ES

- i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ES.1 OVERVIEW OF PRELIMIN ARY ACTIVITIES

................................ ............................... 1

ES.2 OVERVIEW OF THE PREL IMINARY ANALYSIS AND THE

PRELIMINARY TECHNICA L SUPPORT DOCUMENT

................................ ................ 3

ES.3 KEY RESULTS OF THE A NALYSIS

................................ ................................ ............... 4

ES.3.1 Market and Technology Assessment

................................ ................................ ............. 4

ES.3.2 Screening Analysis

................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 9

ES.3.3 Engineering Analysis

................................ ................................ ................................ ... 10

ES.3.3.1 Equipment Classes Analyzed

................................ ................................ . 10

ES.3.3.2 Contractor Price Assessment

................................ ................................ . 10

ES.3.3.3 Price

- Efficiency Tables and Baseline Prices for Mechanical Draft Commercial Packaged Boilers

................................ ............................... 11

ES.3.3.4 Price

- Efficiency Tables and Baseline Prices for Natural Draft Commercial Packaged Boilers

................................ ............................... 13

ES.3.4 Markups Analysis

................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 15

ES.3.5 Energy Use Analysis

................................ ................................ ................................ .... 17

ES.3.6 Life

- Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis

................................ ............................ 20

ES.3.7 Shipments Analysis

................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 25

ES.3.8 National Impact Analysis

................................ ................................ ............................. 26

ES.3.8.1 National Energy Savings

................................ ................................ ........ 27

ES.3.8.2 Net Present Value of Consumer Benefits

................................ .............. 29

ES.3.9 Preliminary Manufacturer Impact Analysis

................................ ................................ . 32

ES.4 ISSUES ON WHICH THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY SEEKS PUBLIC

COMMENT

................................ ................................ ................................ ....................... 33

LIST OF TABLES

Table ES.3.1 Existing energy conservation standards for commercial packaged boilers

under 10 CFR 431.87

................................ ................................ ............................... 5

Table ES.3.2 New equipment classes along with their current baseline efficiencie s

.................... 6

Table ES.3.3 Price

- efficiency table for small gas

- fired mechanical draft hot water commercial packaged boilers at 800,000 Btu/ h representative capacity

............... 11

Table ES.3.4 Price

- efficiency table for large gas

- fired mechanical draft hot water

commercial packaged boilers at 3,000,000 Btu/h representative capacity

............ 11

Table ES.3.5 Price

- efficiency table for small oil

- fired mechanical draft hot water commercial packaged boilers at 800,000 Btu/h representative capacity

............... 12

Table ES.3.6 Price

- efficiency table for large oil

- fired mechanical draft hot water a commercial packaged boilers at 3,000,000 Btu/h representative capacity

............ 12

Table ES.3 .7 Price

- efficiency table for small gas

- fired mechanical draft steam commercial packaged boilers at 800,000 Btu/h representative capacity

............... 12

Table ES.3.8 Price

- efficiency table for large gas

- fired mechanical draft steam commercial packaged boilers at 3,000,000 Btu/h representative capacity

............ 13ES

- ii Table ES.3.9 Price

- efficiency table for small oil

- fired mechanical draft steam a commercial packaged boilers at 800,000 Btu/h representative capacity

............... 13

Table ES.3.10 Price

- efficiency table for large oil

- fired mechanical draft steam commercial packaged boilers at 3,000,000 Btu/h representative capacity

............ 13

Table ES.3.11 Price

- efficiency table for small gas

- fired natural draft hot water commercial packaged boilers at 800,000 Btu/h representative capacity

............... 13

Table ES.3.12 Price

- efficiency table for large gas

- fired natural draft hot water commercial packaged boilers at 3,000,000 Btu/h representative capacity

............ 14

Table ES.3.13 Price

- efficiency table for small oil

- fired natural draft hot water commercial packaged b oilers at 800,000 Btu/h representative capacity

............... 14

Table ES.3.14 Price

- efficiency table for large oil

- fired natural draft hot wat er commercial packaged boilers at 3,000,000 Btu/h representative capacity

................................ 14

Table ES.3.15 Price

- efficiency table for small gas

- f ired natural draft steam commercial packaged boilers at 800,000 Btu/h representative capacity

................................ ... 14

Table ES.3.16 Price

- efficiency table for large gas

- fired natural draft steam commercial packaged boilers at 3,000,000 Btu/h representative capacity

................................ 15

Table ES.3 .17 Price

- efficiency table for small oil

- fired natural draft steam commercial packaged boilers at 800,000 Btu/h representative capacity

................................ ... 15

Table ES.3.18 Price

- efficiency table for large oil

- fired natural draft steam commercial packaged boilers at 3,000,000 Btu/h representative capacity

................................ 15

Table ES.3.19 National Average Markups for Small Commercial Packaged Boilers

.................. 17

Table ES.3.20 National Average Markups for Large Commercial Packaged Boilers

.................. 17

Table ES.3.21 Average Annual Energy Consumption and Savings for Small Gas

- Fired Mechanical Draft Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boilers

................................ 19

Table ES.3.22 Average Annual Energy Consumption and Savi ngs for Large Gas

- Fired Natural Draft Steam Commercial Packaged Boilers

................................ ............. 19

Table ES.3.23 Average Annual Energy Consumption and Sa vings for Small Gas

- Fired Natural Draft Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boilers

................................ ....... 19

Table ES.3.24 Average Annual Energy Consumption and Savings for Small Gas

- Fired Mechanical Draft Steam Commercial Packaged Boilers

................................ ....... 20

Table ES.3.25 Average Annual Energy Consumpt ion and Savings for Small Oil

- Fired Mechanical Draft Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boilers

................................ 20

Table ES.3.26 Average LCC and PBP Re sults by Efficiency Level for Small Gas

- Fired Mechanical Draft Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boilers

................................ 22

Table ES.3.27 LCC Savings Relative to the Base Case Efficiency Distribution for Small

Gas

- Fired Mechanical Draft Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boilers

............... 23

Table ES.3.28 Average LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for Large Gas

- Fired Natural Draft Steam Commercial Packaged Boilers

................................ ............. 23

Table ES.3.29 LCC Savings Relative to the Base Case Efficiency Distribution for Large

Gas

- Fired Natural Draft Steam Commercial Packaged Boilers

............................ 23

Table ES.3.30 Average LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for Small Gas

- Fired Natural Draft Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boilers

................................ ....... 23

Table ES.3.31 LCC Savings Relative to the Base Case Efficiency Distribution for Small

Gas

- Fired Natural Draft Hot Water Commercial Packaged

................................ .. 24

Table ES.3.32 Average LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for Small Gas

- Fired Mechanical Draft Steam Commercial Packaged Boilers

................................ ....... 24ES

- iii Table ES.3.33 LCC Savings Relative to the Base Case Efficiency Distribution for Small

Gas

- Fired Mechanical Draft Steam Commercial Packaged Boilers

...................... 24

Table ES.3.34 Average LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for Small Oil

- Fired Mechanical Draft Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boilers

................................ 25

Table ES.3.35 LCC Savings Relative to the Base Case Efficiency Distribution for Small

Oil

- Fired Mechanical Draft Hot Water Comme rcial Packaged Boilers

................ 25

Table ES.3.36 Full

- Fuel

- Cycle National Energy Savings for Commercial Packaged Boilers (quads)

................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 28

Table ES.3.37 Net Present Value, Discounted at 3 Percent for Commercial Packaged Boilers (billion 2013$)

................................ ................................ ........................... 30

Table ES.3.38 Net Present Value, Discounted at 7 Percent, for Commercial Packaged Boilers (billion 2013$)

................................ ................................ ........................... 31

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure ES.1.1 Flow Diagram of Analyses for the Commercial Packaged Boilers Standards Rulemaking

................................ ................................ ............................. 2 Figure ES.3.1 Market share of mechanical draft commercial packaged boilers based on

Air

- conditioning, Heating and Refrigeration Institute database

.............................. 7 Figure ES.3.2 Market share of natural draft commercial packaged boilers based on Air

conditioning, Heating a nd Refrigeration Institute database

................................ ..... 8 Figure ES.3.3 Forecasted Shipments for Commercial Packaged Boilers (Base Case)

................. 26ES

- 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

ES.1 OVERVIEW OF PRE LIMINARY A CTIVITIES

Title III , Part C 1 of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA), Pub. L. 94

- 163 (42 U.S.C. 6311

- 6317, as codified), added by Pub. L. 95

- 619, Title IV, §441(a), sets forth a variety of provisions designed to improve energy efficiency, and it established the "Energy

Conservation Program for Certain Industrial Equipment," a program covering certain commercial and industrial equipment (hereafter referred to as "covered equipment"), which includes the commercial packaged boilers (hereafter referred to as "CPB" or “boilers’) that are the subject of this rulemaking

. 2 Part A

- 1 specifically includes definitions (42 U.S.C. 6311), energy conservation standards (42 U.S.C. 6313), test procedures (42 U.S.C. 6314), labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6315), and the authority to require compliance information and

certification reports from manufacturers of covered equipment (42 U.S.C. 6316). This program authorizes DOE to establish technologically feasible, economically justified energy conservation regulations for certain products and equipment that would be likely to result in substantial national energy savings.

This E xecutive S ummary presents the preliminary activities that the U.S. Department of Energy ( DOE ) conducted in consideration of amende d energy conservation standards for commercial packaged boilers

. The E xecutive S ummary describes activities and reports key results from DOE’s preliminary analyses. Additionally, the Executive Summary delineates issues identified during the analyses about which DOE seeks comments , data, and other information from interested parties. These issues are highlighted in the public meeting presentation and are further discussed in chapter 2 of the preliminary technical support document (TSD).

Figure ES.1.1 presents a summary of the analytical components of the standards

- setting process and illustrates how key results are generated. The focal point of the figure is the co lumn, labeled “Analyses.” The columns labeled “Key Inputs” and “Key Outputs” show how the analyses fit into the process and how they relate to each other. Key inputs are the types of data and other information that the analyses require. Some key informat ion is obtained from public databases; DOE collects other inputs from interested parties or persons having special knowledge and expertise. Key outputs are analytical results that feed directly into the standards

- setting

process. The issues on which DOE seeks comment from interested parties derive from the key results that are generated by the pre liminary analyses. Arrows connecting analyses show the types of information that f low from one analysis to another.

1 For editorial reasons, upon codification in the United States Code (U.S.C.), Part C was re

- designated Part A

- 1.

2 All references to EPCA in this document refer to the statute as amended through the Ameri can Energy Manufacturing Technical Corrections Act, Pub. L. 112

- 210 (December 18, 2012)

.ES

- 2 Figure ES.1.1 Flow Diagram of Analyses for the Commercial Packaged Boilers

Standards RulemakingES

- 3 ES.2 O VERVIEW OF THE P RELIMINARY ANALYSIS AND THE

PRELIMINARY T ECHNICAL S UPPORT D OCUMENT

For the preliminary analysis stage, DOE publishes a notice of public meeting (NOPM) in

the Federal Register , which annou nces the availability of the preliminary TSD , the date and place of the public meeting, and presentation materials that interested parties may review before the public meeting. In addition, the NOPM highlights the major analyses DOE developed in the preli minary analysis stage. The preliminary TSD describes each preliminary analysis step in detail, providing descriptions of inputs, sources, methodologies, and results. The following chapters of the preliminary TSD address the analyses performed for the pre liminary analysis
stage.

Chapter 1

- The introduction provides an overview of standards for CPB s and describes DOE’s process for setting energy conservation standards.

Chapter 2

- The analytical framework describes each preliminary analysis step , the comments received in response to the analytical approaches DOE described in the F ramework

D ocument, and DOE’s responses to those comments.

Chapter 3

- The market and technology assessment (MTA) characterizes the relevant equipment markets and technology option s, including prototype designs.

Chapter 4

- The screening analysis reviews each technology option uncovered in the MTA to determine whether it is technologically feasible; is practicable to manufacture, install, and service; would adversely affect equipment utility or equipment availability; or would have adverse impacts on health and safety.

Chapter 5

- The engineering analysis develops price

- efficiency relationships that show a

manufacturer’s selling price of achieving increased efficiency.

Chapter 6

- The markup analysis estimat es commercial consumer equipment prices based on market structures, and the manufacturing costs developed in the engineering analysis.

Chapter 7

- The energy use analysis determines the annual energy consumption of the equipment under consideration.

Chapter 8

- The life

- cycle cos t (LCC) and payback period (PBP) analysis discusses the effects

of standards on individual commercial consumers and users of the equipment and compares the LCC and PBP of equipment with and without higher efficiency

standards.

Chapter 9

- The shipments analysis docume nts historic unit shipments and forecasts future shipments of equipment at potential energy conservation standard level s under

consideration.

Chapter 10

- The national impact analysis (NIA) assesses the cumulative national energy savings (NES) from potential standard s and the net present value ( NPV ) of consumer costs and savings associated with standards at different efficiency levels.ES

- 4 Chapter 11

- The consumer subgroup analysis evaluates the effects of potential energy conservation standards on subgroup s of the population ( e.g. , small businesses)

. Chapter 12

- The preliminary manufacturer impact analysis (MIA) assesses the potential impacts of energy conservation standards on manufacturers, such as effects on expenditures for capital conversion, marketing costs, shipments, and research and dev elopment

costs.

The remaining chapters of the preliminary TSD describe the analyses to be performed for

the notice of proposed rulemaking ( NOPR ) stage:

Chapter 13

- The emissions analysis examines the effects of potential energy conservation

standards on various air borne emissions.

Chapter 14

- Monetization of emissions reductions quantifies the anticipated benefits from potential energy conservation standards.

Chapter 15

- The utility impact analysis examines impacts of potential energy conservation standards on the generation capacity of el ectric utilities.

Chapter 16

- The employment impact analysis examines the effects of potential energy conservation standards on national employment.

Chapter 17

- A regulatory impact analysis examines the national impacts of non

- regulatory alternatives to mandatory energy conservation standards.

ES.3 KEY RESULTS OF THE A NALYSIS

The following sections describe analyses DOE performed for the preliminary analysis
stage and present the key results.

ES.3.1 Market and Technology Assessment

When initiating an analysis of potential energy c onservation standards for commercial equipment , DOE develops information for the equipment and characterizes the market and industry structure , evaluating both current and historical information

. This activity is primarily

based on a review of publicly

- av ailable information which can be obtained from a variety of sources, including manufacturers and trade associations

.

When evaluating and establishing energy conservation standards, DOE generally divides

covered equipment into classes by the type of energy used or by capacity and/ or other performance

- related features that affect efficiency. Because the current definition of “packaged

boiler” as defined in 42 USC 6311 (11)(B) includes, t he terms “shipped complete with heating equipment, mechanical draft equi pment

, ” DOE is proposing to clarify its statutory authority

under EPCA to cover natural draft boilers through a coverage determination

. 78 FR 49202 (August 13, 2013). Accordingly, DOE will maintain separate equipment classes for mechanical

draft and natu ral draft CPB s , which will be used presuming that DOE moves to a final coverage

determination

. In addition, DOE has decided to differentiate between CPB equipment classesES

- 5 based on three performance

- related features: (1) s ize of boiler based on input ratings ( s mall ( ≥ 300 kBtu /h to ≤ 2500 kBtu /h) or l arge (>2500 kBtu /h ) )

, (2) f uel used ( g as or o il)

, and (3) b oiler output ( h ot water or s team)

. Thus

, in all

, 16 equipment classes were analyzed as part of this rulemaking effort. Different energy conservati on standards may be applied to different equipment classes.

Existing energy conservation standards

, as set forth in s ubpart E of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 431 ( 10 CFR Part 431 ) , describe efficiency levels for 10 equipment

classes. Both the small and large gas

- fired steam boilers are currently divided based on draft
type. Table ES.3.1 below describes the equipment classes established under e xisting standards. The efficiency levels under the existing standards were used as baseline efficiency lev els for all subsequent analyses covered under the m arket and t echnology a ssessment chapter and the

e ngineering a nalysis chapter.

Table ES.3.1 Existing energy cons ervation standards for commercial packaged boilers

under 10 CFR 431.8 7 Equipment type Subcategory Size category (input) Efficiency level*

Hot Water Commercial Packaged

Boilers Gas

- fired ≥ 300,000 Btu /h and

≤ 2,500,000 Btu /h 80.0% E T

Hot Water

Commercial Packaged

Boilers Gas

- fired >2,500,000 Btu /h 82.0% E C

Hot Water Commercial Packaged

Boilers Oil

- fired ≥ 300,000 Btu /h and

≤ 2,500,000 Btu /h 82.0% E T

Hot Water Commercial Packaged

Boilers Oil

- fired >2,500,000 Btu /h 84.0% E C

Steam Commercial Packaged Boilers Gas

- fired

— all, except natural draft ≥ 300,000 Btu /h and

≤ 2,500,000 Btu /h 79.0% E T

Steam Commercial Packaged Boilers Gas

- fired

— all, except natural draft >2,500,000 Btu /h 79.0% E T

Steam Commercial Packaged Boilers Gas

- fired

— natural

draft ≥ 300,000 B tu /h and

≤ 2,500,000 Btu /h 77.0% E T **

Steam Commercial Packaged Boilers Gas

- fired

— natural

draft >2,500,000 Btu /h 77.0% E T **

Steam Commercial Packaged Boilers Oil

- fired ≥ 300,000 Btu /h and

≤ 2,500,000 Btu /h 81.0% E T

Steam Commercial Packaged Boilers Oil

- fired >2,500,000 Btu /h 81.0% E T

* E T refers to “Thermal Efficiency

, ” and E C refers to “Combustion Efficiency

. ” **On March 2, 2022 the minimum efficiency standard for small and large gas

- fired natural draft steam commercial packaged boilers will be 79.0% E T

.ES

- 6 As noted above, o n August 13, 2013, DOE published a notice of proposed determination ( NOPD ) in the Federal Register to confirm its authority to include n atural draft commercial packaged boilers under its energy conservation standards rulemaking purview. 78 FR 49202. As part of this NOPD, DOE has sought feedback from interested parties about DOE’s authority to regulate such equipment

. If the outcome of th e NOPD is ultimately positive , DOE will create

several new separate equipment class es for n atural draft boilers having different ener gy conservation standards. The creation of th ese class es will add another 6 equipment classes to the existing ones describ ed in Table ES.3.1

. The rulemaking process conducted under this TSD

consider ed all 16 CPB equipment classes for its analyses. Table ES.3. 2 shows all 16 CPB equipment classes along with their baseline efficiencies. The baseline efficiencies correspond to existing energy conservation standards as set forth in 10 CFR 431.87

.

Table ES.3.2 N ew equipment classes along with their current baseline efficiencies

Equipment Type Draft Type Fuel Type Size Category Abbreviation Efficiency

Standard

Hot Water

CPB Natural

Draft Gas

- fired Small (≥300,000 Btu/h and ≤2,500,000 Btu/h) SGNDHW 80% (E T )

Hot Water

CPB Natural

Draft Gas

- fired Large (>2,500,000 Btu/h) LGNDHW 82% (E C )

Hot Water

CPB Natural

Draft Oil

- fired Small (≥300,000 Btu/h and ≤2,500,000 Btu/h) SONDHW 82% (E T )

Hot Water

CPB Natural

Draft Oil

- fired Large (>2,500,000 Btu/h) LONDHW 84% (E C )

Steam CPB Natural

Draft Gas

- fired Small (≥300,000 Btu/h and ≤2,500,000 Btu/h) SGNDST 77% (E T )

Steam CPB Natural

Draft Gas

- fired Large (>2,500,000 Btu/h) LGNDST 77% (E T )

Steam CPB Natural

Draft Oil

- fired Small (≥300,000 Btu/h and ≤2,500,000 Btu/h) SONDST 81% (E T )

Steam CPB Natural

Draft Oil

- fired Large (>2,500,000 Btu/h) LONDST 81% (E T )

Hot Water

CPB Mechanical

Draft Gas

- fired Small (≥300,000 Btu/h and ≤2,500,000 Btu/h) SGMDHW 80%(E T )

Hot Water

CPB Mechanical

Draft Gas

- fired Large (>2,500,000 Btu/h) LGMDHW 82%(E C )

Hot Water

CPB Mechanical

Draft Oil

- fired Small (≥300,000 Btu/h and ≤2,500,000 Btu/h) SOMDHW 82%(E T )

Hot Water

CPB Mechanical

Draft Oil

- fired Large (>2,500,000 Btu/h) LOMDHW 84%(E C )

Steam CPB Mechanical

Draft Gas

- fired Small (≥300,000 Btu/h and ≤2,500,000 Btu/h) SGMDST 79%(E T )

Steam CPB Mechanical

Draft Gas

- fired Large (>2,500,000 Btu/h) LGMDST 79%(E T )

Steam CPB Mechanical

Draft Oil

- fired Small (≥300,000 Btu/h and ≤2,500,000 Btu/h) SOMDST 81%(E T )

Steam CPB Mechanical

Draft Oil

- fired Large (>2,500,000 Btu/h) LOMDST 81%(E T )ES

- 7 For the analyses, DOE reviewed available literature and interviewed manufacturers to develop an overall understanding of the CPB industry in the United States. Industry publications, including trade journals, literature from manufacturers, government agencies, and trade organizations provided the bulk of the information, including: (1) manufacturers and their market share; (2) equipment information; and (3) indus try trends. DOE obtained much of the

information for the market assessment through the Air

- conditioning, Heating and Refrigeration

Institute ’s (AHRI’s) certified directory of performance for commercial boilers

. 3 AHRI, one of the trade associations repres enting CPB manufacturers

, provides a database of boiler models

available on the market that includes information such as the name of manufacturer, input ratings, efficiency ratings, draft type

, and fuel input

, etc. DOE used this data as a starting point

a nd supplemented it with data from manufacturer literature to create a complete database of

CPB s

. DOE categorized the boilers in its database into the 16 equipment classes and carried out its analyses on each equipment class.

Figure ES.3.1 shows market share of m echanical draft CPB models available on the

market by equipment class

. Similarly, Figure ES.3.2 shows market share of n atural draft CPB s based on equipment class es

. Chapter 3 of the preliminary TSD describes the market analysis and resulting information in further detail.

Figure ES.3.1 Market s hare of mechanical draft commer cial packaged boilers based on Air

- conditioning, Heating and Refrigeration Institute database

3 AHRI directory for certified commercial boilers can be found at: https://ww w.ahridirectory.org/ahridirectory/pages/cblr/defaultSearch.aspx

. 3% 7% 2%

8%

56% 7% 9% 8% Commercial Packaged Boilers Market Share

- Mechanical Draft

SOMDHW

SOMDST

LOMDHW

LOMDST

SGMDHW

SGMDST

LGMDHW

LGMDST

Total: 1362ES

- 8 Figure ES.3.2 Market s hare of natural draft commercial packaged

boilers based on Air

- conditioning, Heating and Refrigeration Institute database

In addition to the market assessment, DOE also conducts a technology assessment to review existing and past designs , along with prototype designs, to determine which technologies provide ways to improve commercial package boiler efficiency. In consultation with interested

p arties, DOE develops a list of technologies to be considered as efficiency improvement options

. In the current rulemaking, after re viewing comments from interested parties, DOE included the following technologies as part of the m arket and t echnology a sses sment. The list below consist s of all possible options which were conceived

. Several options were later screened out as part of DOE’s screening analysis which is discussed briefly in the next section and in detail in chapter 4

, Screening Analysis

, of thi s preliminary TSD. 4

1. Technology options to improve combustion and/or thermal efficiency

a. Jacket insulation optimization

b. Heat exchanger improvements (including c ondensing heat exchanger and external

and internal tube surface enhancement)

c. Burner derating

d. Improved burner technology

e. Combustion air preheaters

f. Economizers

g. Integrated, high

- efficiency steam boilers

h. Blowdown waste heat recovery

4 As explained in Chapter 2, Analytical Framework, of this preliminary TSD, DOE has tentatively concluded that the proportion of standby mode and off mode energy consumption is de minimis , and therefore, DOE has tentatively decided not to address such modes further in this rulemaking. As a result, technology options that reduce standby mode and off mode energy consumption were not included in Chapter 3, Market and Technology Assessment, o f this preliminary TSD. 6% 5% 1%

10%

24%

35% 3% 16% Commercial Packaged Boilers Market Share

Natural Draft

SONDHW

SONDST

LONDHW

LONDST

SGNDHW

SGNDST

LGNDHW

LGNDST

Total: 989ES

- 9 2. Technology options to reduce seasonal boiler energy consumption

a. Modulating burners

b. Electronic ignition

c. Dampers

d. Temperat ure reset controls

e. Thermal post

- purge controls

f. Delayed

- action oil pump solenoid valve

DOE developed its list of technology options for CPB s based on a review of trade publications, technical papers, and manufacturer literature and through consultation wit h manufacturers of components and systems. Because existing equipment contain many technologies for improving equipment efficiency, equipment literature examination p rovided additional information. Detailed information regarding these tec hnology options is included in

c hapter 3 of this preliminary TSD.

ES.3.2 Screening Analysis

DOE develops an initial list of options for enhancing efficiency of CPB s from the technologies that the technology assessment identified as feasible. DOE then conducts a screening analysis ( see chapter 4 , Screening Analysis

, of th is preliminary TSD ) in which it

examines , in consultation with interested parties, whether the identified technologies : (1) are technologically feasible; (2) are practicable to manufacture, install, and ser vice; (3) have an adverse impact on equipment utility or availability; or (4) have adverse impacts on health and safety. If the technology option does not meet the first two criteria or if the technology option

does meet the last two criteria, DOE will not consider that technology option further. In addition, DOE notes that the four screening criteria do not directly address the proprietary status of design options. DOE only considers efficiency levels achieved through the use of proprietary designs in the engineering analysis if they are not part of a unique path to achieve that efficiency level ( i.e. , if there are other non

- proprietary technologies capable of achieving the same efficiency). Out of the list of technology options that passed t he screening test, several options were removed from the final list, by DOE. This is because these options have a negligible improvement on combustion or thermal efficiency of the CPB when it is tested using DOE’s test procedure

. T he following technology o ptions are the remaining options that passed DOE’s screening analysis and are considered as potential technology options to increase

thermal/combustion efficiencies

.

1. Addition of condensing or secondary heat exchanger

2. Increased primary heat exchanger surfa ce area 3. Incorporation of heat exchanger surface features (such as dimples) and internal features (such as turbulators, corrugation, or rifling) with the purpose of inducing turbulent flow

on either the flue

- gas or water side of the heat exchanger

4. Introduct ion of baffles in the heat exchanger tubes which increase effective flow length (or surface area) and residence time of fluid inside the heat exchanger

5. Introduction of micro

- fin heat exchanger tubes to enhance water

- side boiling performanceES

- 10 6. Replacing fla t straight heat exchanger fins with wavy o r louvered fins to improve flue

gas side heat transfer performance. Staggering may also improve thermal as well as hydraulic performance

. 7. Introduction of premix burners, pulse combustion and low pressure

– air atom ized oil burners as improved burner technology options.

For further details on the technology options which DOE considered but screened out (and the rationale for doing so), see chapter 4, Screening Analysis, of th is preliminary TSD.

ES.3.3 Engineering Analys is

The engineering analysis establishes the relationship between the manufacturer selling price of CPB s and their efficiency. This relationship serves as the basis for calculating costs and

benefits to consumers, manufacturers, and the Nation of modified equipment designs intended to improve energy efficiency

. Chapter 5 describes the equipment classes DOE analyzed, the representative baseline units, the efficiency levels DOE considered, the methodology DOE used

to de termine the manufactur er se lling price , and the price

- efficiency results.

ES.3.3.1 Equipment Classes Analyzed

The engineering analysis directly analyzed all 16 CPB equipment classes listed in Table

ES.3.2

. Based on its analysis, DOE generated price

- efficiency curves for all classes

. After a review of publicly

- available equipment literature, manufacturer and contractor price lists

, and discussions with manufacturers, DOE determined that the common technologies found in all

baseline CPB models include : ( 1 ) g as v alve (single

- stage, two

- stage

, or modulating) ; ( 2 ) i gnition (intermittent/electronic or standing pilot) ; and ( 3 ) h eat exchanger ( a sectional heat exchanger made from cast iron; a fin

- tube heat exchanger made from copper; or a fire /water tube heat exchanger made from either a luminum or s tainless steel). Of these, the heat exchanger is the

most cost

- intensive component of a CPB. Boiler model s for which prices were obtained were divided into different equipment classes and within each equipment class were further divided

based on manufacturer and heat exchanger material

. This served as a basis for grouping different manufacturers for the purpose of analy zing the incremental increase in equipment prices as efficiency increases

. A d etailed description of the analysis is explained in c hapter 5

, E ngineering

A nalysis , of th is preliminary TSD

.

The e fficiency of boiler models for which prices were obtained from manufacturers and

contractors was verified through examination of equipment literature and the AHRI database to improve consistency of analysis. Relevant mathematical and statistical techniques were used to

calcu late change in price for higher

- efficiency models ( i.e.

, “incremental price”)

, especially for efficiency levels for which price data w ere limited.

ES.3.3.2 Contractor Price Assessment

DOE calculated the increased incremental price to contractors for higher

- efficiency equipment ( with reference to the price of baseline

- e fficiency models ) for all equipment classes.ES

- 11 For small boilers (having an input rating 300 k B tu /h

– 2,500 k B tu /h)

, all prices were based on a reference capacity of 800 k B tu /h. Similarly

, reference capacity for large boilers (hav ing input rating >2,500 k B tu /h) was set at 3,000 k B tu /h. Based on t he prices calculated at the reference capacity

, price

- efficiency curves are created to assess the variation of price with respect to efficiency

. The incremental prices ( for classes for which sufficient data w ere available ) were calculated by taking an average of the prices of boiler models from various manufacturers. In

some cases , especially for condensing boilers, models were categorized based on material of the heat exchanger. In this case, t he incremental c hange in equipment price was calculated by taking an average of incremental prices for each material type. T rends that were observed in equipment classes with adequate data available and certain assumptions based on past industry experience

and discussion s with manufacturers were used to find incremental prices for efficiency levels for

which limited price data w ere available.

The trends and price

- efficiency curves are discussed in detail in chapter 5, E ngineering

A nalysis

, of this preliminary TSD

. The sub

- topics below describe preliminary results generated through the e ngineering analysis conducted by DOE. Incremental and baseline co ntractor prices for each equipment class are shown in the tables below.

ES.3.3.3 Price

- Efficiency Table s and Baseline Prices for Mechanical Draft

C ommercial Packaged Boilers

1. Small ( ≥ 300,000 Btu /h and ≤ 2,500,000 Btu /h ) Gas

- fired Hot Water

Table ES.3.3 Price

- efficiency table for s mall gas

- fired mechanical draft hot water commercial packaged boilers at 800,000 Btu /h representative capacity
Equipment

Class Efficiency Level (Thermal) Change in Price Baseline Price

Small Gas

- fired

Hot Water , ≥ 300,000 Btu/h and ≤ 2,500,000

Btu/h 80% $0

$ 7,120 83% $1,710

85% $3,078

87% $4,665

92% $6,819

95% $11,211

98% $15,604

2. Large (>2,500,000 Btu /h ) Gas

- fired Hot Water

Table ES.3.4 Price

- efficiency table for large gas

- fired mechanical draft hot water commercial pa ckaged b oiler s at 3,000,000 Btu /h representative capacity

Equipment Class Efficiency Level (Combustion) Change in Price Baseline Price

Large Gas

- fired
Hot Water, >2,500,000 Btu /h 82% $0

$ 22,256 84% $4,343

86% $9,533ES

- 12 94% $31,784

97% $35,892

3. Small ( ≥ 300,000 Btu /h and ≤ 2,500,000 Btu /h ) Oil

- fired Hot Water

Table ES.3.5 Price

- efficiency table for small oil

- fired mechanical draft hot water commercial packaged boilers at 800,000 Btu /h representative capacity
Equipment

Class Efficiency Level (Thermal) Change in Price Baseline Price

Small Oil

- fired

Hot Water , ≥ 300,000 Btu /h and ≤ 2,500,000

Btu /h 82% $0

$ 8,806 83% $814

84% $1,629

87% $4,073

98% $18,943

4. Large (>2,500,000 Btu /h ) Oil

- fired Hot Water

Table ES.3.6 Price

- efficiency table for large oil

- fired mechanical draft hot water a commercial packaged boilers a t 3,000,000 Btu /h representative capacity

Equipment Class Efficiency Level (Combustion) Change in Price Baseline Price

Large Oil

- fired

Hot Water, >2,500,000 Btu /h 84% $0

$ 21,203 86% $5,348

88% $8,459

97% $47,635

5. Small ( ≥ 300,000 Btu /h and ≤ 2,500,000 Btu /h ) Gas

- fired Steam

Table ES.3.7 Price

- efficiency table for small gas

- fired mechanical draft steam commercial packaged boilers at 800,000 Btu /h representative capacity

Equipment Class Efficiency Level (Thermal) Change in Price Baseline Price

Small Gas

- fired Steam, ≥ 300,000

Btu /h and ≤ 2,500,000 Btu /h 79% $0

$ 8,136 80% $1,060

81% $2,243

83% $5,025

6. Large (>2,500,000 Btu /h ) Gas

- fired SteamES

- 13 Table ES.3.8 Price

- efficiency table for large gas

- fired mechanical draft steam commercial packaged boilers at 3,000,000 Btu /h representative capacity

Equipment Class Efficiency Level (Thermal) Change in Price Baseline Price

Large Gas

- fired Steam, >2,500,000

Btu /h 79% $0

$ 14,464 80% $3,534

83% $16,750

7. Small ( ≥ 300,000 Btu /h and ≤ 2,500,000 Btu /h ) Oil

- fired Steam

Table ES.3.9 Price

- efficiency table for small oil

- fired mechanical draft steam a commercial packaged boilers a t 800,000 Btu /h representative capacity

Equipment Class Efficiency Level (Thermal) Change in Price Baseline Price

Small Oil

- fired Steam, ≥ 300,000

Btu /h and ≤ 2,500,000 Btu /h 81% $0

$ 8,607 83% $2,204

84% $3,485

86% $6,461

8. Large (>2,500,000 Btu /h ) Oil

- fired Steam

Table ES.3.10 Price

- efficiency table for large oil

- fired mechanical draft steam commercial packaged boilers at 3,000,000 Btu /h representative capacity

Equipment Class Efficiency Level (Thermal) Change in Price Baseline Price

Large Oil

- fired Steam, >2,500,000

Btu /h 81% $0

$ 13,355 83% $6,250

86% $18,316

ES.3.3.4 Price

- Efficiency Table s and Baseline Prices for Natural Draft

C ommercial P ackaged B oilers

1. Small ( ≥ 300,000 Btu /h and ≤ 2,500,000 Btu /h ) Gas

- fired Hot Water

Table ES.3.11 Price

- efficiency table for small gas

- fired natural draft hot water commercial packaged boilers at 800,000 Btu /h representative capacity

Equipment Class Efficiency Level ( Thermal ) Change in Price Baseline Price

Small Gas

- fired Hot

Water, ≥ 300,000

Btu/h and ≤ 80 % $0
$ 3,799 81% $529

8 2 % $1,307ES

- 14 2,500,000 Btu/h 85 % $3,078

2. Large (>2,500,000 Btu /h ) Gas

- fired Hot Water

Table ES.3.12 Price

- efficiency table for large gas

- fired natural draft hot water commercial packaged boilers at 3,000,000 Btu /h representative capacity

Equipment Class Efficiency Level ( Combustion ) Change in Price Baseline Price

Large Gas

- fired Hot Water, >2,500,000

Btu /h 82% $0

$ 16,898 83% $2,075

84% $4,343

3. Small ( ≥ 300,000 Btu /h and ≤ 2,500,000 Btu /h ) Oil

- fired Hot Water

Table ES.3.13 Price

- efficiency table for small oil

- fired natural draft hot water commercial packaged boilers at 800,000 Btu /h representative capacity

Equipment Class Efficiency Level (Thermal) Change in Price Baseline Price

Small Oil

- fired Hot

Water, ≥ 300,000

Btu /h and ≤ 2,500,000 Btu /h 82% $0

$ 5,486 83% $395

85% $3,282

87% $3,654

4. Large (>2,500,000 Btu /h ) Oil

- fired Hot Water

Table ES.3.14 Price

- efficiency table for large oil

- fired natural draft hot water commercial packaged boilers at 3,000,000 Btu /h representative capacity

Equipment Class Efficiency Level ( Combustion ) Change in Price Baseline Price

Large Oil

- fired Hot Water, >2,500,000

Btu /h 84% $0

$ 15,845 85% $2,300

86% $4,138

5. Small ( ≥ 300,000 Btu /h and ≤ 2,500,000 Btu /h ) Gas

- fired Steam

Table ES.3.15 Price

- efficiency table for small gas

- fired natural draft steam commercial packaged boilers at 800,000 Btu /h representative capacity

Equipment Class Efficiency Level (Thermal) Change in Price Baseline Price

Small Gas

- fired Steam, ≥ 300,000 77% $0 $ 3,215 79% $1,601ES

- 15 Btu /h and ≤ 2,500,000 Btu /h 80% $2,661

6. Large (>2,500,000 Btu /h ) Gas

- fired Steam

Table ES.3.16 Price

- efficiency table for large gas

- fired natural draft steam commercial packaged boilers at 3,000,000 Btu /h representative capacity

Equipment Class Efficiency Level (Thermal) Change in Price Baseline Price

Large Gas

- fired Steam, >2,500,000

Btu /h 77% $0

$ 5,248 79% $3,858

80% $7,392

81% $11,334

7. Small ( ≥ 300,000 Btu /h and ≤ 2,500,000 Btu /h ) Oil

- fired Steam

Table ES.3.17 Price

- efficiency table for small oil

- fired natural draft steam commercial packaged boilers at 800,000 Btu /h representative capacity

Equipment Class Efficiency Level (Thermal) Change in Price Baseline Price

Small Oil

- fired Steam, ≥ 300,000

Btu /h and ≤ 2,500,000 Btu /h 81% $0

$ 5,286 82% $1,046

83% $2,204

8. Large (>2,500,000 Btu /h ) Oil

- fired Steam

Table ES.3.18 Price

- efficiency table for large oil

- fired natural draft steam commercial packaged boilers at 3,000,000 Btu /h representative capacity

Equipment Class Efficiency Level (Thermal) Change in Price Baseline Price

Large Oil

- fired Steam, >2,500,000

Btu /h 81% $0

$ 7,998 82% $2,966

83% $6,250

85% $13,892

ES.3.4 Markups Analysis

The markups analysis develops appropriate markups in the distribution chain to convert the estimates of manufacturer cost derived in the engineering analysis to commercial consumer prices. For the two major equipment categories, small boilers (≥300,000 Bt u/h and ≤2,500,000 Btu/h) and large boilers (>2,500,000 Btu/h), covered in the analysis, DOE estimated that the majority of equipment is installed in commercial applications and that only a small fraction ofES

- 16 them is used in residential applications. Within each application, there are two primary types of markets describing the way most equipment pass from the manufacturer to the commercial consumer: one applying to commercial packaged boilers installed in replacemen t markets or by new owners, and the other applying to commercial packaged boilers that are installed in new

construction

. DOE consider ed three distinct categories of market participants for commercial packaged boiler distribution s : (1) wholesaler (for sma ll boilers) or manufacturer’s representative (for large boilers); (2) mechanical contractors (including dealers and installers ); and (3) general

contractors (including builders)

. In addition, DOE accounted for a fraction of large custom

- built

boilers that manufacturer s sell directly to commercial consumer s through a national accounts

distribution channel.

For each type of actor in the distribution channel, DOE developed separate markups for baseline equipment (baseline markups) and for the cost increase associated with more

- efficient equipment (incr emental markups). DOE also adde d sales tax where appropriate. The overall markup for each distribution channel is the product of the appropriate markups, as well as the sales tax in the case of replacement ap plications. Table ES.3.19 and Table ES.3.20 summarize the markups developed for commercial packaged boilers.ES

- 17 Table ES.3.19 National Average Markups for Small Commercial Packaged Boilers
Replacement New Construction

Baseline Markup Incremental Markup Baseline Markup Incremental Markup

Manufacturer 1.41 1.41

Wholesaler 1.36 1.10 1.36 1.10

Mechanical Contractor 1.53 1.22 1.44 1.16

General Contractor (commercial/residential) - - 1.33/1.48 1.21/1.34

Sales Tax 1.07

- - Overall Markup (commercial/ residential) 3.15 2.04 3.69/4.10 2.17/2.40

Table ES.3.20 National Average Markups for Large Commercial Packaged Boilers
Replacement New Construction

Baseline Markup Incremental Markup National

Account:

Baseline/

Incr emental

Markup Baseline Markup Incremental Markup National

Account:

Baseline/

Incr emental

Markup

Manufacturer 1.41 1.41

Manufacturer’s Representative 1.36 1.10 1.36/1.10 1.36 1.10 1.36/1.10

Mechanical Contractor 1.53 1.22

- 1.44 1.16

- General Contractor (commercial/residential) - - - 1.33/1.4

8 1.21/1.34

-

Sales Tax 1.07

- - 1.07 Overall Markup (commercial/ residential) 3.15 2.04 2.06/1.66 3.69/4.1

0 2.17/2.40 2.06/1.66

ES.3.5 Energy Use Analysis

The purpose of the energy use analysis is to determine the annual energy consumption of

commercial packaged boiler s in representative U.S. buildings and to assess the energy savings potential of increased boiler efficiency

. DOE estimate d the annual energy consumption of

commercial packaged boiler s at specified energy efficiency levels across a range of climate

zones

. The annual energy consumption in clude s the fuel use (oil or natural gas) by the boiler for space and water heating (if applicable), as well as the electricity use of auxiliary components, including the blower fan, ignit e r, and pumps.

To determine the variation in field energy use by th e commercial packaged boilers considered in this rulemaking, DOE developed a sample from the Energy InformationES

- 18 Administration’s (EIA) 2003 Commercial Building Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS)

. 5

CB ECS is a national sample survey of commercial buildings t hat collects information on the vintage of the building, building square footage, fuels used, heating energy use, and other

relevant information. For the residential building sample, DOE used EIA ’s 200 9 Residential Energy Consumption Survey (RECS ) to esta blish a sample of residential buildings using commercial boilers for each boiler equipment class. 6 The RECS data provide information on the consumption of and expenditures for energy in residential buildings along with data on energy

related characteristics of the building and occupants

.

To determine the energy consumption of commercial packaged boiler s, DOE is using an adjusted thermal efficiency to account for the a ctual performance in the field. 7 Starting with the rated thermal efficiency, DOE calculated adjustments to account for differences in efficiency related to part

- load operation, return water temperature, and cycling losses. The adjustments are

based on weather data and boiler efficiency information published in manufacturer literature. The adjusted thermal efficiency is proportional to annual heating energy consumption for national average operating conditions. There are four equipment classes ( LGNDHW

, LONDHW

, LGMDHW

, LOMDHW ) for which the efficiency metric in the standard is combustion efficiency instead of thermal efficiency

. 8 For the purposes of the energy use analysis, for these product classes, DOE us ed data from the AHRI model database to represent the relationship between the rated combustion efficiency and the thermal efficienc y

. 9

To estimate the annual energy consumption of commercial packaged boilers, DOE calculated the building heating load based on the CBECS and RECS estimates of the annual energy consumption of the boil er for each building. DOE then use d the building heating load to determine the burner operating hours, to which the adjusted thermal efficiency was applied in

order to calculate the annual fuel consumption and electricity consumption

.

Table ES.3.21 through Table ES.3.24 shows the energy use results by efficiency level for several key equipment classes

, including small gas

- fired mechanical draft hot water boilers ( S G M DHW )

, large gas

- fired natural draft steam boilers ( LGNDST )

, small gas

- fired natural draft

hot water boilers ( SGNDHW )

, small gas

- fired mechanical draft steam boilers ( SGMDST ) , and

small oil

- fired mechanical draft hot water boilers ( SOMDHW )

. These equipment classes

account for about 55

- percent of commercial packaged boiler projected shipments in 2019 , the

5 Energy Information Administration (EIA), 2003 Commercial Building Energy Consumption Survey (Available at: http://www.eia.gov/consumption/commercial/data/2003/ ) . Since the 2003 survey, EIA conducted surveys in 2007 and 2012. EIA determined that the CBECS 2007 did not yield valid statistical estimates of building counts, energy characteristics, consumption, and expenditures and, therefore, did not release the majo rity of the data tables and public use files. Data collection for the CBECS 2012 is still in progress, and the complete results have not yet been

released.

6 Energy Information Administration (EIA), 2009 Residential Energy Consumption Survey (Available at: http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/recs ).

7 “T hermal e fficiency ” definition: the ratio of the heat absorbed by the water or the water and steam to the higher heating value in the fuel burned 10 CFR 431.82.

8 “C o mbustion e fficiency ” definition: 100% minus the flue losses due to : (1) Dry Flue Gas, (2) Incomplete Combustion, and (3) Moisture Formed by Combustion of Hydrogen . 10 CFR 431.82.

9 Air

- Conditioning Heating and R efrigeration Institute, "AHRI Directory of C ertified Product Performance for

Commercial Boilers " (Available at: https://www.ahridirectory.org/ahridirectory/pages/cblr/defaultSearch.aspx ) (Last accessed May 2014 )

.ES

- 19 first full year in whic h compliance would be required

. Similar results for the remaining equipment classes are presented in chapter 7 , Energy Use Analysis, of this preliminary TSD, along with details on the methods, data, and assumptions used for th at analysis.

The savings in Table ES.3.21 through Table ES.3.24 do not account for potential changes in consumer operation of commercial packaged boilers if they purchase more

- efficient equipment. There is no evidence that building managers who purchase higher

- efficiency

commercial packaged boilers significantly increase the frequency with which they operate the

boiler

. Therefore, DOE concluded that inclusion of such a rebound effect in its analysis is not

warranted.

Table ES.3.21 Average Annual Energy Consumption a nd Savings for Small Gas

- Fired Mechanical Draft Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boiler s

EL Thermal Efficiency (TE) Annual Energy

Use

MMBtu Energy Use Savings

MMBtu Additional Electricity Use kWh (MMBtu )

0 80% TE

- Baseline 938.8

-- 746 (2.5)

1 83% TE 903.7 35.1 720 (2.5)

2 85% TE 881.8 57.0 704 (2.4)

3 87% TE 860.9 77.9 689 (2.3)

4 92% TE 824.5 114.3 990 (3.4)

5 95% TE 797.5 141.3 960 (3.3)

6 98% TE 772.2 166.5 931 (3.2)

Note: 1 kWh = 3412 Btu and 1 MMBtu = 1 million Btu

.

Table ES.3.22 Average Annual Energy Consumption and Savings for Large Gas

- Fired

Natural Draft Steam Commercial Packaged Boilers

EL Thermal Efficiency (TE) Annual Energy

Use

MMBtu Energy Use Savings

MMBtu Additional Electricity Use kWh (MMBtu )

0 77% TE

- Baseline 4051.9

-- 1008 (3.4)

1 78% TE 3942.5 109.4 981 (3.3)

2 79% TE 3890.0 161.8 968 (3.3)

3 81% TE 3838.9 213.0 955 (3.3)

Table ES.3.23 Average Annual Energy Consumption and Savings for Small Gas

- Fired

Natural Draft Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boilers

EL Thermal Efficiency (TE) Annual Energy

Use

MMBtu Energy Use Savings

MMBtu Additional Electricity Use kWh (MMBtu )

0 80% TE

- Baseline 830.1

-- 342 (1.2)

1 81% TE 819.7 10.4 337 (1.2)

2 82% TE 809.5 20.6 333 (1.1)

3 85% TE 780.5 49.6 321 (1.1)ES

- 20 Table ES.3.24 Average Annual Energy Consumption and Savings for Small Gas

- Fired Mechanical Draft Steam Commercial Packaged Boilers

EL Thermal Efficiency (TE) Annual Energy

Use

MMBtu Energy Use Savings

MMBtu Additional Electricity Use kWh (MMBtu )

0 79% TE

- Baseline 752.4

-- 673 (2.3)

1 80% TE 742.7 9.7 665 (2.3)

2 81% TE 733.3 19.1 657 (2.2)

3 83% TE 715.2 37.3 641 (2.2)

Table ES.3.25 Average Annual Energy Consumption and Savings for Small Oil

- Fired

Mechanical Draft Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boilers

EL Thermal Efficiency (TE) Annual Energy

Use

MMBtu Energy Use Savings

MMBtu Additional Electricity Use kWh (MMBtu )

0 82% TE

- Baseline 680.2

-- 686 (2.3)

1 83% TE 671.6 8.6 678 (2.3)

2 84% TE 663.1 17.1 670 (2.3)

3 87% TE 639.1 41.1 647 (2.2)

4 98% TE 573.8 106.4 858 (2.9)

ES.3.6 Life

- Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysi s

New and amended energy conservation standards for equipment result in changes in commercial consumer operating expenses ( usually a decrease ) and changes in commercial consumer price ( usually an increase )

. DOE analyzed the net effect of potential standards on commercial consumers by evaluating the LCC and PBP using the cost

- efficiency relationships derived in the engineering analysis, as well as the energy use derived from the energy use analysis. DOE co nducted the LCC and PBP analysis using values that reflect use of commercial packaged boilers in the field.

DOE perform ed the LCC and PBP analysi s using a spreadsheet model combined with a commercially

- available software program used to conduct stochast ic analysis using Monte Carlo simulation and probability distributions to account for uncertainty and variability among the input variables. Each Monte Carlo simulation consist s of 10,000 LCC and PBP calculations. The model perform s each calculation usin g input values that are either sampled from probability distributions and household samples or characterized with single point values. Inputs to the LCC calculation include the installed cost to the consumer, operating costs (primarily energy expenses), t he lifetime of the appliance, and a discount rate.

DOE used recent energy price data from EIA to determine average commercial prices of natural gas , fuel oil

, and electricity in the nine CBECS C ensus D ivisions and 30 RECS geographic areas. Appropriate prices were assigned to each sample building based on itsES

- 21 location. To estimate the future trends in energy prices, DOE used projections from EIA’s Annual Energy Outlook 2014 ( AEO 2014 ). 10

DOE modeled boiler lifetime using data from the ASHRAE Service Life Database and a literature review of research studies, and field data reports 11 and a literature review of research studies, and field data reports. 12 The data allowed DOE to develop a n equipment survival function, which provides an average and median a ppliance lifetime. DOE assumed that the

lifetime is the same for all commercial packaged boilers due to the lack of data showing

otherwise

.

DOE estimated all the installation costs associated with installing a boiler in a new building unit or as a replac ement for an existing boiler using RS Means 2011 Facilities Construction Cost Data, 13 manufacturer literature, and information from expert consultants. This

include s any additional costs, such as venting and piping modifications that would be required to

i nstall equipment at various efficiency levels.

DOE also considered expected maintenance and repair costs for the equipment covered in this rulemaking. DOE used the most recent RS Means Facilities Maintenance & Repair Cost

Data 14 to develop appropriate repair and maintenance costs for baseline units. DOE included

increased repair and maintenance cos ts for condensing equipment (thermal efficiency greater

than 90 percent) , accounting for regular replacement of condensate neutralize r and more expensive heat exchanger repair compared to lower

- efficiency boilers. 15

To estimate the share of commercial consumers that would be affected by a standard at a particular efficiency level, DOE projected the distribution ( i.e. , market shares) o f equipment

efficiencies that commercial consumers may purchase under the base case ( i.e. , the case without amended energy efficiency standards). DOE based the base

- case efficiency distribution on

trends in the AHRI model database because it found very limited historical shipment data upon

which to estimate either current shares or recent trends. 16

Using the projected distribution of equipment efficiencies for each equipment class, DOE assigned a base

- case

- efficiency boiler to ea ch sample building. If a building was assigned an equipment efficiency that is greater than or equal to the efficiency of the standard level under

10 See http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/

. 11 Available at http://xp20.ashrae.org/publicdatabase/

. 12 See appendix 8

- F of the preliminary TSD for a list of the sources used in the literature review.

13 RS Means Company Inc., RS Means Mechanical Cost Data, 36st Annual Edition (2013) (Available at:

ht tp://rsmeans.reedconstructiondata.com/ ) (Last accessed May 2014).

14 RS Means Company Inc., 2013 Facilities Maintenance & Repair Cost Data ( 2013) ( Available at : http://rsmeans.reedconstructiondata.co m/ )

. (Last accessed May 2014).

15 “Replacement Cartridge for Condensate Neutralizing Kit

, ” The Home Depot (Available at: http://www.homedepot.co m/p/Unbranded

- Replacement

- Cartridge

- for

- Condensation

- Neutralizing

- Kit

- JM

- 2

- R/202809241?cm_mmc=shopping

-

_ - googleads

-

_ - pla

-

_ - 202809241&skwcid&kwd=&ci_sku=202809241&ci_kw=&ci_gpa=pla&ci_src=17588969 ) (Last accessed June 27, 2014).

16 Air

- Conditioning Heating a nd Refrigeration Institute (2007

- 201 4 )

, "AHRI Directory of Certified Product

Performance for Commercial Boilers " (Available at: https://www.ahridirectory.org/ahridire ctory/pages/cblr/defaultSearch.aspx ) (Last accessed May 2014)

.ES

- 22 consideration, the LCC calculation would show that this building is not impacted by that

standard level.

Table ES.3.26 through Table ES.3.35 show key LCC and PBP results by eff iciency level ( EL ) for several key equipment classes

, including SGMDHW , LGNDST, SGNDHW, SGMDST,

and SOMDHW. These equipment classes account for about 55

- percent of commercial packaged

boiler projected shipments in 2019

, the first full year in which compli ance with amended

standards would be required

. Similar results for the remaining equipment classes are presented in chapter 8 , LCC and PBP Analysis, of this preliminary TSD, along with details on the methods, data, and assumptions used for th at analysis. The average lifetime operating cost presented in the tables reflects discounting of future costs using the consumer discount rates developed for the LCC analysis.

In the first of each pair of tables, the simple payback is measured relative to the basel ine equipment in the compliance year and reflects the number of years it would take for the consumer to recover the increased costs of higher

- efficiency equipment as a result of operating cost savings. The simple payback is calculated by dividing the incre mental total installed cost increase by the difference in first year operating costs

. In the second table, the LCC savings are measured relative to the base

- case efficiency distribution in the compliance year. No impacts

occur when the base

- case efficien cy for a specific consumer equals or exceeds the efficiency at a given trial standard level ( TSL ) ; a standard would have no effect because the equipment installed

would be at or above that standard level without amended standards. Figures presented in

cha pter 8 , LCC and PBP Analysis, of this preliminary TSD show the range of LCC savings and PBPs for all of the efficiency levels considered for all equipment class es

.

Table ES.3.26 Average LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for Small Gas

- Fired

Mechanical Draft Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boiler s Efficiency

Level TE Average Costs Simple Payback

years Average

Lifetime

years 2013$

Installed

Cost First Year’s Operating Cost Lifetime Operating

Cost LCC

0 80% $32,003 $11,261 $190,176 $222,180 N / A 24.8

1 83% $35,530 $10,907 $184,115 $219,646 10.0 24.8

2 85% $38,353 $10,685 $180,326 $218,680 11.0 24.8

3 87% $41,626 $10,474 $176,721 $218,348 12.2 24.8

4 92% $45,983 $10,161 $171,255 $217,239 12.7 24.8

5 95% $55,044 $9,887 $166,576 $221,621 16.8 24.8

6 98% $64,104 $9,631 $162,202 $226,307 19.7 24.8

Note: The results for each TSL are calculated assuming that all consumers use equipment with that efficiency level. The PBP is measured relative to the baseline equipment.ES

- 23 Table ES.3.27 LCC Savings Relative to the Base Case Efficiency Distribution for Small

Gas

- Fired Mechanical Draft Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boiler s Efficiency

Level TE Life

- Cycle Cost Savings % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost Average Savings*
2013$

0 80% 0% N / A

1 83% 5% $325

2 85% 13% $579

3 87% 28% $738

4 92% 31% $1,333

5 95% 51% ( $1,612 )

6 98% 78% ( $6,018 )

* The calculation includes building s with zero LCC savings (no impact). Parentheses indicate negative values.

Table ES.3.28 Average LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for Large Gas

- Fired

Natural Draft Steam Commercial Packaged Boilers Efficiency

Level TE Average Costs Simple Payback

years Average

Lifetime

years 2013$

Installed

Cost First Year’s Operating

Cost Lifetime Operating

Cost LCC

0 77% $33,212 $43,563 $715,670 $748,876 N / A 24.8

1 79% $40,816 $42,520 $698,333 $739,143 7.3 24.8

2 80% $47,781 $42,019 $690,011 $737,785 9.4 24.8

3 81% $55,550 $41,531 $681,908 $737,450 11.0 24.8

Note: The results for each TSL are calculated assuming that all consumers use equipment with that efficiency level. The PBP is measured relative to the baseline equipment.

Table ES.3.29 LCC Savings Relative to the Base Case Efficiency Distribution for Large

Gas

- Fired Natura l Draft Steam Commercial Packaged Boilers Efficiency

Level TE Life

- Cycle Cost Savings % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost Average Savings*
2013$

0 77% 0% N / A

1 79% 15% $4,378

2 80% 41% $5,478

3 81% 53% $5,811

* The calculation includes building s with zero LCC savings (no impact).

Table ES.3.30 Average LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for Small Gas

- Fired Natural Draft Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boiler s Efficiency TE Average Costs Simple AverageES

- 24 Level 2013$ Payback

years Lifetime

years Installed

Cost First Year’s Operating

Cost Lifetime Operating

Cost LCC

0 80% $17,667 $10,108 $169,645 $187,315 N / A 24.8

1 81% $18,727 $10,003 $167,852 $186,582 10.1 24.8

2 82% $20,289 $9,900 $166,105 $186,397 12.6 24.8

3 85% $23,842 $9,608 $161,126 $184,970 12.3 24.8

Note: The results for each TSL are calculated assuming that all consumers use equipment with that efficiency level. The PBP is measured relative to the baseline equipment.

Table ES.3.31 LCC Savings Relative to the Base Case Efficiency Distribution for Small

Gas

- Fired Natural Draft Hot Water Commercial Packaged Efficiency

Level TE Life

- Cycle Cost Savings % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost Average Savings*
2013$

0 80% 0% N / A

1 81% 7% $116

2 82% 20% $172

3 85% 52% $1,546

* The calculation includes buildings with zero LCC savings (no impact).

Table ES.3.32 Average LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for Small Gas

- Fired

Mechanical Draft Steam Commercial Packaged Boilers Efficiency

Level TE Average Costs Simple Payback

years Average

Lifetime

years 2013$

Installed

Cost First Year’s Operating Cost Lifetime Operating

Cost LCC

0 79% $33,196 $10,266 $170,602 $203,798 N / A 24.8

1 80% $35,311 $10,169 $168,926 $204,236 21.8 24.8

2 81% $37,669 $10,075 $167,294 $204,963 23.4 24.8

3 83% $43,220 $9,894 $164,154 $207,374 26.9 24.8

Note: The results for each TSL are calculated assuming that all consumers use equipment with that efficiency level. The PBP is measured relative to the baseline equipment.

Table ES.3.33 LCC Savings Relative to the Base Case Efficiency Distribution for Small

Gas

- Fired Mechan ical Draft Steam Commercial Packaged Boilers Efficiency

Level TE Life

- Cycle Cost Savings % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost Average Savings*
2013$

0 79% 0% N / A

1 80% 14% ( $71 )

2 81% 51% ( $538 )

3 83% 75% ( $2,699 )ES

- 25 Parentheses indicate negative values.

Table ES.3.34 Average LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for Small Oil

- Fired

Mechanical Draft Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boilers Efficiency

Level TE Average Costs Simple Payback

years Average

Lifetime

years 2013$

Installed

Cost First Year’s Operating Cost Lifetime Operating

Cost LCC

0 82% $38,850 $18,682 $327,718 $366,567 N / A 24.8

1 83% $40,555 $18,472 $323,957 $364,512 8.1 24.8

2 84% $42,260 $18,267 $320,291 $362,551 8.2 24.8

3 87% $47,376 $17,683 $309,823 $357,199 8.5 24.8

4 98% $79,076 $16,160 $282,186 $361,262 16.0 24.8

Note: The results for each TSL are calculated assuming that all consumers use equipment with that efficiency level. The PBP is measured relative to the baseline equipment.

Table ES.3.35 LCC Savings Relative to the Base Case Efficiency Distribution for Small

Oil

- Fired Mechanical Draft Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boilers Efficiency

Level TE Life

- Cycle Cost Savings % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost Average Savings*
2013$

0 82% 0% N / A

1 83% 11% $567

2 84% 21% $1,613

3 87% 27% $5,294

4 98% 58% $1,497

* The calculation includes building s with zero LCC savings (no impact).

ES.3.7 Shipments Analysis

Shipment forecasts are needed to calculate the national impacts of standards on energy use, NPV, and future manufacturer cash flows. DOE estimated commercial packaged boiler shipments in three market segments: (1) replacements; (2) new construction; and (3) new owners in buildings that did not previously have a commercial packaged boiler

.

To forecast boiler replacement shipments, DOE develop ed retirement functions for

boilers from the lifetime estimates and appl ied them to the existing equipment in the b uilding

stock. The existing stock of equipment is tracked by vintage and developed from historical shipments data. To forecast shipments to the new construction market, DOE utilize d forecasted

new building construction and historic saturation rates of va rious boiler equipment types in new buildings

. DOE used AEO 2014 for forecasts of new construction

. Boiler saturation rates in new buildings are provided by CBECS 2003 and RECS 2009.ES

- 26 Figure ES.3.3 illustrates the projected base

- case shipments by equipment class.

DOE has determined that, consistent with economic theory and its past practice, it is reasonable to expect that standards that result in higher boiler prices will have some dampening

effect on sales. To estimate the impact of the price increase for the considered efficiency levels, DOE used a relative price elasticity approach

. This approach gives some weight to the operating cost savings from higher

- efficiency equipment. The impact of higher boiler prices due to higher efficiency is expressed as a percentage drop in market share for each year during the analysis period.

Figure ES.3.3 For ecasted Shipments for Commercial Packaged Boilers (Base Case)

ES.3.8 National Impact Analysis

The NIA estimates the following national impacts of potential efficiency levels for commercial packaged boilers: (1) national energy savings, (2) monetary value of the energy savings due to standards, (3) increased total installed costs of the considered equipment due to standards, and (4) the NPV of the difference between the value of energy savings and increased

total installed costs. DOE prepared a spreadsheet model to forecast energy savings and national commercial consumer economic costs and savings resulting from new standards. In contrast to the LCC and PBP analysis which uses probability distributions for the inputs, the NIA uses average or typical values for in puts.

A key component of DOE’s NIA is the energy efficiencies forecasted for the base case (without new standards) and each of the standards cases. To forecast the efficiency trend in the base case ( i.e. , no new standards for commercial packaged boiler s), DOE derived a growth rate 0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020 0.025 0.030 0.035 0.040 0.045 0.050

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040Shipments (million) LOMDST

SOMDST

LGMDST

SGMDST

LOMDHW

SOMDHW

LGMDHW

SGMDHW

LONDST

SONDST

LGNDST

SGNDST

LONDHW

SONDHW

LGNDHW

SGNDHWES

- 27 in the market share of different equipment classes by extrapolating the trend from 2007 to 201 4

AHRI model data.

For the standards

- case efficiency distributions, DOE used a “roll

- up” scenario to establish

the distribution of efficiencies for the year that compliance with amended standards is assumed

to become required ( i.e. , 2019 ). DOE assumed that equipment efficiencies in the base case that did not meet the standard level under consideration would “roll up” to meet the new standard

level in 201 9

. Market shares that were above a given standard level before 2019 would be

unaffected.

Because DOE did not include the rebound effect in its analysis, the NES was not adjusted

to account for the rebound effect.

Chapter 10 , Nati onal Impact Analysis, of th is preliminary TSD provides additional

details on the NIA.

ES.3.8.1 National Energy Savings

DOE calculated annual NES as the difference between national energy consumption in the base case (without new efficiency standards) and under ea ch candidate standard level (CSL)

. Cumulative energy savings are the sum of the annual NES, which DOE determined for

2019− 204 8.

DOE estimated energy consumption and savings based on site energy and converted the site energy values to primary (source) energy using factors that account for losses in transmission and distribution and in electricity generation. These site

- to

- source fa ctors are derived from the National Energy Modeling System ( NEMS )

. DOE also estimated full

- fuel

- cycle ( FFC ) energy savings for each EL. T he full

- fuel

- cycle measure include s the energy consumed in extracting, processing, and transporting primary fuels.

The NES results shown in Table ES.3.36 are shown as full

- fuel

- cycle energy savings in quadrillion Btu (quads). The primary energy savings are presented in chapte r 10 , National Impact Analysis, of th is preliminary TSD.ES

- 28 Table ES.3.36 Full

- Fuel

- Cycle National Energy Savings for Commercial Packaged Boiler s (quads)

Equipment Class Candidate Standard Level

1 2 3 4 5 6

Natural Draft Gas

- Fired Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boiler ≥300,000 Btu/h and ≤2,500,000 Btu/h 0.001 0.005 0.029 N/A N / A N/A

Natural Draft Gas

- Fired Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boiler >2,500,000

Btu/h 0.011 0.025 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Natural Draft Oil

- Fired Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boiler ≥300,000

Btu/h and ≤2,500,000 Btu/h 0.001 0.004 0.006 N/A N/A N/A

Natural Draft Oil

- Fired Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boiler >2,500,000

Btu/h 0.006 0.014 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Natural Draft Gas

- Fired Steam Commercial Packaged Boiler ≥300,000 Btu/h and ≤2,500,000 Btu/h 0.004 0.020 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Natural Draft Gas

- Fired Steam Commercial Packaged Boiler >2,500,000

Btu/h 0.009 0.056 0.111 N/A N/A N/A

Natural Draft Oil

- Fired Steam Commercial Packaged Boiler ≥300,000 Btu/h and ≤2,500,000 Btu/h 0.001 0.002 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Natural Draft Oil

- Fired Steam Commercial Packaged Boiler >2,500,000

Btu/h 0.006 0.017 0.051 N/A N/A N/A

Mechanical Draft Gas

- Fired Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boiler ≥300,000 Btu/h and ≤2,500,000 Btu/h 0.025 0.058 0.117 0.230 0.370 0.583

Mechanical Draft Gas

- Fired Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boiler >2,500,000

Btu/h 0.044 0.161 0.634 0.975 N/A N/A

Mechanical Draft Oil

- Fired Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boiler ≥300,000 Btu/h and ≤2,500,000 Btu/h 0.007 0.020 0.069 0.235 N/A N/A

Mechanical Draft Oil

- Fired Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boiler >2,500,000

Btu/h 0.013 0.044 0.159 N/A N/A N/A

Mechanical Draft Gas

- Fired Steam Commercial Packaged Boiler ≥300,000 Btu/h and ≤2,500,000 Btu/h 0.004 0.019 0.059 N/A N/A N/A

Mechanical Draft Gas

- Fired Steam Commercial Packaged Boiler >2,500,000

Btu/h 0.011 0.110 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Mechanical Draft Oil

- Fired Steam Commercial Packaged Boiler ≥300,000 Btu/h and ≤2,500,000 Btu/h 0.018 0.041 0.091 N/A N/A N/A

Mechanical Draft Oil

- Fired Steam Commercial Packaged Boiler >2,500,000

Btu/h 0.041 0.139 N/A N/A N/A N/A

“N/A” means “not applicable.”ES

- 29 ES.3.8.2 Net Present Value of Consumer Benefits

DOE calculated net monetary savings in each year as the difference between total savings in operating costs and increases in total equipment costs in the base case and standards cases. DOE calculated savings over the life of the equipment purchased in the forecast period. The

NPV i s the diffe rence between the present value of operating cost savings and the present value

of increased total installed costs. I n accordance with guidance provided by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to Federal agencies on regulatory analysis, DOE used disc ount
rates of 7

- percent and 3

- percent to discount future costs and savings to the present. 17 The NPV results by equipment class are shown in Table ES.3.37 and Table ES.3.38

. A negative NPV indicates that the costs of a standard at a given efficiency lev el exceed the savings.

17 U.S. Office of Management and Budget, “Circular A

- 4: Regulatory Analysis” (Sept. 17, 2003) (Available at: http://www.whitehou se.gov/omb/circulars_a004_a

- 4/ ).ES

- 30 Table ES.3.37 Net Present Value, Discounted at 3 Percent for Commercial Packaged

Boiler s ( billion 2013$ )

Equipment Class Candidate Standard Level

1 2 3 4 5 6

Natural Draft Gas

- Fired Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boiler ≥300,000 Btu/h and ≤2,500,000 Btu/h 0.004 0.011 0.072 N/A N/A N/A

Natural Draft Gas

- Fired Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boiler >2,500,000 Btu/h 0.036 0.079 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Natural Draft Oil

- Fired Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boiler ≥300,000 Btu/h and ≤2,500,000 Btu/h 0.009 0.025 0.054 N/A N/A N/A

Natural Draft Oil

- Fired Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boiler >2,500,000 Btu/h 0.057 0.144 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Natural Draft Gas

- Fired Steam Commercial Packaged Boiler ≥300,000 Btu/h and ≤2,500,000 Btu/h 0.010 0.024 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Natural Draft Gas

- Fired Steam Commercial Packaged Boiler >2,500,000 Btu/h 0.034 0.151 0.300 N/A N/A N/A

Natural Draft Oil

- Fired Steam Commercial Packaged Boiler ≥300,000 Btu/h and ≤2,500,000 Btu/h 0.009 0.025 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Natural Draft Oil

- Fired Steam Commercial Packaged Boiler >2,500,000 Btu/h 0.072 0.185 0.576 N/A N/A N/A

Mechanical Draft Gas

- Fired

Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boiler ≥300,000 Btu/h and ≤2,500,000 Btu/h 0.047 0.088 0.129 0.203 (0.202) (0.908)

Mechanical Draft Gas

- Fired

Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boiler >2,500,000

Btu/h 0.087 0.267 0.523 1.268 N/A N/A

Mechanical Draft Oil

- Fired

Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boiler ≥300,000 Btu/h and ≤2,500,000 Btu/h 0.052 0.148 0.487 0.323 N/A N/A

Mechanical Draft Oil

- Fired

Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boiler >2,500,000

Btu/h 0.105 0.406 0.650 N/A N/A N/A

Mechanical Draft Gas

- Fired Steam Commercial Packaged Boiler ≥300,000 Btu/h and ≤2,500,000 Btu/h 0.000 (0.009) (0.067) N/A N/A N/A

Mechanical Draft Gas

- Fired 0.016 0.096 N/A N/A N/A N/AES

- 31 Steam Commercial Packaged Boiler >2,500,000 Btu/h

Mechanical Draft Oil

- Fired Steam Commercial Packaged Boiler ≥300,000 Btu/h and ≤2,500,000 Btu/h 0.137 0.296 0.591 N/A N/A N/A

Mechanical Draft Oil

- Fired Steam Commercial Packaged Boiler >2,500,000 Btu/h 0.356 1.106 N/A N/A N/A N/A

“N/A” means “not applicable.” Parentheses indicate negative values.

Table ES.3.38 Net Present Value , Discounted at 7 Percent

, for Commercial Packaged

Boiler s ( billion 2013$ )

Equipment Class Candidate Standard Level

1 2 3 4 5 6

Natural Draft Gas

- Fired Hot

Water Commercial Packaged Boiler ≥300,000 Btu/h and ≤2,500,000 Btu/h 0.001 0.003 0.019 N/A N/A N/A

Natural Draft Gas

- Fired Hot

Water Commercial Packaged Boiler >2,500,000

Btu/h 0.014 0.030 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Natural Draft Oil

- Fired Hot

Water Commercial Packaged Boiler ≥300,000 Btu/h and ≤2,500,000 Btu/h 0.003 0.007 0.016 N/A N/A N/A

Natural Draft Oil

- Fired Hot

Water Commercial Packaged Boiler >2,500,000

Btu/h 0.022 0.055 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Natural Draft Gas

- Fired

Steam Commercial Packaged Boiler ≥300,000 Btu/h and ≤2,500,000 Btu/h 0.003 0.002 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Natural Draft Gas

- Fired

Steam Commercial Packaged Boiler >2,500,000

Btu/h 0.016 0.054 0.108 N/A N/A N/A

Natural Draft Oil

- Fired

Steam Commercial Packaged Boiler ≥300,000 Btu/h and ≤2,500,000 Btu/h 0.003 0.010 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Natural Draft Oil

- Fired

Steam Commercial Packaged Boiler >2,500,000

Btu/h 0.028 0.072 0.229 N/A N/A N/A

Mechanical Draft Gas

- Fired

Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boiler ≥300,000 Btu/h and ≤2,500,000 Btu/h 0.007 0.006 (0.016) (0.046) (0.358) (0.861)ES

- 32 Mechanical Draft Gas

- Fired

Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boiler >2,500,000

Btu/h 0.017 0.034 (0.132) 0.035 N/A N/A

Mechanical Draft Oil

- Fired

Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boiler ≥300,000 Btu/h and ≤2,500,000 Btu/h 0.013 0.037 0.117 (0.315) N/A N/A

Mechanical Draft Oil

- Fired

Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boiler >2,500,000

Btu/h 0.031 0.131 0.025 N/A N/A N/A

Mechanical Draft Gas

- Fired

Steam Commercial Packaged Boiler ≥300,000 Btu/h and ≤2,500,000 Btu/h (0.004) (0.022) (0.089) N/A N/A N/A

Mechanical Draft Gas

- Fired

Steam Commercial Packaged Boiler >2,500,000

Btu/h 0.001 (0.024) N/A N/A N/A N/A

Mechanical Draft Oil

- Fired

Steam Commercial Packaged Boiler ≥300,000 Btu/h and ≤2,500,000 Btu/h 0.038 0.076 0.131 N/A N/A N/A

Mechanical Draft Oil

- Fired

Steam Commercial Packaged Boiler >2,500,000

Btu/h 0.109 0.318 N/A N/A N/A N/A

“N/A” means “not applicable.” Parentheses indicate negative values.

ES.3.9 Preliminary Manufacturer Impact Analysis

DOE acknowledges that amended energy conservation standards might lead to changes in manufacturing practices for manufacturers of commercial packaged boilers. DOE conducts a manufacturer impact analysis (MIA) to assess the potential impacts of amended sta ndards on

manufacturers. In this analysis, DOE examines the effects of potential standards on manufacturers’ capital investments, marketing costs, shipment volumes, employment levels, and research and development costs, among other factors. In the prelim inary analysis, DOE identified potential impacts by conducting market research and interviewing manufacturers and other interested parties.

During interviews for this preliminary MIA, manufacturers identified four major areas of concern: (1) the testing burden associated with amended standards; (2) condensing boilers are not appropriate for many commercial applications; (3) not many American companies produce condensing heat exchangers; and (4) amended standards could reduce e quipment durability and reliability. See chapter 12

, Preliminary Manufacturer Impact Analysis

, of this preliminary TSD

for details.ES

- 33 ES.4 ISSUES ON WHICH THE D EPARTMENT OF E NERGY SEEKS PUBLIC

COMMENT

DOE is interested in receiving comments on all aspects of this preliminary analysis. DOE especially invites comments or data to improve DOE’s analysis, including data or information that will respond to the following questions or concerns that were raised in response

to the F ramework D ocument and in preparation of the preliminary TSD.

1. DOE requests comment on its tentative decision not to set an upper input capacity limit

for CPB.

2. DOE requests comment on the appropriateness of its tentative decision to classify CPBs

into 16 equipment classes as described in Table ES.3.2

. 3. DOE seeks comment on CPB standby mode and off mode energy consumption and, in

par ticular, data on the magnitude of energy consumed in th e different operational modes.

4. DOE is interested in views regarding the technological and economic feasibility of the technology options which successfully passed the screening analysis

. In particula r , DOE

s eeks information regarding technology options which can be applied to improve the efficiency of natural draft boilers

. 5. DO E requests comment on the methodology us ed to calculate incremental costs for increased efficiency for each equipment class. DOE would welcome comments from interested parties about the appropriateness of the incremental costs reported as part of the engineering analysis chapter. DOE would also welcome any additional price

- related

information

, especially for natural draft boilers

, which would further improve future analys e s for this current rulemaking.

6. DOE seeks input on whether the considered distribution channels are appropriate for commercial packaged boilers

. 7. DOE seeks input on the percent age of equipment being distributed through the different distribution channels, and whether the share of equipment through each channel varies based on equipment class or equipment capacity

. 8. DOE welcomes suggestions and comments concerning its proposed ap proach to developing estimates of future commercial packaged boiler retail prices

. 9. DOE seeks recent data to establish the markups and commercial consumer price for the parties involved with the distribution of th is equipment

. 10. DOE seeks data on representa tive annual profiles of return water temperature, supply water temperature, and boiler percent loading.

11. DOE seeks data on what return water temperatures boilers are tested at under the test conditions prescribed by the DOE test procedure.

12. DOE seeks input o n data sources that it can use to characterize the variability in annual energy consumption for commercial packaged boilers. DOE is particularly interested in field monitoring studies and data

. 13. DOE welcomes any data from interested parties about typical boiler sizing practices, including how often multiple boilers instead of a single boiler are installed to cover the building heating load

, and how the number of boilers suitable for a specific installation is

determined

.ES

- 34 14. DOE seeks input on how boilers are controlled, particularly in multiple

- boiler

installations.

15. DOE seeks historical shipment

- weighted commercial packaged boiler efficiency data and/or shipment data by efficiency bins. DOE is primarily interested in data during the last 10 years in order to capture the impact of the most current technologies on the boilers

market

. 16. DOE requests input on ancillary energy use by commercial boilers ( i.e.

, in addition to fuel energy use ) that should be included in the energy use analysis

. 17. DOE seeks input on what fractions of hot

- water commercial packaged boilers are used both for space heating and hot water

. 18. DOE requests data to characterize the current distribution of commercial packaged boiler

efficiencies in the market

. 19. DOE requests comment on frequency and cost of maintenance, major repair issues, repair frequency, and repair costs for commercial packaged boilers that meet the minimum efficiency standards, as well as for higher

- efficiency boilers

. 20. DOE seeks input on how often boiler maintenance is performed by on

- site staff versus external contractors, specifically for hot water boilers versus steam boilers and small boilers versus large boilers.

21. DOE seeks input as to how often, in the event of a heat exchanger failure, the heat exchanger alone is replaced v ersus the entire boiler being replaced. DOE is interested in knowing whether this varies with equipment class or varies with condensing versus non

condensing boilers.

22. DOE requests data on the fractions of installations that would entail significant additi onal installation expenses.

23. DOE seeks input on how often plastic versus stainless steel venting is installed for condensing boilers.

24. DOE seeks input on how often boilers have direct venting, for both condensing and non

condensing boilers.

25. DOE seeks input o n the fraction of stainless steel venting in existing boiler installations by efficiency

. 26. DOE seeks input on where boilers are typically located within buildings and where the vents typically terminate. DOE is interested in whether such placements change b y geographic region or boiler type.

27. DOE seeks data on how often common venting occurs in multiple

- boiler installations and

whether commercial water heater s are commonly vented with commercial boilers.

28. DOE seeks comments on the methodology used to determine equipment lifetimes for commercial packaged boilers

. 29. DOE welcomes any data to predict boiler lifetime, particularly for non

- condensing versus condensing boilers.

30. DOE seeks input on its planned approach for estimating discount rates for commercia l

consumers

.ES

- 35 31. DOE requests data on the efficiency distribution and welcomes comment on the likelihood and degree of improvement in efficiency of commercial packaged boilers in the next 5 to 10 years as a result of market forces or industry trends (in the a bsence of amended energy conservation standards)

. 32. DOE welcomes input on the shipments projection methodology

. 33. DOE invites comments regarding the selection of appropriate economic drivers and sources of data for historical shipments and shipment breakdown s by equipment class.

34. DOE seeks historical commercial packaged boiler shipments data, disaggregated by equipment class and efficiency level if available

. 35. DOE seeks input on the potential impact of amended standards on commercial packaged boiler shipments

. 36. DOE seeks comments on the appropriate assumptions to use regarding long

- run changes in commercial packaged boiler energy efficiency independent of amended energy

conservation standards

. 37. DOE requests input as to what consumer subgroups are appropriate to evaluate for commercial packaged boilers

.