion Chamb ..u

13. Two Phase Thermosiphon

14. Side Arm Heater ..

15. Direct Vent,

16. Power Vent

17. Power Vent w/ Flue Gas Dilu

18. Plastic Tank

19. Condensing

20. Pulse Condensing

21. TPV Generator

22. Submerged CoWbstion

23. Directly Firedr -aSX

Dratt whea..WTM^ d ^ J ^ e ........... ...

Draft wheaterl.wpd June 11, 1997 C-17

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
Data Request C.^ -fficiency-Level Approach (page I)

0 Appliance Type: ,: | Water Heater Yearly Production Volume (a) =__

Appliance Class (ati'l Electric

Rated Volume: .ii ' ii. SP5 gallons . '_ __: 

! ': 11:1 Variable Costs '::i:l ...iiii::. Cost Uncertainty Range Conversion Costs (Fixed) Total Cost Uncertainty Range

'5IS JJIII Costs per Unit (a) SVariable mi Costs Total (millions of dollars) Fixed Fixed Costs

E':!: ' "' LqIa h

bor :.i:: (+/- perrcenuagc) (g) Capital Prodlicl (j) Costs (k) - (+/- prcntage) (I)

( :..' (d) .:iiili '"er Unit) Maximum Minimum Costs(h).(i) Design Costs (millions) Maximum Minimum

Energy Factor (b) ][]' :,, | [21] ,s 4,1 1[5] [6] (7) 1[8 [91 [10] [I1]

c - .88 _' 3 .89 ''S-' ...... i .... : 

.90 _ i _,i; 

.92 :2. .......... ___92___ _ _ _ _ _ ~ (0

.94a ' ..

1.32

-... :-::' -

":;:;:i:: ;:i¥ . "')??)L 

2.20 ~?;.

2. .

CO.11 ~i~~i ~ ........ .. i:!::, .!......,

OD~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.:~

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
Data Request C.2-Efficiency-Level Approach (page 2)

a Appliance Type: Water Heater

;t ::::: ·

) X Appliance Class (ant |r|u.|| :... Electric

Rated Volumen: 50 gallons __________________________________________________________

M Energy Da:

. :ii:E (Tnr) UA : i-Cycle Energy Data Comments Estimated

3 ISii::I:: ( msi) (n) "t) :(: Source (q) Notes (r) Increase in

" : ::::::: ,.:.:-.: Retail Price

Energy Factor (b) ":'i. [13J . :' '15] [161] 171 [181

C- .88 "'

: .89: __ _ _

. 8 ....... :::: :iiiiiiiii ii:ii....____________________________

2.0 3s != s S...... 1=== .....::>:

-4 .94 _ _ _ _

1.32 ______ i 11

2.20 _____________ ______ : i:| '. K '''.:::::. 2.20 : . :::::: .. .

2.64

o. .9 :::':>,:,,: ... ,......' ' >S. '-$i!~::::.::.:i~? i['~ ............ .

_~~~ %_:;; ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.. ;i i~ iii~!iif...':.......

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
Appliance Class: Electric

(a) Assume a constant production volume at the level anticipated for the most

common model for the year the new standard would come into effect (2002).

(b) Energy Factor (EF) from DOE test procedure, 10 CFR 430, Appendix E to

Subpart B of Part 430- Uniform Test Method For Measuring the Energy

Consumption of Water Heaters.

(c) Material costs include material and parts. ...

(d) Burdened labor rate includes direct labor and fringe-benefits ts ...

(e) Overhead includes factory overhead excluding depreciatio..s both fixed

and variable components. .i .

(f) Total of columns numbered [1] through [31. .

(g) Show the range of expected variable costs ex:essed as. : irmum over

column [4]) and a minimum value (% below ? mn .[1)

(h) For purposes of this analysis assume a 5 yea 'ji'. ry life (i.e., amorti"is

cost over 5 years).

(i) Includes investment for such items as produc''t . ... i3' and plant upgrade

and/or expansion and tooling.

(j) Product design conversion costs are the,. ex sable c st " . product design.

These may include product redesig '..pensableiry conversion

expenses. Also includes costs iliterature and catalogs,

product obsolescence, and various relate.fart igpnses.

(k) Total of columns numbered 71 & [8]..

(1) Show the range of expe..c tiixed coS expresse as maximum value (% over

column [9]) and a miIn 'value. ( below cilumn [9]).

(m) Recovery Efficiency'. from D ..-'test prcdure, 10 CFR 430, Appendix E to

Subpart B of Pa U'430-U niforrbm ht obd For Measuring the Energy

Coni sum~pptio ti o"W:: Heater..'

(n) WaW HeatfisC i c i e n t (hAS from DOE test procedure, 10 CFR 430,

.... "'.iE to Su'bt" .. Part 430- Uniform Test Method For Measuring the

o)Ene............. ump.tioW ..EH.eaters.

(o) This'" s'" "tiicity c'"i ption when the element(s) are on.

(p I,:s is'fh""ty consumption, such as for transformer losses, when the

,..element(s) a''' t" :.

(q:I Source for E' lse data: test data (T), calculations (C), or estimation (E).

(Ofl List design o0ions used to achieve this efficiency.

1. ,y Baseline

-::2.. : Heat Traps

ii.iii.......-.. ' R-25 Insulation

$.i4 ' . Advanced Insulation

5. Plastic Tank

6. Baseboard

7. Off-Peak

8. Add-On Heat Pump

Draft wheaterl.wpd June 11, 1997 C-20

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
9. Intergral Heat Pump

10. Return Air Heat Pump

&,? i:. ' ..indefin·::. 

'4 ''::'....:iii:.~?"

:.4... ..

1⁄2.' 1

Draft wheater.wpd June 11, 1997 c21

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
Data Requ iency-Level Approach (page )

0 Appliance Typ Water Heater Yearly Production Volume (a) =

Appliance Cla. wpted):. .. Oil-Fired

Rated Volume: 2 gallons

SS ''il !|_!__- Variable Costs Cio' i I I Cost Uncertainty Range Conversion Costs (Fixed) Total Cost Uncertainty Range

_ .||B _ _ Costs per Unit (a) B aiil able Variable Costs Total (millions of dollars) Fixed Fixed Costs

. Bial. Labor .:rt i Costs (f (+/- percentage) (g) Capital Product (j) Costs (k) (+/- percentage) (I)

( i:,) (d) : Iiol:l. (S #) per Unit) Maximum Minimum Costs(h),(i) Design Costs (millions) Maximum Minimum

Energy Factor (b) ili f$ 1 4Sig .[5] f1l [6] (7) [81 [9] [10l [1I]

-. s 5 _ ___ ;;;i!!?,iii8____ ^l" ii .:.. . ,.i-,.: .i: : I i,, B ..... g II_

CCD .56

* .58 6= 3-____

.60 _____ .... ii::..

.62__ .:_ .

64 .646__________ ____________________||||s_ __,,::~

.66 _ :__ ''__.. . . ..

.68_ ___ _____

.* : 70.

9

r ,y::J. '

w5^..

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
Data Request C.2--Efficiency-Level Approach (page 2)

0 Appliance Type: Water Heater

> Appliance Class (II:::: . Oil.Flred

Rated Volume: . .-::::^:. .... : 32 gallons

£¢:DJ~' fII ly _:_ [ Energy Data':^i .i: .

. l".,iii.E (ir) UA .iO I On- Off-Cycle Energy Data Commcnts . Estimated

tdp' :

.i:,fii.() (n) (, i: Elec (q) Source (r) Notes (s) Increase in

.66 - w Retail Pri..ce

EnergyFactor(b) [ [131 i[15) . (16.1 1171 118) [191

CD .56 _______

.58

.60 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __..

.64 :_______ ___.______________

. ~ ~ZZ - ~~ f~ ..... l.66l .68 .

.70

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
Appliance Class: Oil-Fired

(a) Assume a constant production volume at the level anticipated for the most

common model for the year the new standard would come into effect (2002).

(b) Energy Factor (EF) from DOE test procedure, 10 CFR 430, Appendix E to

Subpart B of Part 430- Uniform Test Method For Measuring the Energy

Consumption of Water Heaters.

(c) Material costs include material and parts.

(d) Burdened labor rate includes direct labor and fringe-benefits costs. .

(e) Overhead includes factory overhead excluding depreciation._i'w d b"oth fixed

and variable components.

(f) Total of columns numbered [1] through [3]. .....

(g) Show the range of expected variable costs ex'?ssed as r.lmum "io ver ;.o 

column [4]) and a minimum value (% below'."umn [1 4

(h) For purposes of this analysis assume a 5 year.!i oy life (i.e., amorti '

cost over 5 years).

(i) Includes investment for such items as producut l ic-i and plant upgrade

and/or expansion and tooling. " -.

(j) Product design conversion costs are the erable cosXi proi oduct design.

These may include product redesign gotn'* pensabli'.. conversion

expenses. Also includes costs incui:i.u. uct litejure and catalogs,

product obsolescence, and varioi related 2'":'iexnses.

(k) Total of columns numbered [1:& [8]. .-

(1) Show the range of expecte ixed cosiiexpresse as maximum value (% over

column [9]) and a mini ilalue. ( below climn [9]).

(m) Recovery Efficiency (||from DOiEest proqeure, 10 CFR 430, Appendix E to

Subpart B of PartF.i3U(niform "i ' For Measuring the Energy

.- :suXmption .of r.. "Heaters

(n) y Heat C ficient (lA f'om DOE test procedure, 10 CFR 430,

': I: "'-E to f .S."l.-: Part 430- Uniform Test Method For Measuring the

E-......-.. mptio..-... W- :Heaters.

(o) This ilsi: p i . hen ::sum the burner is firing.

(p) T.iel ty conis ption, for fans, pumps, ignition systems, controls,

t..c., when thEt i.e is firing.

(q)i This is the ele"ic.. t:consumption, for fans, pumps, ignition systems, controls,

transformer lossesI etc., when the burner is not firing.

.-?"ll Source for Energy Use data: test data (T), calculations (C), or estimation (E).

List design options used to achieve this efficiency.

,i. Baseline

Heat Traps

3:i. R-8 Foam Insulation

4. R-16 Insulation

5. R-25 Insulation

6. Advanced Insulation

Draft wheaterl.wpd June 11, 1997 C-24

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
f

7. Multiple Flues

8. Improved Flue Baffle

9. Multiple Flues

10. Air Atomized Burner

11. Interrupted Ignition

12. Improved Motor Efficiency

C.3 Uncertainty and Variability in Manufacturer Costs. .1

The analysis will explicitly consider uncertainty (e.g., in.plete ' about

future costs) and variability (e.g., differences among cOn :?:ufacturer" describes a proposed approach for collecting and usinthe datal apb used for any data collected (each component of cost for th. otal increm,. . Part of the discussion with stakeholders should inc l ins about the lev'etil

at which uncertainty should be addressed.

How detailed should the data be on uncertainty? - All of the data have some uncertainty associated...One approacl ie to request explicit estimates of uncertainty associated nber pro However, where

possible, the burden of making those estue' d ced, by tead estimating only the uncertainty associated with more a"egate r . i iple, rather than

estimating the uncertainty for each o the cost fims in ign option survey, only the

uncertainty in total variable costa..total fix ::cost foriac design option is needed to

carry an analysis of the cost un.:'"inty thi 'igh the ma tufacturer impact analysis and

engineering analysis. In the :of the .iency, " ertainty could be characterized for

the energy factor, recov f ency, ac. t loss coefficient. Variability in hot

water uS".among 'be h " will b ted separately to deal with actual energy

consw asI...:: Ipro ist 'e...':.,. test re.

How shoua "i"".fnty b.hr'i e...ed ?

In order to e diff among manufacturers, each manufacturer will be

asked to .'a ti stimatof costs, including their estimate of the uncertainty in

their.Sosts. Manufa"'c:"i: be asked to estimate the uncertainty in their costs by pi lding a minimu r ikely, and maximum value for the cost. These values will

?Minterpreted as a trigilar distribution, unless the manufacturer indicates that a

.'Different distribution should be used.

ftCstructing .iistry costs from individual manufacturer costs.

o individual manufacturers will be treated as confidential, a range of

' t "'t"'industry will be constructed, based upon the information from the individual

manufacturers. The range of costs to the industry will be expressed as confidence

intervals, that is a range of values with a specified probability.

Draft wheaterl.wpd June 11, 1997 C-25

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
Four steps are proposed for combining information from individual manufacturers to

construct the range of costs for the industry. First, a sample will be selected to

characterize the range provided by each manufacturer. Second, these samples may be

weighted. (See discussion below about how to determine what weights to use, if any.)

Third, the samples from each manufacturer are combined to obtain the range of costs for

the industry. Fourth, in order to protect confidentiality, the results are summarized as

"trend results," revealing only the median ("middle") and the low and high values

corresponding to specific confidence intervals.

Weighting the individual manufacturer costs to obtain the industry. '

For the current mix of products, the industry result can b,:.lt up r " '" ividual

manufacturer's costs by simply averaging the estimate sisuming wa!:. : ), or

alternatively, by weighting each manufacturer's costis their ma:it. shar t

example, we present both the unweighted estimate, n estimite of indus'" s

upon market shares. '

Without advance knowledge of future market shares,, we ...i.s use current market

shares to weight each manufacturer's costs, in orderii build 'i : .range of industry

costs. For the future mix of products, the marketL..es may chis(i( , with the

possibility that those manufacturers with the may los"i ket share). A

sensitivity analysis can be conducted on it' ' upon "eig':''' psible shifts in market

shares. ,.

Example. .. ... : 

Suppose three manufacturers pri::'e estia es of an i:iremental cost (either for a design

option or for an efficiency levd Table '1b:ows ea nanufacturer' s estimate of the

.......... ,. :. .............. > - .. .':,. ....... /\'aa COSTS

..-:.;::..

5 10 15 20 25 30

'"::'"Draf:t :eaterl::pd June 11, 1997 C-26·

Draft w.eate:.wpd June 11, 1997 C-26

"::::ii~ i -:::':'"

. .. . 101/0 53

Drftwnatrlwd un 1119 7 C-2

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
minimum, likeliest, and maximum cost. Figure 1 shows the triangular distributions

drawn from minimum, likeliest, and maximum costs for three manufacturers,

corresponding to Table 1.Table 1. Hypothetical incremental cost estimates from three

manufacturers.

Manufacturer Minimum Likeliest Maximum

B $10 $15 $20:4'

A $5 $20

C $10 ;$?*:' $-

Manufacturer B estimates the cost to be between $1 (:d $20, .kiest $1;- .... .,i

Manufacturer A estimates the cost to be between $5 $25 i¢ eliest $20. Mg ter

C estimates the cost between $10 and $30, likeliest $ T| hmple average of 'ii:

estimates of "likeliest" cost is $18 = ($15+20+20)/3. .. t.I ate fails to account for

the uncertainty. . '

Figure 1 and Table 1 show that manufacturer Ai H 'ider rang e minimum to

the likely value ($15=$20-$5) than from the.'l""" Jothe max m ($5=$25-$20).

Considering the uncertainties as triangulafdistrib l : t ki.. account of the range

and shape of the uncertainties gives a iean valui for ::n"i'at-:er A of $16.67.

~;: : .. iiis *'. ii::: : ... .

Calculations of industry costs wl' se multilLe values W.thin the range provided by

manufacturers. Sampling techal-es (Moi. Carlo orl.atin Hypercube') will be used to

select samples within the rano provide' sufffint number of samples will be

analyzed i.: represent thei range w'"vi ": 2 (page C-29) shows the unweighted

avera g. l 'ilated us-- "'nals (Lat" :: prcube), with a mean industry value of

The weighteid I.are obtaitniiiiasuming market shares of 60% for manufacturer A,

30% for n"ai"B:and lOi manufacturer 'r C. Since Manufacturer A, with the

largest arket shar ei'ated lower costs than the other manufacturers, the

weighted costs are los:i tha: the unweighted costs. Figure 3 (page C-30) shows the

.ighted costs, with aIen value of $16.0.

iii en more information is provided by a confidence interval. The confidence interval is

:.3i't probability ta: the cost will occur within some range from low to high value around

' ::e .idiva: Table 2 shows the range of values for each of the confidence intervals.

ig 'r': " s10%, ':s 25%, 50%, and 90% confidence intervals for the unweighted and

Monte Carlo involves random sampling. Latin Hypercube is intended to provide higher

assurance than Monte Carlo that the full range is sampled. Latin Hypercube first divides the range into

equal-sized segments, then conducts random sampling within each segment.

Draft wheaterl.wpd June 11, 1997 C-27

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
weighted averages.

Table 2. Confident - intervals and range of costs for the industry

Confidence Interval Range of Costs Range of Costs

(around median) (unweighted) (weighted)

Median $17.3 $16.1 2

10% $17.0-17.7 :' $1 

25% $16.6-18.0 .

50% $15.9-18.7 $ . :

90% $13.5-20.6 i :'. $12.8-18.

e· 1:. 1: .:::::::::::::::::::::w::::

....:.:.... ....... . :.:.:..

*''"'"'"F....

.?::?.9 - ....

.:~i?:!:mi.ii!?!:i..: . ....

· :...; 7.:. ' i.' i i ... ...

Draft vineateri.wpd June 11, 1997 C-28,

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
Forecast: UNWEIGHTED AVERAGE Cell: E9

Summary:

Display Range is from 10.0 to 30.0

Entire Range is from 11.9 to 22.9

After 500 Trials, the Std. Error of the Mean is 0.1

Statistics: Value Trials 500

Mean 172

Median 17 ..3 . Mode

Standard Deviation ·. :

Variance '44J

Skewness -0M

Kurtosis B51

Coeff. of Variability 0 12 Range Minimum 11 9

Range Maximum 9

Range Width

Mean Std. Error '::

Forecast: UNWEIGHTE.B: ........ s

500 Trials Freque:' Chart 0i:O Outliers 046 .. iS:"23

...- B1725

oz~ ~ ...* ... ~ _11.5 '-

0

..?~:ii~ii:? .. .

(e.D iSO ~ t0~25.0 30.0

Draft wheaterl.wpd June 11, 1997

C-29

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
Forecast: WEIGHTED AVERAGE Ce:

Cell: H11

Summary:

Display Range is from 10.0 to 30.0

Entire Range Is from 10.8 to 20.2

After 500 Trials, the Std. Error of the Mean Is 0.1

Statistics:

Trials 500

Mean u, Median 16.0 16. ... Mode ..

Standard Deviation :!i

Variance 34 *..' .

Skewness

Kurtosis

Coeff. of Variability 0 1

Range Minimum

Range Maximum

Range Width

Mean Std. Error

I 500 Trials Freque hart 0 Outliers j Outliers 054

.041 . . . . .,.:

Draft wheater.wpd June 11, 1997

C-30

o, .ol....... .: .13.

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
Appendix D

Financial Inputs for Water Heaters

Assumption Default Suggested Uncertainty

Range

Max.

Tax Rate 40%

Interest Rate 12%

Working Capital 18%

% Sales

Selling, General & 16%

Administrative, % Sales

Depreciation 3.25% '

Variable Overhead (%) 60%

Regulatory Life (years)

Research & Development 1% .apital. :::

In m ish flow . tihe GRIM odel requires several major assumptions,

each obe mo ?bease provide your suggestions for these values.

D : s ." ... :s.. ail. : : 

Draft wheater.wpd June 11, 1997 D-1

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B
· ~:::.. V ~~~~'.x:..: -. A

~........~.~ ~ .%'.-~::: .'::. .. :::~:..:.::::-'

s · ' :..'..'::::xx:'...~':.:..$:::::.

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 01B