This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

34843 

Vol. 80, No. 117 

Thursday, June 18, 2015 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy 

10 CFR Part 430 

[Docket Number EERE–2014–BT–STD– 

0059] 

Energy Conservation Program: Energy 

Conservation Standards for Room Air 

Conditioners; Request for Information 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Request for Information (RFI). 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Energy (DOE) is initiating an effort to 

determine whether to amend the current 

energy conservation standards for room 

air conditioners (room ACs). According 

to the Energy Policy and Conservation 

Act’s 6-year review requirement, DOE 

must publish by April 8, 2017 a notice 

of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) to 

propose new standards for room ACs or 

a notice of determination that the 

existing standards do not need to be 

amended. This RFI seeks to solicit 

information from the public to help 

DOE determine whether amended 

standards for room ACs would result in 

a significant amount of additional 

energy savings and whether those 

standards would be technologically 

feasible and economically justified. In 

addition, DOE has identified several 

issues associated with the currently 

applicable test procedure for room ACs 

on which DOE is particularly interested 

in receiving comment. 

DATES: Written comments and 

information are requested on or before 

August 3, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Interested parties are 

encouraged to submit comments 

electronically. However, comments may 

be submitted by any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Email: RoomAC2014STD0059@

ee.doe.gov. Include docket number 

EERE–2014–BT–STD–0059 in the 

subject line of the message. All 

comments should clearly identify the 

name, address, and, if appropriate, 

organization of the commenter. Submit 

electronic comments in Word Perfect, 

Microsoft Word, PDF, or ASCII file 

format, and avoid the use of special 

characters or any form on encryption. 

• Postal Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, 

U.S. Department of Energy, Building 

Technologies Office, Mailstop EE–5B, 

Request for Information for Energy 

Conservation Standards for Room Air 

Conditioners, Docket No. EERE–2014– 

BT–STD–0059, 1000 Independence 

Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585– 

0121. Please submit one signed paper 

original. 

• Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda 

Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy, 

Building Technologies Office, Sixth 

Floor, 950 L’Enfant Plaza SW., 

Washington, DC 20024. Please submit 

one signed paper original. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the agency name and 

docket number for this rulemaking. No 

telefacsimiles (faxes) will be accepted. 

Docket: The docket is available for 

review at www.regulations.gov, 

including Federal Register notices, 

comments, and other supporting 

documents/materials. All documents in 

the docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. However, 

not all documents listed in the index 

may be publicly available, such as 

information that is exempt from public 

disclosure. A link to the docket Web 

page can be found at: http://

www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;

D=EERE-2014-BT-STD-0059. This Web 

page contains a link to the docket for 

this notice on the www.regulations.gov 

Web site. The www.regulations.gov Web 

page contains simple instructions on 

how to access all documents, including 

public comments, in the docket. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Direct requests for additional 

information may be sent to: 

Mr. Bryan Berringer, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency 

and Renewable Energy, Building 

Technologies Office, EE–5B, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: 202–586–0371. Email: 

room_air_conditioners@ee.doe.gov. 

Ms. Sarah Butler, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of the General Counsel, 

GC–33, 1000 Independence Avenue 

SW., Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 586–1777. Email: 

Sarah.Butler@hq.doe.gov. 

For information on how to submit or 

review public comments, contact Ms. 

Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Building 

Technologies Program, Mailstop EE–5B, 

1000 Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 586–2945. Email: 

Brenda.Edwards@ee.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Introduction 

A. Authority and Background 

B. Rulemaking Process 

II. Request for Information and Comments 

A. Products Covered by this Rule 

B. Test Procedure 

1. Background 

2. Updated Energy Efficiency Metric 

3. Test Method for Cooling Mode 

4. Test Method for Heating Mode 

5. Test Method for Part Load Performance 

6. Test Methods for Products that Operate 

on Mutliple Voltages 

7. Test Methods for ‘‘Connected Products’’ 

C. Market and Technology Assessment 

1. Product Classes 

2. Technology Assessment 

D. Screening Analysis 

1. Weight Limits 

2. Chassis size Limits 

3. Acoustic Noise 

E. Engineering Analysis 

1. Baseline Models 

2. Baseline Efficiency Levels 

3. Higher Efficiency Levels 

F. Markups Analysis 

G. Energy Use Analysis 

H. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period 

Analysis 

I. Shipments Analysis 

J. National Impact Analysis 

K. Manufacturer Impact Analysis 

III. Submission of Comments 

I. Introduction 

A. Authority and Background 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
34844 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 117 / Thursday, June 18, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

1For editorial reasons, upon codification in the 

U.S. Code, Part B was re-designated Part A. 

2All references to EPCA in this document refer 

to the statute as amended through the Energy 

Efficiency Improvement Act of 2015, Public Law 

114–11 (April 30, 2015). 

Title III, Part B1 of the Energy Policy 

and Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA or 

the Act), Public Law 94–163, (42 U.S.C. 

6291–6309, as codified) sets forth a 

variety of provisions designed to 

improve energy efficiency and 

established the Energy Conservation 

Program for Consumer Products Other 

Than Automobiles, a program covering 

major household appliances 

(collectively referred to as ‘‘covered 

products’’), including room ACs.2 EPCA 

authorizes DOE to establish 

technologically feasible, economically 

justified energy conservation standards 

for covered products that would be 

likely to result in significant national 

energy savings. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(I)–(VII)) 

The National Appliance Energy 

Conservation Act of 1987 (NAECA), 

Public Law 100–12, amended EPCA to 

establish prescriptive standards for 

room ACs manufactured on or after 

January 1, 1990, and directed DOE to 

conduct two cycles of rulemakings to 

determine if more stringent standards 

were justified. (42 U.S.C. 6295(c)(1)–(2)) 

DOE undertook the first cycle of these 

rulemakings and published a final rule 

on September 24, 1997 (hereafter the 

September 1997 Final Rule), revising 

the energy conservation standards for 

room ACs manufactured on or after 

October 1, 2000. 62 FR 50122. For the 

second cycle of rulemakings, DOE 

published a direct final rule on April 21, 

2011 (hereafter the April 2011 Direct 

Final Rule), amending the energy 

conservation standards for room ACs 

manufactured on or after April 21, 2014. 

76 FR 22454. DOE published a final rule 

amending the compliance dates for 

energy conservation standards for 

residential room air conditioners. 76 FR 

52852 (Aug. 24, 2011). In a separate 

notice, also on August 24, 2011, DOE 

confirmed the adoption of these energy 

conservation standards in a notice of 

effective date and compliance dates for 

the direct final rule published on 

August 24, 2011 (76 FR 52854), which 

also adopted compliance dates which 

were set forth in a proposed rule 

published on May 9, 2011 (76 FR 

26656). The current energy conservation 

standards apply to room ACs 

manufactured on or after June 1, 2014. 

EPCA requires that, not later than 6 

years after the issuance of a final rule 

establishing or amending a standard, 

DOE publish a NOPR proposing new 

standards or a notice of determination 

that the existing standards do not need 

to be amended. (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(1)) 

Based on this provision, DOE must 

publish by April 8, 2017, either a NOPR 

proposing amended standards for room 

ACs or a notice of determination that 

the existing standards do not need to be 

amended. This notice represents the 

initiation of the mandatory review 

process imposed by EPCA and seeks 

input from the public to assist DOE with 

its determination on whether amended 

standards pertaining to room ACs are 

warranted. In making this 

determination, DOE must evaluate 

whether more stringent standards would 

(1) yield a significant savings in energy 

use and (2) be both technologically 

feasible and economically justified. (42 

U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(B)) 

B. Rulemaking Process 

DOE must follow specific statutory 

criteria for prescribing new or amended 

standards for covered products. EPCA 

requires that any new or amended 

energy conservation standard be 

designed to achieve the maximum 

improvement in energy or water 

efficiency that is technologically 

feasible and economically justified. To 

determine whether a standard is 

economically justified, EPCA requires 

that DOE determine whether the 

benefits of the standard exceed its 

burdens by considering, to the greatest 

extent practicable, the following: 

1. The economic impact of the 

standard on the manufacturers and 

consumers of the affected products; 

2. The savings in operating costs 

throughout the estimated average life of 

the product compared to any increases 

in the initial cost, or maintenance 

expense; 

3. The total projected amount of 

energy and water (if applicable) savings 

likely to result directly from the 

imposition of the standard; 

4. Any lessening of the utility or the 

performance of the products likely to 

result from the imposition of the 

standard; 

5. The impact of any lessening of 

competition, as determined in writing 

by the Attorney General, that is likely to 

result from the imposition of the 

standard; 

6. The need for national energy and 

water conservation; and 

7. Other factors the Secretary of 

Energy (Secretary) considers relevant. 

(42 U.S.C. 6295 (o)(2)(B)(i)) 

DOE fulfills these and other 

applicable requirements by conducting 

a series of analyses throughout the 

rulemaking process. Table I.1 shows the 

individual analyses that are performed 

to satisfy each of the requirements 

within EPCA. 

TABLE I.1—EPCA REQUIREMENTS AND CORRESPONDING DOE ANALYSIS

EPCA requirement Corresponding DOE analysis 

Technological Feasibility .......................................................................... • Market and Technology Assessment. 

• Screening Analysis. 

• Engineering Analysis. 

Economic Justification: 

1. Economic impact on manufacturers and consumers ................... • Manufacturer Impact Analysis. 

• Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis. 

• Life-Cycle Cost Subgroup Analysis. 

• Shipments Analysis. 

2. Lifetime operating cost savings compared to increased cost for 

the product.

• Markups for Product Price Determination. 

• Energy and Water Use Determination. 

• Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis. 

3. Total projected energy savings ..................................................... • Shipments Analysis. 

• National Impact Analysis. 

4. Impact on utility or performance ................................................... • Screening Analysis. 

• Engineering Analysis. 

5. Impact of any lessening of competition ........................................ • Manufacturer Impact Analysis. 

6. Need for national energy and water conservation ........................ • Shipments Analysis. 

• National Impact Analysis. 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 117 / Thursday, June 18, 2015 / Proposed Rules 34845 

3AHAM standards are available for purchase 

online at: www.aham.org/ht/d/Store/name/

STANDARDS/pid/5132. 

4ASHRAE standards are available for purchase 

online at: www.techstreet.com/ashrae/. 

TABLE I.1—EPCA REQUIREMENTS AND CORRESPONDING DOE ANALYSIS—Continued 

EPCA requirement Corresponding DOE analysis 

7. Other factors the Secretary considers relevant ............................ • Emissions Analysis. 

• Utility Impact Analysis. 

• Employment Impact Analysis. 

• Monetization of Emission Reductions Benefits. 

• Regulatory Impact Analysis. 

As detailed throughout this RFI, DOE 

is specifically publishing this notice as 

the first step in the analysis process and 

is specifically requesting input and data 

from interested parties to aid in the 

development of the technical analyses. 

II. Request for Information and 

Comments 

In the next section, DOE has 

identified a variety of questions that 

DOE would like to receive input on to 

aid in the development of the technical 

and economic analyses regarding 

whether new standards for room ACs 

may be warranted. In addition, DOE 

welcomes comments on other issues 

relevant to the conduct of this 

rulemaking that may not specifically be 

identified in this notice. 

A. Products Covered by This 

Rulemaking 

DOE defines ‘‘room air conditioner’’ 

under EPCA as ‘‘a consumer product, 

other than a ‘‘packaged terminal air 

conditioner,’’ which is powered by a 

single phase electric current and which 

is an encased assembly designed as a 

unit for mounting in a window or 

through the wall for the purpose of 

providing delivery of conditioned air to 

an enclosed space. It includes a prime 

source of refrigeration and may include 

a means for ventilating and heating. (10 

CFR 430.2) DOE intends to address 

energy conservation standards for all 

room ACs. 

DOE notes that other consumer 

products, including portable ACs and 

residential dehumidifiers, are selfencased, powered by a single phase 

electric current, refrigeration-based, and 

provide delivery of conditioned air to an 

enclosed space. Portable ACs also 

provide connection through ducting to a 

window mounting bracket. DOE 

believes, however, that the requirement 

in the room AC definition that the 

encased assembly be designed as a unit 

for mounting in a window refers to the 

product in its entirety, and not just to 

duct connections. For this reason, DOE 

is not proposing to update the definition 

of ‘‘room air conditioner’’ to exclude 

other consumer products. 

DOE is aware that room ACs may 

provide additional consumer-oriented 

functions besides cooling, heating, and 

ventilation. Certain units may offer an 

air circulation feature, in which the 

room air is circulated without the 

addition of any outside air. In addition, 

certain units may provide an air 

cleaning function by means of 

electrostatic filtration, ultraviolet 

radiation, or ozone generators. DOE 

requests feedback from interested 

parties on the suitability of adding 

references to air circulation, air 

cleaning, or other functions to the room 

air conditioner definition. 

Issue A.1 DOE requests comment on 

the definition of room ACs and the 

consideration of energy conservation 

standards for all room ACs. 

B. Test Procedure 

1. Background 

Prior to June 1, 2014, room AC 

performance was certified using the 

energy efficiency ratio (EER). EER is 

expressed in British thermal units (Btu) 

per watt-hour (Wh), and is the quotient 

of: (1) The cooling capacity in Btu per 

hour, divided by: (2) The electrical 

input power in watts (W). (10 CFR 

430.23(f)(2)) 

The Energy Independence and 

Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007), Public 

Law 110–140, amended EPCA to require 

that standby mode and off mode energy 

consumption be integrated into the 

overall energy efficiency, energy 

consumption, or other energy descriptor 

unless the Secretary determines that (i) 

the current test procedures for a covered 

product already fully account for and 

incorporate standby mode and off mode 

energy consumption of the covered 

product; or (ii) such an integrated test 

procedure is technically infeasible for a 

particular covered product, in which 

case the Secretary shall prescribe a 

separate standby mode and off mode 

energy use test procedure for the 

covered product, if technically feasible. 

(42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A)) 

On January 6, 2011, DOE published in 

the Federal Register a final rule for a 

room air AC test procedure rulemaking 

(January 2011 RAC TP Final Rule), in 

which DOE determined it is technically 

feasible to incorporate standby mode 

and off mode energy consumption into 

overall energy consumption. As a result, 

DOE adopted new methods to calculate 

room AC standby and off mode energy 

use and the new measure of energy 

efficiency, Combined Energy Efficiency 

Ratio (CEER), that integrates standby 

and off mode energy use with the active 

mode energy use. 76 FR 972, 991–992 

(Jan. 6, 2011) 

In the January 2011 RAC TP Final 

Rule, DOE incorporated by reference 

into the room AC test procedures 

specific clauses from International 

Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) 

Standard 62301, ‘‘Household electrical 

appliances—Measurement of standby 

power’’, First Edition, 2005–06 (IEC 

Standard 62301 First Edition) regarding 

test conditions and test procedures for 

measuring standby and off mode power 

consumption. DOE also incorporated 

definitions of ‘‘active mode,’’ ‘‘standby 

mode,’’ and ‘‘off mode’’ that are based 

on the definitions provided in IEC 

Standard 62301, ‘‘Household electrical 

appliances—Measurement of standby 

power’’, Second Edition, Committee 

Draft for Vote (IEC Standard 62301 

CDV). Further, DOE adopted language to 

clarify the application of clauses from 

IEC Standard 62301 First Edition and 

the mode definitions from IEC Standard 

62301 CDV for measuring standby and 

off mode power consumption. 76 FR 

972, 979–987 (Jan. 6, 2011). Also as part 

of the January 2011 RAC TP Final Rule, 

DOE amended the room AC test 

procedure to update the references to 

industry test standards to the versions 

applicable at that time: (1) American 

National Standards Institute (ANSI)/

Association of Home Appliance 

Manufacturers (AHAM) RAC–1–2008, 

‘‘Room Air Conditioners’’ (ANSI/AHAM 

RAC–1–2008); 3 and (2) ANSI/American 

Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and 

Air-Conditioning Engineers Standard 

(ASHRAE) 16–1983 (RA2009), ‘‘Method 

of Testing for Rating Room Air 

Conditioners and Packaged Terminal 

Air Conditioners’’ (ANSI/ASHRAE 

Standard 16–1983 (RA2009)),4


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
34846 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 117 / Thursday, June 18, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

respectively. 76 FR 972, 1016–1017 (Jan. 

6, 2011). 

2. Updated Energy Efficiency Metric 

On February 25, 2015, DOE published 

a test procedure NOPR for portable ACs 

that proposes the use of a revised CEER 

metric that accounts for energy 

consumption in each of the identified 

active, standby, and off modes: Cooling 

mode, heating mode, off-cycle mode, 

inactive mode, and off mode (hereafter 

referred to as the February 2015 PAC TP 

NOPR). 80 FR 10212. As discussed in 

section II.A of this notice, DOE is 

requesting input on including 

definitions for different operating modes 

in the definitions for room ACs. If such 

additional modes are included, DOE 

would also consider whether to revise 

the current room AC CEER metric to 

account for the energy use in them. In 

particular, DOE is interested in feedback 

on whether to consider including in the 

room AC CEER metric the same modes 

proposed for the portable AC metric, 

because of the similarity between the 

two products. 

As a possible approach, DOE could 

consider the proposal in the February 

2015 PAC TP NOPR, in which average 

power in each mode would be measured 

and then individually multiplied by the 

annual operating hours for its respective 

mode. 

AECi = Pi × hi × k 

Where: 

AECi is the annual energy consumption in 

each mode, in kilowatt-hours (kWh)/

year; 

Pi is the average power in each mode, in W; 

hi is the number of annual operating hours 

in each mode; 

i designates the operating mode (‘‘c’’ cooling, 

‘‘h’’ heating, ‘‘oc’’ off-cycle, and ‘‘ia’’ 

inactive or ‘‘om’’ off mode); and 

k is 0.001 kWh/Wh conversion factor for Wh 

to kWh. 

80 FR 10211, 10234 (Feb. 25, 2015). 

In order to calculate AECi, DOE would 

need to define the annual operating 

hours for each mode. The current room 

AC test procedure specifies 750 hours 

for active cooling mode, and a total of 

5,115 hours for inactive and off mode. 

(10 CFR part 430 appendix F to subpart 

B). DOE established these values in the 

January 2011 RAC TP Final Rule. DOE 

seeks input on mode hours for the 

complete set of operating modes that 

may be defined for room ACs. 

To incorporate the new operating 

modes into a revised CEER metric, the 

February 2015 PAC TP NOPR proposed 

defining the new term; ‘‘combined 

cooling mode EER’’ (CEERC). 

Where: 

CEERC is the combined energy efficiency 

ratio in cooling mode, in Btu/Wh. 

ACC is the adjusted cooling capacity, in Btu/ 

h. 

AECT is the total annual energy consumption 

attributed to all modes except cooling 

and heating, in kWh/year. 

t is the number of hours per year, 8,760. 

k is 0.001 kWh/Wh conversion factor for 

watt-hours to kilowatt-hours. 

80 FR 10211, 10234 (Feb. 25, 2015). 

The CEERC would be calculated for all 

units, including those with only cooling 

function and those with both cooling 

and heating functions. For units with 

cooling and heating functions, the 

metric would be calculated assuming 

heating mode is not used and therefore, 

the operating hours that would have 

been attributed to heating mode and 

other associated operating modes during 

the heating season would be neglected. 

In the February 2015 PAC TP NOPR, 

DOE proposed that the resulting CEERC

is a meaningful metric for portable ACs 

without a heating function, and a basis 

for comparing cooling mode efficiency 

for units that include heating function, 

as well as a metric that could be 

compared to other cooling products, 

such as room ACs. Id. 

To calculate the overall energy 

efficiency metric for portable ACs 

without a heating function, the February 

2015 PAC TP NOPR proposed that the 

revised CEER would be directly equal to 

the unit’s calculated CEERC. However, 

for units with both cooling and heating 

mode, the revised overall CEER would 

be calculated as follows. 

Where: 

CEER is the combined energy efficiency ratio, 

in Btu/Wh. 

ACC is the adjusted cooling capacity, in Btu/ 

h. 

AHC is the adjusted heating capacity, in Btu/ 

h. 

AECT is the total annual energy consumption 

attributed to all modes except cooling 

and heating, in kWh/year. 

hc and hh are the cooling and heating mode 

operating hours, respectively. 

t is the number of hours per year, 8,760. 

k is 0.001 kWh/Wh conversion factor for 

watt-hours to kilowatt-hours. 

80 FR 10211, 10234–35 (Feb. 25, 2015). 

Issue B.1 DOE seeks comment on the 

merits and/or limitations of revising the 

room AC test procedure and efficiency 

metric to account for energy 

consumption in various modes, which 

may include cooling mode, heating 

mode, off-cycle mode, inactive mode, 

off mode, or others. 

Issue B.2 DOE requests data on 

annual operating hours for the room AC 

operating modes. 

Issue B.3 DOE seeks comment on 

revising the room AC test procedure to 

require calculation of CEERC for all 

units, including those with only cooling 

function, and those with both cooling 

and heating functions. 

Issue B.4 DOE seeks comment on 

revising the definition of CEER for room 

ACs to be consistent with definitions 

proposed in the February 2015 PAC TP 

NOPR. 

3. Test Methods for Cooling Mode 

The current room AC test procedure 

specifies that cooling mode performance 

be tested in accordance with the 

methods and conditions in ANSI/

AHAM RAC–1–2008 and ANSI/

ASHRAE 16–1983 (RA2009). (10 CFR 

part 430, appendix F to subpart B) 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALSEP18JN15.000</GPH> EP18JN15.001</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 117 / Thursday, June 18, 2015 / Proposed Rules 34847 

5ARI 310/380–2004 is available online at: 

www.ari.org/App_Content/ahri/files/

standards%20pdfs/ANSI%20standards%20pdfs/ ANSI.AHRI.CSA%20Standard%20310_380- 

2004.pdf. 

ANSI/ASHRAE reaffirmed the test 

standard 16–1983 most recently in 2014. 

ANSI/ASHRAE 16–1983 (R2014) 

specifies measuring cooling 

performance using a calorimeter 

method. DOE is aware, however, that 

ASHRAE is currently undertaking a 

revision to ANSI/ASHRAE 16–1983 

(R2014) that is expected to allow 

cooling performance to be measured 

using an air enthalpy method similar to 

that specified in ANSI/ASHRAE 37– 

2009 ‘‘Methods of Testing for Rating 

Electrically Driven Unitary AirConditioning and Heat Pump 

Equipment’’ (ANSI/ASHRAE 37–2009). 

Issue B.5 DOE seeks comment on the 

possible use of an air enthalpy method 

as an alternative to the current 

calorimeter method to measure cooling 

performance in the room AC test 

procedure. 

Issue B.6 DOE requests test data 

comparing the performance and 

accuracy of the current calorimeter 

method to the air enthalpy method 

being considered in a revision to ANSI/ 

ASHRAE 16–1983 (R2014). 

Issue B.7 DOE requests information 

on the burdens associated with testing 

cooling performance using an air 

enthalpy method. Specifically DOE is 

interested in data related to the required 

capital investment costs, per-test costs, 

and testing time associated with air 

enthalpy testing. DOE is also interested 

in how these costs compare to those for 

the existing calorimeter method, and 

whether the burden for air enthalpy 

testing would disproportionately impact 

certain businesses. 

4. Test Methods for Heating Mode 

If DOE revises the room AC test 

procedure to require calculation of 

CEERh for models with reverse cycle, 

DOE would need to define a method for 

measuring heating performance. DOE is 

currently evaluating test methods that 

have been developed (or are proposed) 

for other residential or light commercial 

space cooling/heating appliances, such 

as portable ACs, packaged terminal ACs 

(PTACs), and packaged terminal heat 

pumps (PTHPs). 

In the February 2015 PAC TP NOPR 

DOE proposed using an air enthalpy 

method to measure portable AC heating 

performance. The proposed method is 

based on AHAM PAC–1–2014 ‘‘Portable 

Air Conditioners’’ (AHAM PAC–1), 

which references test methods 

established in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 

37–2009. 80 FR 10211, 10217–10231 

(Feb. 25, 2015). For this method, DOE 

proposed standard rating conditions for 

the evaporator (room) side and 

condenser (outdoor) side of dual-duct 

portable ACs as shown in Table II.1. 

DOE considers the test conditions in 

Table II.1 to be the most representative 

of typical heating mode use for portable 

ACs, which are likely used as 

supplemental or low-capacity heaters 

when a central heating system isn’t 

necessary or operating. DOE notes that 

the terms ‘‘evaporator’’ and ‘‘condenser’’ 

refer to the heat exchanger configuration 

in cooling mode, not the reverse-cycle 

heating mode. 

TABLE II.1—STANDARD RATING CONDITIONS FOR DUAL DUCT PACS—HEATING MODE

Evaporator inlet air 

degrees Fahrenheit (°F) (°Celsius (C)) 

Condenser inlet air 

°F (°C) 

Dry Bulb Wet Bulb Dry Bulb Wet Bulb 

70.0 (21.1) 60.0 (15.6) 47.0 (8.33) 43.0 (6.11) 

In the current PTAC and PTHP test 

procedure (10 CFR 431.96), DOE also 

uses an air enthalpy method to measure 

heating mode performance. For this test 

procedure, DOE incorporates by 

reference in total the American 

Refrigeration Institute (ARI) Standard 

310/380–2004 ‘‘Standard for Packaged 

Terminal Air-Conditioners And Heat 

Pumps’’ (ARI 310/380–2004).5 ARI 310/ 

380–2004 in turn references ANSI/

ASHRAE Standard 58–1999 ‘‘Methods 

of Testing Rating Room Air Conditioner 

and Packaged Terminal Air Conditioner 

Heating Capacity’’ (ANSI/ASHRAE 58– 

1999) to rate the heating performance of 

both PTACs and PTHPs. AHR 310/380– 

2004 specifically notes that ‘‘standard 

ratings relating to cooling capacity and 

heating capacity shall be net values, 

including the effects of circulating fan 

heat, but not including supplementary 

heat. Standard input ratings shall be the 

total power input to the compressor(s) 

and fans, plus controls and other items 

included as part of the model 

number(s).’’ AHR 310/380–2004 

provides methods to calculate heat 

pump heating capacities and energy 

consumption at both ‘‘hightemperature’’ and ‘‘low-temperature’’ 

operating conditions, but specifies that 

EER and coefficient of performance 

(COP) are only calculated for the hightemperature condition. Table II.2 

summarizes the rating conditions for 

high- and low-temperature conditions. 

TABLE II.2—STANDARD RATING CONDITIONS FOR PTHPS AND PTACS WITH REVERSE CYCLE CAPABILITY—HEATING

MODE

Operating condition 

Evaporator inlet air 

°F (°C) 

Condenser inlet air 

°F (°C) 

Dry Bulb Wet Bulb Dry Bulb Wet Bulb 

High-Temperature ........................................... 70.0 (21.1) 60.0 (15.6) max .............................................. 47.0 (8.3) 43.0 (6.1) 

Low-Temperature ............................................ 70.0 (21.1) 60.0 (15.6) max .............................................. 17.0 (¥8.3) 15.0 (¥9.4) 

Issue B.8 DOE seeks comment on 

appropriate test methods, external 

standards, and operating conditions for 

measuring heating performance in room 

ACs with reverse cycle. Specifically, 

DOE seeks comment on the hightemperature operating conditions 

specified in Table II.2. DOE also 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
34848 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 117 / Thursday, June 18, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

6Available online at www.energystar.gov/

products/spec/room_air_conditioner_specification_

version_4_0_pd. 

welcomes suggestions and supporting 

data for alternative methods. 

Issue B.9 DOE requests information 

on the burdens associated with testing 

heating performance, using methods 

similar to ANSI/ASHRAE 58–1999 or 

ANSI/ASHRAE 37–2009, or other 

methods. Specifically DOE is interested 

in data related to the required capital 

investment costs, per-test costs, and 

testing time associate with sound 

testing. DOE also requests comment on 

whether this burden would 

disproportionately impact certain 

businesses. 

5. Test Methods for Part Load 

Performance 

In the January 2011 RAC TP Final 

Rule, DOE discussed that the test 

procedure established in that rule does 

not measure the benefits of technologies 

that improve part-load performance. 76 

FR 972, 1016 (Jan. 6, 2011). The current 

room AC test procedure measures only 

the full-load performance at outdoor 

ambient conditions of 95 °F dry-bulb 

and 75 °F wet-bulb. Therefore, 

technologies that improve part-load 

performance, such as multiple-speed 

compressors and variable-opening 

expansion devices, will not improve the 

rated performance of a room AC under 

the current test procedure. In contrast, 

central ACs and heat pumps are rated 

with a seasonal energy efficiency ratio 

(SEER) descriptor, but the test 

procedure consists of multiple rating 

points at different conditions that add 

time and expense when rating the 

product. 

DOE concluded in the January 2011 

RAC TP Final Rule that widespread use 

of part-load technology in room ACs 

would not likely be stimulated by the 

development of a part-load metric at 

this time, and therefore, the significant 

effort required to develop an accurate 

part-load metric is not likely to be 

warranted by the expected minimal 

energy savings. 76 FR 972, 1016 (Jan. 6, 

2011. 

For the current test procedure 

rulemaking, DOE again intends to 

investigate the merits and limitations of 

revising the current room AC test 

procedure to account for any benefits of 

technologies that improve part-load 

performance. As part of this 

investigation, DOE expects to research 

the availability of room ACs on the 

market in the United States that 

incorporate variable speed compressors 

and other components and controls that 

would enable implementation of partload operation. 

Issue B.10 DOE seeks comment on 

the merits and/or limitations of revising 

the current room AC test procedure to 

account for benefit of technologies that 

improve part-load performance, and 

welcomes suggestions and supporting 

information for test methods that 

measure part-load operation. 

Issue B.11 DOE seeks data and 

information on the prevalence of room 

ACs in the U.S. market that are capable 

of part-load operation. 

6. Test Methods for Products That 

Operate on Multiple Voltages 

DOE is aware that there are room ACs 

available in the United States that can 

operate on multiple voltages for the 

input power. These products may have 

a different capacity measured at each 

operating voltage. As a result, a single 

product may be categorized into two 

different product classes and therefore 

be required to comply with two 

different energy conservation standards, 

depending on which voltage is used to 

test the product. Currently, the room AC 

test procedure does not specify which 

voltage a product should be tested at, if 

it is capable of operating with multiple 

voltages. 

Issue B.12 DOE seeks comment on 

how to test and certify products that 

may operate on multiple voltages. 

Specifically, DOE is interested in 

comment on how to treat products that 

may be categorized into two different 

product classes, depending on operating 

voltage. 

7. Test Methods for ‘‘Connected 

Products’’ 

On February 20, 2015, the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

published the Final Version 4.0 

‘‘ENERGY STAR Product Specification 

for Room Air Conditioners.’’ 6 Along 

with revised efficiency criteria, EPA 

specified an optional connected criteria 

for room ACs designed to provide 

enhanced functionality to consumers, 

such as alerts/messages, remote control, 

and energy information, as well as new 

demand response capabilities to support 

future smart grid interconnection. 

Products that meet these optional 

criteria and are certified using a future 

test method to validate the demand 

response capabilities could take 

advantage of a 5-percent energy use 

allowance for ENERGY STAR rating 

qualification. 

DOE anticipates that the revised 

ENERGY STAR specification may 

increase the market penetration of 

‘‘connected products.’’ It is possible that 

connected products may consume a 

significant amount of energy while 

performing these connected functions. 

As such, DOE is considering whether to 

amend the room AC test procedure and 

energy conservation standards to 

account for the energy consumed while 

the product performs connected 

functions. 

Issue B.13 DOE requests information 

on ‘‘connected’’ room ACs that are 

already on the market in the United 

States. Specifically, DOE is interested in 

the available ‘‘connected’’ features, as 

well as the energy consumption while 

these features are active or awaiting 

commands. 

Issue B.14 DOE request information 

on the current and anticipated market 

penetration of ‘‘connected products.’’ 

C. Market and Technology Assessment 

The market and technology 

assessment provides information about 

the room AC industry that will be used 

throughout the rulemaking process. For 

example, this information will be used 

to determine whether the existing 

product class structure requires 

modification based on the statutory 

criteria for setting such classes and to 

explore the potential for technological 

improvements in the design and 

manufacturing of such products. DOE 

uses qualitative and quantitative 

information to characterize the structure 

of the room AC industry and market. 

DOE will identify and characterize the 

manufacturers of room ACs, estimate 

market shares and trends, address 

regulatory and non-regulatory initiatives 

intended to improve energy efficiency 

or reduce energy consumption, and 

explore the potential for technological 

improvements in the design and 

manufacturing of room ACs. DOE will 

also review product literature, industry 

publications, and company Web sites. 

Additionally, DOE will consider 

conducting interviews with 

manufacturers to assess the overall 

market for room ACs. 

1. Product Classes 

As required by EPCA, the criteria for 

separation into different classes are: (1) 

Type of energy used, or (2) capacity or 

other performance-related features such 

as those that provide utility to the 

consumer or others deemed appropriate 

by the Secretary that would justify the 

establishment of a separate energy 

conservation standard. (42 U.S.C. 6295 

(q)) 

For room ACs, the NAECA 

amendments to EPCA, initially specified 

12 product classes which were 

applicable to units designed for singlehung or double-hung window 

installation or through-thewall 

installation and based on the following 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 117 / Thursday, June 18, 2015 / Proposed Rules 34849 

criteria: (1) cooling capacity, in Btu/h; 

(2) the presence of louvered sides (LS); 

and (3) the capability of reverse cycle. 

(42 U.S.C. 6295(c)(1)). In the September 

1997 Final Rule, DOE established an 

updated set of performance standards 

(effective October 1, 2000) which 

included four additional product 

classes. 62 FR 50122 (Sept. 24, 1997). In 

the April 2011 Direct Final Rule, DOE 

split Product Classes 5 and 8 into two 

product classes each. Former Product 

Class 5 (louvered, non-reverse-cycle, 

capacity of 20,000 Btu/h and higher) 

was split into Product Class 5A 

(louvered, non-reverse-cycle, capacity of 

20,000 to 27,999 Btu/h) and Product 

Class 5B (louvered, non-reverse-cycle, 

capacity of 28,000 Btu/h and higher). 

Former Product Class 8 (non-louvered, 

non-reverse-cycle, capacity of 8,000 to 

13,999 Btu/h) was split into Product 

Class 8A (non-louvered, non-reversecycle, capacity of 8,000 to 10,999 Btu/ 

h) and Product Class 8B (nonlouvered, 

non-reverse-cycle, capacity of 11,000 to 

13,999 Btu/h). 76 FR 22454 (Apr. 21, 

2011). Table II.3 lists the current 18 

product classes for room ACs. 

TABLE II.3—CURRENT ROOM AIR

CONDITIONER PRODUCT CLASSES

Without reverse cycle and with louvered 

sides 

1. Less than 6,000 Btu/h. 

2. 6,000 to 7,999 Btu/h. 

3. 8,000 to 13,999 Btu/h. 

4. 14,000 to 19,999 Btu/h. 

5A. 20,000 to 27,999 Btu/h. 

5B. 28,000 Btu/h or more. 

Without reverse cycle and without louvered 

sides 

6. Less than 6,000 Btu/h. 

TABLE II.3—CURRENT ROOM AIR CONDITIONER PRODUCT CLASSES—Continued 

7. 6,000 to 7,999 Btu/h. 

8A. 8,000 to 10,999 Btu/h. 

8B. 11,000 to 13,999 Btu/h. 

9. 14,000 to 19,999 Btu/h. 

10. 20,000 Btu/h or more 

With reverse cycle 

11. With louvered sides and less than 20,000 

Btu/h. 

12. Without louvered sides and less than 

14,000 Btu/h. 

13. With louvered sides and 20,000 Btu/h or 

more. 

14. Without louvered sides and 14,000 Btu/h 

or more. 

Casement 

15. Casement-Only. 

16. Casement-Slide. 

Issue C.1 DOE requests feedback on 

the current room AC product classes 

and seeks information regarding any 

other product classes it should consider 

for inclusion in its analysis. 

2. Technology Assessment 

DOE uses information about existing 

and past technology options and 

prototype designs to help identify 

technologies that manufacturers could 

use to meet and/or exceed energy 

conservation standards. In consultation 

with interested parties, DOE intends to 

develop a list of technologies to 

consider in its analysis. Initially, this 

list will include a subset of the 

technology options considered during 

the most recent room AC energy 

conservation standards rulemaking. 

These technologies are listed in Table 

II.4. 

DOE is aware that certain 

technologies listed in Table II.4 may 

have progressed since the April 2011 

Direct Final Rule. Specifically, at the 

time of that analysis, the room AC 

industry was responding to the EPAmandated phase-out of HFC–22 

refrigerant. 74 FR 66412, 66418 (Dec. 15, 

2009). This rule led to an industry 

changeover to R–410A refrigerant. 

Manufacturers expressed concern at the 

time over the availability of R–410A 

compressors, stating that production 

capacity of compressor suppliers had 

not fully rebounded and compressor 

suppliers had yet to offer the same range 

of compressor capacities and efficiency 

tiers (See chapter 12 of the direct final 

rule technical support document 

(TSD).). Consequently, DOE plans to 

investigate improvements in R–410A 

compressors that may have come 

available since the April 2011 Direct 

Final Rule. 

Additionally, in the April 2011 Direct 

Final Rule, DOE investigated the 

technological feasibility of the 

alternative refrigerant R–407C. 76 FR 

22490 (April 21, 2011). For this 

rulemaking, DOE may reevaluate R– 

407C, as well as other 

hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) and 

hydrocarbon (HC) refrigerants. 

Furthermore, DOE is aware that three 

new refrigerants have been approved for 

use in room air conditioners by the EPA 

under the Significant New Alternatives 

Program (SNAP), subject to certain use 

conditions: R–290, R–441A and R–32.80 

FR 19454 (Apr. 10, 2015). For this 

rulemaking, DOE plans to investigate 

the technological feasibility of these 

refrigerants. 

TABLE II.4—TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS FOR ROOM AIR CONDITIONERS

Technology 

passed to 

screening 

analysis in 

April 2011 

direct final 

rule? 

Increased heat transfer surface area 

1. Increased frontal coil area ..................................................................................................................................................................... Yes. 

2. Increased depth of coil (add tube rows) ............................................................................................................................................... Yes. 

3. Increased fin density ............................................................................................................................................................................. Yes. 

4. Add subcooler to condenser coil ........................................................................................................................................................... Yes. 

Increased Heat Transfer Coefficients 

5. Improved fin design ............................................................................................................................................................................... Yes. 

6. Improved tube design ............................................................................................................................................................................ Yes. 

7. Hydrophilic-film coating on fins ............................................................................................................................................................. Yes. 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
34850 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 117 / Thursday, June 18, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE II.4—TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS FOR ROOM AIR CONDITIONERS—Continued 

Technology 

passed to 

screening 

analysis in 

April 2011 

direct final 

rule? 

8. Spray condensate onto condenser coil ................................................................................................................................................. Yes. 

9. Microchannel heat exchangers ............................................................................................................................................................. Yes. 

Component Improvements 

10. Improved indoor blower and outdoor fan efficiency ............................................................................................................................ Yes. 

11. Improved blower/fan motor efficiency ................................................................................................................................................. Yes. 

12. Improved compressor efficiency .......................................................................................................................................................... Yes. 

Part-Load Technology Improvements 

13. Two-speed, variable-speed, or modulating-capacity compressors ..................................................................................................... Yes. 

14. Thermostatic or electronic expansion valves ...................................................................................................................................... Yes. 

15. Thermostatic cyclic controls ................................................................................................................................................................ Yes. 

Standby Power Improvements 

16. Switching Power Supply ...................................................................................................................................................................... Yes. 

Refrigeration System Options 

17. Alternative Refrigerants (R–407C) ...................................................................................................................................................... No. 

18. Suction-Line Heat Exchanger .............................................................................................................................................................. No. 

Issue C.2 DOE seeks information 

related to the technologies listed in 

Table II.4 or other technologies as to 

their applicability to the current market 

and how these technologies improve 

efficiency of room ACs as measured 

according to the DOE test procedure. 

Issue C.3 DOE seeks information 

related to efficiency improvements in 

R–410A compressors since the April 

2011 Direct Final Rule, their 

applicability and/or penetration in the 

current market, and how the 

compressors improve efficiency of room 

ACs as measured according to the DOE 

test procedure. 

Issue C.4 DOE seeks information 

related to the alternative HFC and HC 

refrigerants, including propane. 

Specifically, DOE seeks information on 

the availability of such refrigerants, and, 

their applicability and/or penetration in 

the current market, and how these 

refrigerants improve efficiency of room 

ACs as measured according to the DOE 

test procedure. 

D. Screening Analysis 

The purpose of the screening analysis 

is to evaluate the technologies that 

improve equipment efficiency to 

determine which technologies will be 

eliminated from further consideration 

and which will be passed to the 

engineering analysis for further 

consideration. 

Appendix A to subpart C of Title 10 

of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 

430 (10 CFR part 430), ‘‘Procedures, 

Interpretations and Policies for 

Consideration of New or Revised Energy 

Conservation Standards for Consumer 

Products’’ (the Process Rule), sets forth 

procedures to guide DOE in its 

consideration and promulgation of new 

or revised equipment energy 

conservation standards. These 

procedures elaborate on the statutory 

criteria provided in 42 U.S.C. 6295(o) 

and, in part, eliminate problematic 

technologies early in the process of 

prescribing or amending an energy 

efficiency standard. In particular, 

sections 4(b)(4) and 5(b) of the Process 

Rule guide DOE in determining whether 

to eliminate from consideration any 

technology that presents unacceptable 

problems with respect to the following 

criteria: 

(1) Technological feasibility. 

Technologies incorporated in 

commercial equipment or in working 

prototypes will be considered 

technologically feasible. 

(2) Practicability to manufacture, 

install, and service. If mass production 

of a technology in commercial 

equipment and reliable installation and 

servicing of the technology could be 

achieved on the scale necessary to serve 

the relevant market at the time of the 

effective date of the standard, then that 

technology will be considered 

practicable to manufacture, install, and 

service. 

(3) Impacts on equipment utility or 

equipment availability. If a technology 

is determined to have significant 

adverse impact on the utility of the 

equipment to significant subgroups of 

consumers, or result in the 

unavailability of any covered equipment 

type with performance characteristics 

(including reliability), features, sizes, 

capacities, and volumes that are 

substantially the same as equipment 

generally available in the United States 

at the time, it will not be considered 

further. 

(4) Adverse impacts on health or 

safety. If it is determined that a 

technology will have significant adverse 

impacts on health or safety, it will not 

be considered further. 

Technology options developed in the 

technology assessment are evaluated 

against these criteria using DOE 

analyses and inputs from 

manufacturers, trade organizations, and 

energy efficiency advocates. 

Technologies that pass through the 

screening analysis are referred to as 

‘‘design options’’ in the engineering 

analysis. Technology options that fail to 

meet one or more of the four criteria are 

eliminated from consideration. 

As a part of the screening analysis, 

DOE has identified three specific 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 117 / Thursday, June 18, 2015 / Proposed Rules 34851 

7NIOSH guideline: http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/

docs/2007-131/. 

OSHA guideline: https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/

etools/electricalcontractors/materials/heavy.html. 

8Available online at www.energystar.gov/

products/spec/room_air_conditioner_specification_

version_4_0_pdf. 9 Id. 

consumer-oriented issues that it seeks 

input on. These issues are weight limits, 

chassis size limits, and acoustic noise. 

The following three subsections provide 

further details on these issues. 

1. Weight Limits 

In the April 2011 Direct Final Rule 

analysis DOE limited the total weight of 

the Product Class 1 (as defined in Table 

II.3) baseline unit to 50 pounds, to avoid 

exceeding Occupational Safety and 

Health Administration (OSHA) and 

National Institute of Occupational 

Safety and Health (NIOSH) guidelines 

for single-person lifting.7 DOE did not 

consider limiting the weight of the other 

analyzed product classes because 

baseline units in those product classes 

already exceeded this weight limit. 

Issue D.1 DOE seeks input on the 

merits and/or limitations of maintaining 

a 50-pound limit for room ACs in 

Product Class 1. DOE also welcomes 

suggestions and supporting analysis for 

alternative weight limits. 

Issue D.2 DOE seeks input on 

whether to consider weight limits for 

product classes other than Product Class 

1 in the room AC analysis. DOE also 

welcomes suggestions and data for 

additional product class-specific weight 

limits. 

2. Chassis Size Limits 

In the April 2011 Direct Final Rule 

analysis, DOE used a methodology that 

established maximum chassis widths 

and heights for each product class, 

when considering a baseline unit. DOE 

established these limits based on the 

dimensions of the largest R–410A room 

AC in each product class on the market. 

DOE did not set a limit for maximum 

chassis depth in that analysis. 

Issue D.3 DOE seeks input on 

potentially establishing chassis size 

limits as part of a design option 

analysis. DOE also welcomes 

suggestions and supporting analysis for 

alternative chassis size limits. 

Issue D.4 DOE seeks input on any 

factors that may help define chassis 

dimension limits beyond the 

dimensions of room ACs currently on 

the market in the United States. 

Specifically DOE welcomes data on the 

distribution of window widths and 

heights in U.S. residences. 

3. Acoustic Noise 

DOE understands that increased noise 

levels might occur as room ACs attain 

higher levels of efficiency. Certain 

technology options, such as higher 

speed fans, can facilitate increased heat 

transfer and improved efficiency, but 

may result in increased acoustic noise. 

As a part of the screening analysis, DOE 

intends to investigate this relationship, 

specifically as it relates to impacts on 

consumer utility. As such DOE seeks 

input on test methods appropriate to 

objectively evaluate acoustic noise in 

room ACs. 

DOE is aware that the European 

Union (EU), through its EcoDesign 

regulations, recently instituted 

maximum sound power levels for room 

ACs assessed under EN 12102:2013 ‘‘Air 

Conditioners, liquid chilling packages, 

heat pumps and dehumidifiers with 

electrically driven compressors for 

space heating and cooling— 

Measurement of airborne noise— 

Determination of sound power levels’’ 

(EN 12102:2013). Under the new EU 

regulation, room ACs may not exceed 

indoor sound power levels of 60 

decibels (dB)(A) and outdoor sound 

power levels of 60dB(A). 

Similarly, the October 28, 2014 EPA 

Draft 1 of Version 4.0 ‘‘ENERGY STAR 

Product Specification for Room Air 

Conditioners’’ 8 proposed that measured 

indoor sound power level shall not 

exceed 60dB(A), as measured using EN 

12102:2013. In response to stakeholder 

comment, the EPA chose to remove the 

sound performance criteria in its 

February 20, 2015 Final Version 4.0 of 

‘‘ENERGY STAR Product Specification 

for Room Air Conditioners.’’ 9

Stakeholders identified the lack of 

availability of test chambers and the 

burden of both building capacity for 

testing and sound power testing as one 

barrier to the inclusion of sound 

performance in an ENERGY STAR 

specification. 

Issue D.5 DOE requests suggestions 

for test methods that are appropriate to 

objectively evaluate acoustic noise in 

room ACs. 

Issue D.6 DOE requests information 

on the relationship between acoustic 

noise, in dB(A), or other appropriate 

units, and consumer satisfaction. 

Issue D.7 DOE requests feedback and 

data on how the design options 

presented in section II.C impact room 

AC acoustic noise. 

E. Engineering Analysis 

The engineering analysis estimates 

the cost-efficiency relationship of 

products at different levels of increased 

energy efficiency (‘‘efficiency levels’’). 

This relationship serves as the basis for 

the cost-benefit calculations for 

consumers, manufacturers, and the 

nation. In determining the costefficiency relationship, DOE estimates 

the change in manufacturer cost 

associated with increasing the efficiency 

of products above the baseline, up to the 

maximum technologically feasible 

(‘‘max-tech’’) efficiency level for each 

product class. 

DOE historically has used the 

following three methodologies to 

generate incremental manufacturing 

costs and establish efficiency levels 

(ELs) for analysis: (1) The design-option 

approach, which provides the 

incremental costs of adding to a baseline 

model design options that will improve 

its efficiency; (2) the efficiency-level 

approach, which provides the relative 

costs of achieving increases in energy 

efficiency levels, without regard to the 

particular design options used to 

achieve such increases; and (3) the costassessment (or reverse engineering) 

approach, which provides ‘‘bottom-up’’ 

manufacturing cost assessments for 

achieving various levels of increased 

efficiency, based on detailed data as to 

costs for parts and material, labor, 

shipping/packaging, and investment for 

models that operate at particular 

efficiency levels. 

1. Baseline Models 

For each established product class, 

DOE selects a baseline model as a 

reference point against which any 

changes resulting from energy 

conservation standards can be 

measured. The baseline model in each 

product class represents the 

characteristics of common or typical 

products in that class. Typically, a 

baseline model is one that meets the 

current minimum energy conservation 

standards. 

2. Baseline Efficiency Levels 

DOE tentatively plans to consider the 

current minimum energy conservations 

standards (which went into effect June 

1, 2014) to establish the baseline 

efficiency levels for each product class. 

Table II.5 presents the current energy 

conservation standards for room ACs. If 

DOE amends the room AC test 

procedure to provide an efficiency 

metric other than the current CEER, 

DOE will adjust the CEER baseline 

levels to account for the new metric. 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
34852 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 117 / Thursday, June 18, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

10ENERGY STAR guidelines are available at: 

www.energystar.gov/sites/default/files/specs/

ENERGY%20STAR%20Version

%203.1%20Room%20Air

%20Conditioner%20Program%

20Requirements.pdf. 

11CEE SEHA room air conditioner guidelines are 

available at: http://library.cee1.org/sites/default/

files/library/9296/CEE_ResApp_

RoomAirConditionerSpecification_2003_Updated_

Again.pdf. 

TABLE II.5—CURRENT ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS FOR ROOM AIR CONDITIONERS

Product class 

CEER, 

effective as of 

June 1, 2014 

1. Without reverse cycle, with louvered sides, and less than 6,000 Btu/h ......................................................................................... 11.0 

2. Without reverse cycle, with louvered sides, and 6,000 to 7,999 Btu/h .......................................................................................... 11.0 

3. Without reverse cycle, with louvered sides, and 8,000 to 13,999 Btu/h ........................................................................................ 10.9 

4. Without reverse cycle, with louvered sides, and 14,000 to 19,999 Btu/h ...................................................................................... 10.7 

5A. Without reverse cycle, with louvered sides, and 20,000 to 27,999 Btu/h .................................................................................... 9.4 

5B. Without reverse cycle, with louvered sides, and 28,000 Btu/h or more ....................................................................................... 9.0 

6. Without reverse cycle, without louvered sides, and less than 6,000 Btu/h .................................................................................... 10.0 

7. Without reverse cycle, without louvered sides, and 6,000 to 7,999 Btu/h ..................................................................................... 10.0 

8A. Without reverse cycle, without louvered sides, and 8,000 to 10,999 Btu/h ................................................................................. 9.6 

8B. Without reverse cycle, without louvered sides, and 11,000 to 13,999 Btu/h ............................................................................... 9.5 

9. Without reverse cycle, without louvered sides, and 14,000 to 19,999 Btu/h ................................................................................. 9.3 

10. Without reverse cycle, without louvered sides, and 20,000 Btu/h or more .................................................................................. 9.4 

11. With reverse cycle, with louvered sides, and less than 20,000 Btu/h .......................................................................................... 9.8 

12. With reverse cycle, without louvered sides, and less than 14,000 Btu/h ..................................................................................... 9.3 

13. With reverse cycle, with louvered sides, and 20,000 Btu/h or more ............................................................................................ 9.3 

14. With reverse cycle, without louvered sides, and 14,000 Btu/h or more ....................................................................................... 8.7 

15. Casement-Only .............................................................................................................................................................................. 9.5 

16. Casement-Slider ............................................................................................................................................................................ 10.4 

Issue E.1 DOE requests comment on 

approaches that it should consider 

when determining the baseline 

efficiency levels for each product class, 

including information regarding the 

merits and/or limitations of such 

approaches. 

3. Higher Efficiency Levels 

For each product class, DOE will 

define efficiency levels beyond the 

baseline and develop incremental 

manufacturing cost data for each 

efficiency level. To define the efficiency 

levels, DOE tentatively plans to evaluate 

potential efficiency improvements from 

available design options and consider 

voluntary certification program levels 

such as ENERGY STAR and Consortium 

for Energy Efficiency’s (CEE) Super 

Efficient Home Appliance Initiative 

(SEHA). The current ENERGY STAR 

and CEE voluntary certification levels 

are presented in Table II.6. 

TABLE II.6—CURRENT ENERGY STAR AND CEE SEHA LEVELS FOR ROOM AIR CONDITIONERS

Product class 

Oct. 2013 

ENERGY 

STAR 

(CEER) 

Oct. 2013 

ENERGY 

STAR 

(EER) 

SEHA 

Tier 1 

(EER) * 

SEHA 

Tier 2 

(EER) * 

1. Without reverse cycle, with louvered sides, and less than 6,000 Btu/h ..................... 11.0 11.2 11.2 11.6 

2. Without reverse cycle, with louvered sides, and 6,000 to 7,999 Btu/h ...................... 11.0 11.2 11.2 11.6 

3. Without reverse cycle, with louvered sides, and 8,000 to 13,999 Btu/h .................... 11.2 11.3 11.3 11.8 

4. Without reverse cycle, with louvered sides, and 14,000 to 19,999 Btu/h .................. 11.1 11.2 11.2 11.6 

5a. Without reverse cycle, with louvered sides, and 20,000 to 27,999 Btu/h ................ 9.8 9.8 † 9.8 † 10.2 

5b. Without reverse cycle, with louvered sides, and 28,000 Btu/h or more ................... 9.8 9.8 † 9.8 † 10.2 

6. Without reverse cycle, without louvered sides, and less than 6,000 Btu/h ................ 10.2 10.4 .................... ....................

7. Without reverse cycle, without louvered sides, and 6,000 to 7,999 Btu/h ................. 10.2 10.4 .................... ....................

8a. Without reverse cycle, without louvered sides, and 8,000 to 10,999 Btu/h ............. 9.7 9.8 .................... ....................

8b. Without reverse cycle, without louvered sides, and 11,000 to 13,999 Btu/h ........... 9.7 9.8 .................... ....................

9. Without reverse cycle, without louvered sides, and 14,000 to 19,999 Btu/h ............. 9.7 9.8 .................... ....................

10. Without reverse cycle, without louvered sides, and 20,000 Btu/h or more .............. ** 9.7 ** 9.8 .................... ....................

11. With reverse cycle, with louvered sides, and less than 20,000 Btu/h ...................... 10.3 10.4 .................... ....................

12. With reverse cycle, without louvered sides, and less than 14,000 Btu/h ................. 9.7 9.8 .................... ....................

13. With reverse cycle, with louvered sides, and 20,000 Btu/h or more ........................ 9.8 9.8 .................... ....................

14. With reverse cycle, without louvered sides, and 14,000 Btu/h or more ................... 9.1 9.2 .................... ....................

15. Casement-Only .......................................................................................................... 9.9 10 .................... ....................

16. Casement-Slider ........................................................................................................ 10.8 10.9 .................... ....................

* Note that CEE SEHA does not specify tier levels in CEER, and tier levels are only specified for units in classes 1–5b. 

** ENERGY STAR requires that units with cooling capacity greater or equal 28,000 Btu/h achieve 9.8 CEER. The aforementioned capacity 

range is part of product class 10 in the current rule.10

† The CEE SEHA room air conditioner specification defines two capacity ranges that cover the same range as product classes 5a and 5b: 

20,000 Btu/h to 24,999 Btu/h or greater than 25,000 Btu/h. These do not match the capacity ranges defined by DOE: 20,000 Btu/h to 27,999 Btu/

h or greater than 28,000 Btu/h.11

Issue E.2 DOE seeks input 

concerning efficiency levels to analyze 

for room ACs. Specifically, DOE seeks 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 117 / Thursday, June 18, 2015 / Proposed Rules 34853 

12For information on RECS, see http://

www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/recs/. 

13For information on CBECS, see http://

www.eia.gov/consumption/commercial/about.cfm. 

information that may guide the 

definition of efficiency levels, including 

any additional voluntary certification 

programs or relevant foreign standards 

or programs. 

Issue E.3 DOE seeks input on 

appropriate maximum technologically 

feasible efficiency levels and the basis 

for why those levels should be selected. 

F. Markups Analysis 

To carry out the life-cycle cost (LCC) 

and payback period (PBP) calculations, 

DOE needs to determine the cost to the 

residential consumer of baseline 

products that satisfies the currently 

applicable standards, and the cost of the 

more-efficient unit the consumer would 

purchase under potential amended 

standards. By applying a multiplier 

called a ‘‘markup’’ to the manufacturer’s 

selling price, DOE is able to estimate the 

residential consumer’s price. 

For the April 2011 Direct Final Rule, 

DOE based the distribution channels on 

data from AHAM. For room ACs, the 

main actors are manufacturers and 

retailers. Thus, DOE analyzed a 

manufacturer-to-consumer distribution 

channel consisting of three parties: (1) 

The manufacturers producing the 

products; (2) the retailers purchasing the 

products from manufacturers and 

selling them to consumers; and (3) the 

consumers who purchase the products. 

DOE plans to use the same approach in 

the current rulemaking. 

As was done in the last rulemaking 

and consistent with the approach 

followed for other energy consuming 

products, DOE will determine an 

average manufacturer markup by 

examining the annual Securities and 

Exchange Commission (SEC) 10–K 

reports filed by publicly traded 

manufacturers of appliances whose 

product range includes room ACs. DOE 

will determine an average retailer 

markup by analyzing both economic 

census data from the U.S. Census 

Bureau and the annual SEC 10–K 

reports filed by publicly traded retailers. 

In addition to developing 

manufacturer and retailer markups, DOE 

will develop and include sales taxes to 

calculate appliance retail prices. DOE 

will use an Internet source, the Sales 

Tax Clearinghouse, to calculate 

applicable sales taxes. 

Issue F.1 DOE seeks input from 

stakeholders on whether the 

distribution channels described above 

are still relevant for room ACs. DOE also 

welcomes comments concerning its 

proposed approach to developing 

estimates of markups for room ACs. 

Issue F.2 DOE seeks recent data to 

establish the markups for the parties 

involved with the distribution of the 

product addressed in this notice. 

G. Energy Use Analysis 

The purpose of the energy use 

analysis is to assess the energy savings 

potential of different product 

efficiencies. DOE uses the annual energy 

consumption and energy-savings 

potential in the LCC and PBP analyses 

to establish the savings in consumer 

operating costs at various product 

efficiency levels. In contrast to the DOE 

test procedure, which provides a 

measure of the energy use, energy 

efficiency or annual operating cost of a 

covered product during a representative 

average use cycle, the energy use 

analysis seeks to capture the range of 

operating conditions for room ACs in 

U.S. homes. 

To determine the field energy use of 

products that would meet possible 

standard levels, DOE proposes to use 

data from the Energy Information 

Administration’s (EIA’s) 2009 

Residential Energy Consumption Survey 

(RECS), or the most recent such survey 

available from EIA.12 RECS is a national 

sample survey of housing units that 

collects statistical information on the 

consumption of and expenditures for 

energy in housing units along with data 

on energy-related characteristics of the 

housing units and occupants. 

For the April 2011 Direct Final Rule, 

DOE used the data reported by RECS on 

the annual energy consumption (field 

energy consumption) for room air 

conditioning. The reported end-use 

quantities were not based on metering of 

individual appliances; rather, EIA used 

a regression technique to estimate how 

much of the total annual electricity 

consumption for each household can be 

attributed to each end-use category. The 

reported field energy consumption 

refers to the consumption of all of the 

room ACs in a home. RECS also reports 

the number of room ACs in the home. 

To estimate the energy consumption of 

a single room AC for this rulemaking, 

DOE divided the room AC energy use 

reported in RECS by the reported 

number of room ACs. For houses with 

both central air conditioning and room 

air conditioning, DOE scaled the energy 

use by using a relative use factor. 

Although in reality the utilization of 

each of the room ACs in a home may 

vary, the RECS data does not allow DOE 

to estimate such variation. 

In the April 2011 Direct Final Rule, 

DOE estimated that, based on 

stakeholder input, 12-percent of room 

AC shipments were utilized in 

commercial building applications. The 

Energy Information Administration’s 

Commercial Buildings Energy 

Consumption Survey (CBECS) 13 does 

not report annual energy consumption 

for room air conditioning, so DOE 

estimated the energy consumption using 

variables specific to each building in the 

sample and data on cooling degree-days. 

For this rulemaking, DOE is considering 

using the same methodology to estimate 

energy use in commercial building 

applications. 

DOE requests comment or seeks input 

from stakeholders on the following 

issues pertaining to the energy use 

analysis: 

Issue G.1 DOE requests stakeholder 

input regarding the impact of changes in 

CEER on cooling energy savings. 

Issue G.2 Data sources that DOE can 

use to characterize the variability in 

annual energy consumption of room 

ACs. 

Issue G.3 DOE requests stakeholder 

comment on whether a significant 

enough percentage of residential room 

ACs are utilized in commercial 

buildings to warrant considering their 

use in commercial applications. 

H. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period 

Analysis 

The purpose of the LCC and PBP 

analysis is to analyze the effects of 

potential amended energy conservation 

standards on consumers of residential 

room AC products by determining how 

a potential amended standard affects the 

consumers’ operating expenses (usually 

decreased) and total installed costs 

(usually increased). 

DOE intends to analyze data input 

variability and uncertainty by 

performing the LCC and PBP 

calculations on a representative sample 

of households from RECS and 

commercial buildings from CBECS for 

the considered product classes using 

Monte Carlo simulation and probability 

distributions. The analysis results are a 

distribution of results showing the range 

of LCC savings and PBPs for a given 

efficiency level relative to the baseline 

level. 

Inputs to the LCC and PBP analysis 

are categorized as: (1) Inputs for 

establishing the purchase expense, 

otherwise known as the total installed 

cost, and (2) inputs for calculating the 

operating expense. The primary inputs 

for establishing the total installed cost 

are the baseline consumer price, 

standard-level consumer price 

increases, and installation costs. 

Baseline consumer prices and standardVerDate Sep<11>2014 14:59 Jun 17, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\18JNP1.SGM 18JNP1

wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
34854 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 117 / Thursday, June 18, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

level consumer price increases will be 

determined by applying markups to 

manufacturer price estimates. The 

installation cost is added to the 

consumer price to arrive at a total 

installed cost. 

In the April 2011 Direct Final Rule, 

DOE derived the installation costs from 

room AC data in RS Means. 76 FR 22454 

(Apr. 21, 2011). DOE plans to use 

similar data sources for this rulemaking, 

with adjustments to reflect current-day 

labor and material prices as well as to 

scale installation cost for higherefficiency products based on equipment 

weight and/or dimensions. 

Issue H.1 DOE seeks input on 

whether room AC installation costs will 

scale with equipment weight and/or 

dimensions. 

The primary inputs for calculating the 

operating costs are product energy 

consumption, product efficiency, 

electricity prices and forecasts, 

maintenance and repair costs, product 

lifetime, and discount rates. 

Repair costs are associated with 

repairing or replacing components that 

have failed in the appliance, whereas 

maintenance costs are associated with 

maintaining the operation of the 

equipment. In the April 2011 Direct 

Final Rule, DOE assumed a maintenance 

increase for the higher-capacity units 

due to more expensive product cost but 

no maintenance differences with higher 

efficiency units. 76 FR 22454 (Apr. 21, 

2011). 

Issue H.2 DOE seeks stakeholder 

input on the appropriateness to assume 

that changes in maintenance costs will 

be negligible for more-efficient 

products. 

Repair costs are costs associated with 

a major repair during the lifetime of the 

product. In the April 2011 Direct Final 

Rule, DOE determined the costs of major 

repairs (e.g., compressor replacement) 

from RS Means and industry literature. 

76 FR 22454 (Apr. 21, 2011). DOE also 

assumed that repair costs vary in direct 

proportion with the product price at 

higher efficiency levels as replacement 

costs for more-efficient components are 

likely to be greater than components in 

baseline products. Id. 

Issue H.3 DOE seeks stakeholder 

comment on the assumption that repair 

costs vary in direct proportion to 

product price and unit capacity. 

DOE measures LCC and PBP impacts 

of potential standard levels relative to a 

base case that reflects the market in the 

absence of amended standards. DOE 

plans to develop market-share efficiency 

data (i.e., the distribution of product 

shipments by efficiency) for the product 

classes DOE is considering, for the year 

in which compliance with any amended 

or new standards would be required. By 

accounting for consumers who already 

purchase more efficient products, DOE 

avoids overstating the potential benefits 

from potential standards. 

Issue H.4 DOE seeks stakeholder 

input and data on the fraction of room 

ACs that are sold above the minimum 

energy efficiency standards. DOE also 

requests information on expected trends 

in product efficiency over the next 5 

years. 

I. Shipments Analysis 

DOE uses shipment projections by 

product class and efficiency level in its 

analysis of the national impacts of 

potential standards, as well as in the 

manufacturer impact analysis. 

In the April 2011 Direct Final Rule, 

DOE developed a shipments model for 

room ACs driven by historical 

shipments data, which were used to 

build up a product stock and calibrate 

the shipments model. 76 FR 22454 (Apr. 

21, 2011). Shipments of each product 

class were projected for two market 

sectors that use these products: 

residential and commercial sectors. 

Issue I.1 DOE seeks stakeholder 

input and data showing the distribution 

of shipments by product class, and 

market sector. 

In the April 2011 Direct Final Rule, 

DOE modeled the decision to repair or 

replace equipment for existing owners 

and the impact that decision would 

have on the shipments model. 76 FR 

22454 (Apr. 21, 2011). DOE investigated 

how increases in product purchase price 

and decreases in product operating costs 

due to standards impact product 

shipments. 

Issue I.2 DOE seeks input and data 

on factors that influence a consumer’s 

decisions to repair or replace failed 

products. In particular, DOE is seeking 

historical repair cost data as a function 

of efficiency. 

J. National Impact Analysis 

The purpose of the national impact 

analysis (NIA) is to estimate aggregate 

impacts of potential efficiency standards 

at the national level. Impacts reported 

by DOE include the national energy 

savings (NES) from potential standards 

and the national net present value 

(NPV) of the total consumer benefits. 

The NIA considers lifetime impacts of 

potential standards on room ACs 

shipped in a 30-year period that begins 

with the expected compliance date for 

new or amended standards. 

To develop the NES, DOE calculates 

annual energy consumption of products 

in residential and commercial building 

stock for the base case and each 

standards case. To develop the national 

NPV of consumer benefits from 

potential standards, DOE calculates 

national annual energy expenditures 

and annual product expenditures for the 

base case and the standards cases. DOE 

calculates total annual energy 

expenditures using data on annual 

energy consumption in each case, 

forecasted average annual energy prices, 

and shipment projections. The 

difference each year between operating 

cost savings and increased product 

expenditures is the net savings or net 

costs. 

A key component of DOE’s estimates 

of NES and NPV is the product energy 

efficiency forecasted over time for the 

base case and for each of the standards 

cases. In the April 2011 Direct Final 

Rule, DOE based projections of basecase shipment-weighted efficiency 

(SWEF) for the room AC product classes 

on growth rates determined from 

historical data provided by AHAM. 76 

FR 22454 (Apr. 21, 2011). For this 

rulemaking, DOE plans on considering 

recent trends in efficiency and input 

from stakeholders to update product 

energy efficiency forecasts. 

Issue J.1 DOE seeks historical SWEF 

data for room ACs by product class and 

stakeholder input regarding future 

trends in efficiency. 

K. Manufacturer Impact Analysis 

The purpose of the manufacturer 

impact analysis (MIA) is to estimate the 

financial impact of potential energy 

conservation standards on 

manufacturers of room ACs and to 

evaluate the potential impact of such 

standards on employment and 

manufacturing capacity. The MIA 

includes both quantitative and 

qualitative aspects. The quantitative 

part of the MIA primarily relies on the 

Government Regulatory Impact Model 

(GRIM), an industry cash-flow model 

used to estimate a range of potential 

impacts on manufacturer profitability. 

The qualitative part of the MIA 

addresses a proposed standard’s 

potential impacts on manufacturing 

capacity and industry competition, as 

well as factors such as product 

characteristics, impacts on particular 

subgroups of firms, and important 

market and product trends. 

As part of the MIA, DOE intends to 

analyze impacts of potential energy 

conservation standards on small 

business manufacturers of covered 

products. DOE intends to use the Small 

Business Administration’s (SBA) small 

business size standards to determine 

whether manufacturers qualify as small 

businesses. The size standards are listed 

by North American Industry 

Classification System (NAICS) code and 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 117 / Thursday, June 18, 2015 / Proposed Rules 34855 

14Available online at: www.sba.gov/sites/default/ 

files/Size_Standards_Table.pdf. 

industry description.14 Manufacturing 

of room ACs can be classified under 

either NAICS 333415, ‘‘AirConditioning and Warm Air Heating 

Equipment and Commercial and 

Industrial Refrigeration Equipment 

Manufacturing’’ or NAICS 335228, 

‘‘Other Major Household Appliance 

Manufacturing.’’ The SBA sets a 

threshold of 750 or 500 employees or 

less for an entity to be considered as a 

small business for these categories. 

These employee threshold would 

include all employees in a business’s 

parent company and any other 

subsidiaries. 

DOE used publically available 

information to attempt to identify any 

small business that manufactures room 

ACs. DOE cross-referenced the 

manufacturers listed in DOE’s 

Compliance Certification Management 

System (CCMS) with individual 

company Web sites and market research 

tools (e.g., Hoovers reports). DOE’s 

initial research indicates that no small 

businesses currently manufacture room 

ACs. 

Issue K.1 DOE requests comment on 

any small business manufacturers of 

room ACs that it should consider in its 

analysis. 

III. Submission of Comments 

DOE invites all interested parties to 

submit in writing by August 3, 2015, 

comments and information on matters 

addressed in this notice and on other 

matters relevant to DOE’s consideration 

of new or amended energy 

conservations standards for room ACs. 

After the close of the comment period, 

DOE will begin collecting data, 

conducting the analyses, and reviewing 

the public comments, as needed. These 

actions will be taken to aid in the 

development of a NOPR for room ACs 

if DOE decides to amend the standards 

for such products. 

DOE considers public participation to 

be a very important part of the process 

for developing test procedures and 

energy conservation standards. DOE 

actively encourages the participation 

and interaction of the public during the 

comment period in each stage of the 

rulemaking process. Interactions with 

and between members of the public 

provide a balanced discussion of the 

issues and assist DOE in the rulemaking 

process. Anyone who wishes to be 

added to the DOE mailing list to receive 

future notices and information about 

this rulemaking or would like to request 

a public meeting should contact Ms. 

Brenda Edwards at (202) 586–2945, or 

via email at Brenda.Edwards@

ee.doe.gov. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on June 9, 2015. 

Kathleen B. Hogan, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy 

Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable 

Energy. 

[FR Doc. 2015–15001 Filed 6–17–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 71 

[Docket No. FAA–2014–1074; Airspace 

Docket No. 14–ASW–10] 

Proposed Amendment of Class E 

Airspace; El Paso, TX 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: This action proposes to 

amend Class E airspace at El Paso, TX. 

The closure of West Texas Airport has 

made this action necessary for 

continued safety and management 

within the National Airspace System. 

Additionally, the geographic 

coordinates for El Paso International 

Airport and Biggs Army Airfield (AAF) 

would be adjusted. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before August 3, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this 

proposal to the U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590–0001; telephone 

(202) 366–9826. You must identify the 

docket number FAA–2014–1074/

Airspace Docket No. 14–ASW–10, at the 

beginning of your comments. You may 

also submit comments through the 

Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. 

You may review the public docket 

containing the proposal, any comments 

received, and any final disposition in 

person in the Dockets Office between 

9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

The Docket Office telephone 1–800– 

647–5527 is on the ground floor of the 

building at the above address. 

FAA Order 7400.9Y, Airspace 

Designations and Reporting Points, and 

subsequent amendments can be viewed 

online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/ 

publications/. The Order is also 

available for inspection at the National 

Archives and Records Administration 

(NARA). For information on the 

availability of this material at NARA, 

call 202–741–6030, or go to http://

www.archives.gov/federal_register/

code_of_federal-regulations/ibr_

locations.html. 

FAA Order 7400.9, Airspace 

Designations and Reporting Points, is 

published yearly and effective on 

September 15. For further information, 

you can contact the Airspace Policy and 

Regulations Group, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone: 202–267–8783. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Rebecca Shelby, Central Service Center, 

Operations Support Group, Federal 

Aviation Administration, Southwest 

Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort 

Worth, TX 76137; telephone: 817–321– 

7740. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

The FAA’s authority to issue rules 

regarding aviation safety is found in 

Title 49 of the United States Code. 

Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the 

authority of the FAA Administrator. 

Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, 

describes in more detail the scope of the 

agency’s authority. This rulemaking is 

promulgated under the authority 

described in Subtitle VII, Part, A, 

Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that 

section, the FAA is charged with 

prescribing regulations to assign the use 

of airspace necessary to ensure the 

safety of aircraft and the efficient use of 

airspace. This regulation is within the 

scope of that authority as it would 

amend Class E airspace at West Texas 

Airport, El Paso, TX. 

Comments Invited 

Interested parties are invited to 

participate in this proposed rulemaking 

by submitting such written data, views, 

or arguments, as they may desire. 

Comments that provide the factual basis 

supporting the views and suggestions 

presented are particularly helpful in 

developing reasoned regulatory 

decisions on the proposal. Comments 

are specifically invited on the overall 

regulatory, aeronautical, economic, 

environmental, and energy-related 

aspects of the proposal. 

Communications should identify both 

docket numbers and be submitted in 

triplicate to the address listed above. 

Commenters wishing the FAA to 

acknowledge receipt of their comments 

on this notice must submit with those 

comments a self-addressed, stamped 

postcard on which the following 

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to 

Docket No. FAA–2014–1074 and 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS