81396 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 22, 2023 / Notices 

4.6.3.5.1 The average box 

temperature is not less than 25 °F above 

the test enclosure temperature. 

4.6.3.5.2 Temperature variations do 

not exceed 5.0 °F between temperaturemeasuring stations. 

4.6.3.5.3 Temperatures do not vary 

by more than 2 °F at any one 

temperature-measuring station. 

4.6.4 Data to be Measured and 

Recorded. Refer to Table C2 in section 

C7.2 of AHRI 1250–2020 for the 

required data that need to measured and 

recorded. 

4.6.5 Refrigeration Capacity 

Calculation. 

4.6.5.1 The heat leakage coefficient 

of the calibrated box is calculated by 

4.6.5.2 For each Dry Rating 

Condition, calculate the Net Capacity: 

q ̇ ss = Kcb (Ten¥Tcb) + 3.412 x E ̇ c

(3) Representations. RSG may not 

make representations about the 

efficiency of a basic model listed in 

paragraph (1) of this Order for 

compliance, marketing, or other 

purposes unless that basic model has 

been tested in accordance with the 

provisions set forth in this alternate test 

procedure and such representations 

fairly disclose the results of such 

testing. 

(4) This Order shall remain in effect 

until the date upon which use of 

appendix C1 is required to demonstrate 

compliance with any amended energy 

conservation standards based on the test 

procedure in appendix C1. 

(5) This Order is issued on the 

condition that the statements and 

representations provided by RSG are 

valid. If RSG makes any modifications 

to the controls or configurations of any 

basic model subject to this Order, such 

modifications will render the waiver 

invalid with respect to that basic model, 

and RSG will either be required to use 

the current Federal test method or 

submit a new application for a test 

procedure waiver. DOE may rescind or 

modify this waiver at any time if it 

determines the factual basis underlying 

the petition for the waiver is incorrect, 

upon a determination that the results 

from the alternate test procedure are 

unrepresentative of a basic model’s true 

energy consumption characteristics, or 

for other appropriate reasons. 10 CFR 

431.401(k)(1). Likewise, RSG may 

request that DOE rescind or modify the 

waiver if RSG discovers an error in the 

information provided to DOE as part of 

its petition, determines that the waiver 

is no longer needed, or for other 

appropriate reasons. 10 CFR 

431.401(k)(2). 

(6) Issuance of this Order does not 

release RSG from the applicable 

requirements set forth at 10 CFR part 

429. 

DOE makes decisions on waivers and 

interim waivers for only those basic 

models specifically set out in the 

petition, not future models that may be 

manufactured by the petitioner. RSG 

may submit a new or amended petition 

for waiver and request for grant of 

interim waiver, as appropriate, for 

additional basic models of singlepackaged dedicated systems with 

multiple refrigeration circuits. 

Alternatively, if appropriate, RSG may 

request that DOE extend the scope of a 

waiver or an interim waiver to include 

additional basic models employing the 

same technology as the basic models set 

forth in the original petition consistent 

with 10 CFR 431.401(g). 

Signing Authority 

This document of the Department of 

Energy was signed on November 17, 

2023, by Jeffrey Marootian, Principal 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy 

Efficiency and Renewable, pursuant to 

delegated authority from the Secretary 

of Energy. That document with the 

original signature and date is 

maintained by DOE. For administrative 

purposes only, and in compliance with 

requirements of the Office of the Federal 

Register, the undersigned DOE Federal 

Register Liaison Officer has been 

authorized to sign and submit the 

document in electronic format for 

publication, as an official document of 

the Department of Energy. This 

administrative process in no way alters 

the legal effect of this document upon 

publication in the Federal Register. 

Signed in Washington, DC, on November 

17, 2023. 

Treena V. Garrett, 

Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. 

Department of Energy. 

[FR Doc. 2023–25873 Filed 11–21–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

[Case Number 2023–004; EERE–2023–BT– 

WAV–0016] 

Energy Conservation Program: 

Notification of Petition for Waiver of 

United CoolAir Corporation From the 

Department of Energy Commercial Air 

Conditioners and Heat Pumps Test 

Procedure and Notification of Denial of 

Interim Waiver 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Notification of petition for 

waiver and denial of application for 

interim waiver; request for comments. 

SUMMARY: This notification announces 

receipt of and publishes a petition for 

waiver and interim waiver from United 

CoolAir Corporation (‘‘UCA’’), which 

seeks a waiver for specified basic 

models of double-duct air conditioners 

and heat pumps from the U.S. 

Department of Energy (‘‘DOE’’) test 

procedure used for determining the 

efficiency of double-duct air 

conditioners and heat pumps. This 

notification also announces that DOE is 

declining to grant the request for an 

interim waiver for the reasons described 

in this notification. DOE solicits 

comments, data, and information 

concerning UCA’s petition and its 

suggested alternate test procedure so as 

to inform DOE’s final decision on UCA’s 

waiver request. 

DATES: Written comments and 

information are requested and will be 

accepted on or before December 22, 

2023. 

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are 

encouraged to submit comments using 

the Federal eRulemaking Portal at 

www.regulations.gov under docket 

number EERE–2023–BT–WAV–0016. 

Follow the instructions for submitting 

comments. Alternatively, interested 

persons may submit comments, 

identified by docket number EERE– 

2023–BT–WAV–0016, by any of the 

following methods: 

(1) Email: 

UnitedCoolAirACHP2023WAV0016@

ee.doe.gov. Include the case number 

[Case No. 2023–004] in the subject line 

of the message. 

(2) Postal Mail: Appliance and 

Equipment Standards Program, U.S. 

Department of Energy, Building 

Technologies Office, Mailstop EE–5B, 

Petition for Waiver [Case No. 2023–004], 

1000 Independence Avenue SW, 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. If 

possible, please submit all items on a 

compact disc (‘‘CD’’), in which case it is 

not necessary to include printed copies. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICESEN22NO23.262</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 22, 2023 / Notices 81397 

(3) Hand Delivery/Courier: Appliance 

and Equipment Standards Program, U.S. 

Department of Energy, Building 

Technologies Office, 950 L’Enfant Plaza 

SW, 6th Floor, Washington, DC 20024. 

Telephone: (202) 287–1445. If possible, 

please submit all items on a CD, in 

which case it is not necessary to include 

printed copies. 

No telefacsimiles (‘‘faxes’’) will be 

accepted. For detailed instructions on 

submitting comments and additional 

information on this process, see the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this document. 

Docket: The docket for this activity, 

which includes Federal Register 

notices, comments, and other 

supporting documents/materials, is 

available for review at 

www.regulations.gov. 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. 

The docket web page can be found at 

www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE– 

2023–BT–WAV–0016. The docket web 

page contains instructions on how to 

access all documents, including public 

comments, in the docket. See the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for 

information on how to submit 

comments through 

www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FOR 

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ms. Julia Hegarty, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Building 

Technologies Office, Mailstop EE–5B, 

1000 Independence Avenue SW, 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (240) 597–6737 Email: AS_

Waiver_Request@ee.doe.gov. 

Ms. Kathryn McIntosh, U.S. 

Department of Energy, Office of the 

General Counsel, Mail Stop GC–33, 

Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence 

Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585– 

0103. Telephone: (202) 586–2002. 

Email: Kathryn.McIntosh@hq.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE is 

publishing UCA’s petition for waiver in 

its entirety, pursuant to 10 CFR 

431.401(b)(1)(iv). DOE invites all 

interested parties to submit in writing 

by December 22, 2023, comments and 

information on all aspects of the 

petition, including the alternate test 

procedure. Pursuant to 10 CFR 

431.401(d), any person submitting 

written comments to DOE must also 

send a copy of such comments to the 

petitioner. The contact information for 

the petitioner is: John Hodges, jhodges@

hwglaw.com, Harris, Wiltshire & 

Grannis LLP, 1919 M Street NW, 

Washington, DC 20036. 

Submitting comments via 

www.regulations.gov. The 

www.regulations.gov web page will 

require you to provide your name and 

contact information. Your contact 

information will be viewable to DOE 

Building Technologies staff only. Your 

contact information will not be publicly 

viewable except for your first and last 

names, organization name (if any), and 

submitter representative name (if any). 

If your comment is not processed 

properly because of technical 

difficulties, DOE will use this 

information to contact you. If DOE 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, DOE may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

However, your contact information 

will be publicly viewable if you include 

it in the comment or in any documents 

attached to your comment. Any 

information that you do not want to be 

publicly viewable should not be 

included in your comment, nor in any 

document attached to your comment. If 

this instruction is followed, persons 

viewing comments will see only first 

and last names, organization names, 

correspondence containing comments, 

and any documents submitted with the 

comments. 

Do not submit to www.regulations.gov 

information for which disclosure is 

restricted by statute, such as trade 

secrets and commercial or financial 

information (hereinafter referred to as 

Confidential Business Information 

(‘‘CBI’’)). Comments submitted through 

www.regulations.gov cannot be claimed 

as CBI. Comments received through the 

website will waive any CBI claims for 

the information submitted. For 

information on submitting CBI, see the 

Confidential Business Information 

section. 

DOE processes submissions made 

through www.regulations.gov before 

posting. Normally, comments will be 

posted within a few days of being 

submitted. However, if large volumes of 

comments are being processed 

simultaneously, your comment may not 

be viewable for up to several weeks. 

Please keep the comment tracking 

number that www.regulations.gov 

provides after you have successfully 

uploaded your comment. 

Submitting comments via email, hand 

delivery/courier, or postal mail. 

Comments and documents submitted 

via email, hand delivery/courier, or 

postal mail also will be posted to 

www.regulations.gov. If you do not want 

your personal contact information to be 

publicly viewable, do not include it in 

your comment or any accompanying 

documents. Instead, provide your 

contact information on a cover letter. 

Include your first and last names, email 

address, telephone number, and 

optional mailing address. The cover 

letter will not be publicly viewable as 

long as it does not include any 

comments. 

Include contact information each time 

you submit comments, data, documents, 

and other information to DOE. If you 

submit via postal mail or hand delivery/ 

courier, please provide all items on a 

CD, if feasible, in which case it is not 

necessary to submit printed copies. 

Faxes will not be accepted. 

Comments, data, and other 

information submitted to DOE 

electronically should be provided in 

PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or 

Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file 

format. Provide documents that are not 

secured, written in English and free of 

any defects or viruses. Documents 

should not contain special characters or 

any form of encryption and, if possible, 

they should carry the electronic 

signature of the author. 

Campaign form letters. Please submit 

campaign form letters by the originating 

organization in batches of between 50 to 

500 form letters per PDF or as one form 

letter with a list of supporters’ names 

compiled into one or more PDFs. This 

reduces comment processing and 

posting time. 

Confidential Business Information. 

According to 10 CFR 1004.11, any 

person submitting information that he 

or she believes to be confidential and 

exempt by law from public disclosure 

should submit via email two wellmarked copies: one copy of the 

document marked confidential 

including all the information believed to 

be confidential, and one copy of the 

document marked ‘‘non-confidential’’ 

with the information believed to be 

confidential deleted. Submit these 

documents via email. DOE will make its 

own determination about the 

confidential status of the information 

and treat it according to its 

determination. 

It is DOE’s policy that all comments 

may be included in the public docket, 

without change and as received, 

including any personal information 

provided in the comments (except 

information deemed to be exempt from 

public disclosure). 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
81398 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 22, 2023 / Notices 

1All references to EPCA in this document refer 

to the statute as amended through the Energy Act 

of 2020, Public Law 116–260 (Dec. 27, 2020), which 

reflect the last statutory amendments that impact 

Parts A and A–1 of EPCA. 

2For editorial reasons, upon codification in the 

U.S. Code, Part C was redesignated as Part A–1. 

3The specific models for which the petition 

applies include UCA C-Series commercial indoor 

horizontal double-duct air conditioner models 

C***T***, H***T***, E***T***, B***T***, and 

BC***T***, with nominally rated capacities of 

72000, 96000, 120000, 144000 and 180000 Btu/h; 

C13-Series commercial indoor horizontal doubleduct air conditioner models C***H***, H***H***, 

E***H***, B***H***, and BC***H***, with 

nominally rated capacities of 72000, 96000 and 

120000 Btu/h; VertiCool Classic commercial indoor 

vertical double-duct air conditioner models 

VA***T***, VAR***T***, VARC***T***, 

BVA***T***, BCVA***T***, and EVA***T***, 

with nominally rated capacities of 72000, 96000, 

120000, 144000, 180000, 240000 and 300000 Btu/ 

h; and VertiCool Aurora commercial indoor vertical 

double-duct air conditioner models VA***H***, 

VAR***H***, VARC***H***, BVA***H***, 

BCVA***H***, and EVA***H***, with nominally 

rated capacities of 72000, 96000, 120000, 144000, 

180000, 240000 and 300000 Btu/h. These models 

were provided by UCA in the Appendix included 

in its November 19, 2018 petition. The petition is 

included at the end of this notice. 

4A notation in this form provides a reference for 

information that is in the docket for this test 

procedure waiver. This notation indicates that the 

statement preceding the reference is document 

number 1 in the docket and appears at page 2 of 

that document. 

Case Number 2023–004 

Denial of Interim Waiver 

I. Authority and Background 

The Energy Policy and Conservation 

Act, as amended (‘‘EPCA’’),1 authorizes 

the U.S. Department of Energy (‘‘DOE’’) 

to regulate the energy efficiency of 

several consumer products and certain 

industrial equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6291– 

6317) Title III, Part C of EPCA 2

established the Energy Conservation 

Program for Certain Industrial 

Equipment, which sets forth a variety of 

provisions designed to improve energy 

efficiency for certain types of industrial 

equipment. This equipment includes 

double-duct air conditioners and heat 

pumps, which are a subset of air-cooled 

commercial package air conditioning 

and heating equipment, the subject of 

this document. (42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(B)– 

(D)) 

The energy conservation program 

under EPCA consists essentially of four 

parts: (1) testing, (2) labeling, (3) Federal 

energy conservation standards, and (4) 

certification and enforcement 

procedures. Relevant provisions of 

EPCA include definitions (42 U.S.C. 

6311), test procedures (42 U.S.C. 6314), 

labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6315), 

energy conservation standards (42 

U.S.C. 6313), and the authority to 

require information and reports from 

manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6316). 

The Federal testing requirements 

consist of test procedures that 

manufacturers of covered equipment 

must use as the basis for: (1) certifying 

to DOE that their equipment complies 

with the applicable energy conservation 

standards adopted pursuant to EPCA (42 

U.S.C. 6316(b); 42 U.S.C. 6296), and (2) 

making representations about the 

efficiency of that equipment (42 U.S.C. 

6314(d)). Similarly, DOE uses these test 

procedures to determine whether the 

equipment complies with relevant 

standards promulgated under EPCA. 

Under 42 U.S.C. 6314, EPCA sets forth 

the criteria and procedures DOE is 

required to follow when prescribing or 

amending test procedures for covered 

equipment. EPCA requires that any test 

procedures prescribed or amended 

under this section must be reasonably 

designed to produce test results which 

reflect the energy efficiency, energy use, 

or estimated annual operating cost of 

covered equipment (or class thereof) 

during a representative average use 

cycle and requires that test procedures 

not be unduly burdensome to conduct. 

(42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2)) The test 

procedure for air-cooled commercial 

package air conditioning and heating 

equipment, including double-duct air 

conditioners and heat pumps, is 

contained in the Code of Federal 

Regulations (‘‘CFR’’) at 10 CFR part 431, 

subpart F, appendix A, Uniform Test 

Method for the Measurement of Energy 

Consumption of Air-Cooled Small 

(≥65,000 Btu/h), Large, and Very Large 

Commercial Package Air Conditioning 

and Heating Equipment (‘‘appendix A’’). 

Under 10 CFR 431.401, any interested 

person may submit a petition for waiver 

from DOE’s test procedure 

requirements. DOE will grant a waiver 

from the test procedure requirements if 

DOE determines either that the basic 

model(s) for which the waiver was 

requested contains a design 

characteristic that prevents testing of the 

basic model according to the prescribed 

test procedures, or that the prescribed 

test procedures evaluate the basic model 

in a manner so unrepresentative of its 

true energy consumption characteristics 

as to provide materially inaccurate 

comparative data. 10 CFR 431.401(f)(2). 

A petitioner must include in its petition 

any alternate test procedures known to 

the petitioner to evaluate the 

performance of the equipment type in a 

manner representative of the energy 

consumption characteristics of the basic 

model. 10 CFR 431.401(b)(1)(iii). DOE 

may grant the waiver subject to 

conditions, which may include 

adherence to alternate test procedures 

specified by DOE. 10 CFR 431.401(f)(2). 

As soon as practicable after the 

granting of any waiver, DOE will 

publish in the Federal Register a notice 

of proposed rulemaking to amend its 

regulations so as to eliminate any need 

for the continuation of such waiver. 10 

CFR 431.401(l). As soon thereafter as 

practicable, DOE will publish in the 

Federal Register a final rule to that 

effect. Id. 

The waiver process also provides that 

DOE will grant an interim waiver from 

the test procedure requirements if it 

appears likely that the petition for 

waiver will be granted and/or if DOE 

determines that it would be desirable for 

public policy reasons to grant 

immediate relief pending a 

determination on the petition for 

waiver. 10 CFR 431.401(e)(3). Within 

one year of issuance of an interim 

waiver, DOE will either: (i) publish in 

the Federal Register a determination on 

the petition for waiver; or (ii) publish in 

the Federal Register a new or amended 

test procedure that addresses the issues 

presented in the waiver. 10 CFR 

431.401(h)(1). 

If the interim waiver test procedure 

methodology is different than the 

decision and order test procedure 

methodology, certification reports to 

DOE required under 10 CFR 429.12 and 

any representations must be based on 

either of the two methodologies until 

180–360 days after the publication date 

of the decision and order, as specified 

by DOE in the decision and order. 

Thereafter, certification reports and any 

representations must be based on the 

decision and order test procedure 

methodology, unless otherwise 

specified by DOE. Once a manufacturer 

uses the decision and order test 

procedure methodology in a 

certification report or any 

representation, all subsequent 

certification reports and any 

representations must be made using the 

decision and order test procedure 

methodology while the waiver is valid. 

10 CFR 431.401(i)(1). When DOE 

amends the test procedure to address 

the issues presented in a waiver, the 

waiver or interim waiver will 

automatically terminate on the date on 

which use of that test procedure is 

required to demonstrate compliance. 10 

CFR 431.401(h)(3). 

II. UCA’s Petition for Waiver and 

Interim Waiver 

On November 19, 2018, DOE received 

from UCA a petition for waiver and 

interim waiver from the test procedure 

for commercial air conditioners and 

heat pumps set forth at 10 CFR part 431 

subpart F.3 (UCA, No. 1 at pp. 1–9) 4 The 

petition did not identify any of the 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 22, 2023 / Notices 81399 

5As referenced in footnote 4 of the petition, 

quoting 10 CFR 431.92, double-duct air conditioner 

or heat pump means air-cooled commercial package 

air conditioning and heating equipment that—(1) Is 

either a horizontal single package or split-system 

unit; or a vertical unit that consists of two 

components that may be shipped or installed either 

connected or split; (2) Is intended for indoor 

installation with ducting of outdoor air from the 

building exterior to and from the unit, as evidenced 

by the unit and/or all of its components being nonweatherized, including the absence of any marking 

(or listing) indicating compliance with UL 1995, 

‘‘Heating and Cooling Equipment,’’ or any other 

equivalent requirements for outdoor use; (3) (i) If it 

is a horizontal unit, a complete unit has a maximum 

height of 35 inches; (ii) If it is a vertical unit, a 

complete unit has a maximum depth of 35 inches; 

and (4) Has a rated cooling capacity greater than or 

equal to 65,000 Btu/h and up to 300,000 Btu/h. 

6ANSI/AHRI Standard 340/360–2007, 2007 

Standard for Performance Rating of Commercial 

and Industrial Unitary Air-Conditioning and Heat 

Pump Equipment, approved by ANSI on October 

27, 2011, and updated by addendum 1 in December 

2010 and addendum 2 in June 2011 (‘‘AHRI 340/ 

360–2007’’). Available online at: webstore.ansi.org. 

7ANSI/ARI/ISO Standard 13256–1:1998, Watersource heat pumps—Testing and rating for 

performance—Part 1: Water-to-air and brine-to-air 

heat pumps, ISO approved 1998. Available online 

at webstore.ansi.org/. 

information contained therein as 

confidential business information. 

In its petition, UCA stated that the 

current DOE test procedure does not 

address the unique characteristics of 

UCA’s double-duct technology. (UCA, 

No. 1 at p. 1) UCA noted that the basic 

models for which it is seeking a waiver 

use a double-duct configuration, which 

do not have an outdoor section and 

instead have ducting to an outside wall 

or window for the supply and discharge 

of outside air to and from the indoor 

condenser. (UCA, No. 1 at p. 3) UCA 

asserts in its waiver petition that the 

energy characteristics of these doubleduct air conditioners 5 are different from 

equipment with an outdoor section. (Id. 

at p. 3) UCA additionally states that the 

Federal test procedure does not account 

for this technology, and that the 

standard AHRI 340/360–2007,6

incorporated by reference at the time of 

petition, was developed to test products 

with both outdoor and indoor sections 

(and UCA noted the references to 

‘‘indoor section’’ and ‘‘outdoor section’’ 

throughout that standard). UCA asserted 

that because double-duct units do not 

have an outdoor section, they cannot be 

tested by the DOE test procedure and a 

waiver is necessary. (Id. at pp. 4–5) 

Further, UCA expressed that doubleduct air conditioners have higher 

condenser fan motor horsepower to 

move condenser air against significant 

air pressure (0.5–1.5 in H2O) and 

smaller but deeper condenser coils, 

which creates a higher pressure drop 

than that of an outdoor condensing 

section, resulting in more energy 

consumption of the condenser fan 

motor, and claimed that both of these 

characteristics were not accounted for in 

the test procedure. (Id.) 

UCA also requested an interim waiver 

from the existing DOE test procedure, 

asserting that the petition for waiver is 

likely to be granted because the DOE 

test procedure does not address the 

unique characteristics of the requested 

basic models. (Id. at p. 7) UCA stated 

that without the granting of an interim 

waiver, UCA would suffer economic 

hardship and be at a competitive 

disadvantage if it must wait to rate these 

basic models pending a determination 

on petition for waiver. (Id.) UCA also 

claimed that the petition was supported 

by sound public policy because the 

products offered property owners and 

developers the ability to install new 

efficient central air conditioning in old 

buildings. (Id.) 

III. Requested Alternate Test Procedure 

EPCA requires that manufacturers use 

DOE test procedures when making 

representations about the energy 

consumption and energy consumption 

costs of covered equipment. (42 U.S.C. 

6314(d)) Consistency is important when 

making representations about the energy 

efficiency of covered equipment, 

including when demonstrating 

compliance with applicable DOE energy 

conservation standards. Pursuant to 10 

CFR 431.401, and after consideration of 

public comments on the petition, DOE 

may establish in a subsequent Decision 

and Order an alternate test procedure 

for the basic models addressed by the 

Interim Waiver Order. 

UCA seeks to use an alternate test 

procedure to test and rate specific 

double-duct commercial unitary air 

conditioners (‘‘CUAC’’) basic models. 

As an alternate test procedure, UCA 

proposed to test the specified basic 

models by ducting the condenser fan 

and imposing external static pressure 

(‘‘ESP’’) per the manufacturer’s 

instructions. Then, UCA proposed to 

adjust the input power of the condenser 

fan motor by subtracting ‘‘added’’ 

condenser motor horsepower imposed 

by the additional ESP, as presented 

below: 

Where: 

ffa is the fan power adjustment, in watts; 

h is 0.3 × 103 by convention; 

Dp is the measured ESP difference, in 

pascals; and 

q is the nominal airflow rate, in litres per 

second. 

(UCA, No. 1 at pp. 6–7) 

This formula is drawn from section 

4.1.3.2 of ANSI/ARI/ASHRAE ISO 

Standard 13256–1:1998 7 and is used in 

that test standard to adjust for the motor 

horsepower expended in moving air 

through the indoor ducts. UCA 

proposed that this formula be used to 

adjust the condenser motor horsepower 

for double-duct units tested at non-zero 

condenser ESP to account only for the 

motor horsepower utilized in 

overcoming internal resistance of the 

unit. (Id.) 

In the course of reviewing UCA’s 

petition, DOE requested additional data 

from UCA to support their proposed 

alternate test procedure. UCA provided 

confidential data to DOE that included 

condenser fan power values at various 

ESPs and adjusted condenser fan power 

based on their suggested approach for 

several basic models offered. 

IV. Denial of Interim Waiver 

DOE has reviewed UCA’s application 

for an interim waiver, the alternate test 

procedure requested by UCA, publicly 

available specification sheets and 

installation manuals relevant to these 

basic models, and additional 

confidential data from UCA regarding 

its petition. In submitting a petition for 

waiver, a petitioner must demonstrate 

that the subject basic model contains 

one or more design characteristics that 

prevent testing of the basic model 

according to the prescribed test 

procedures or cause the prescribed test 

procedures to evaluate the basic model 

in a manner so unrepresentative of its 

true energy and/or water consumption 

characteristics as to provide materially 

inaccurate comparative data. 10 CFR 

431.401(a)(1); 10 CFR 431.401(f)(2). In 

determining whether to grant a request 

for an interim waiver, DOE considers 

whether: (1) it appears likely that the 

petition for waiver will be granted; and/ 

or (2) it would be desirable for public 

policy reasons to grant immediate relief 

pending a determination on the petition 

for waiver. 10 CFR 431.401(e)(=3). 

As described, UCA claims in its 

petition for a waiver that the subject 

basic models contain a design 

characteristic (i.e., no outdoor section) 

that prevents testing according to the 

DOE test procedure. In response to this 

claim, DOE notes that the current DOE 

test procedure for double-duct air 

conditioners and heat pumps is the 

same as that for single-duct commercial 

air conditioning and heating equipment 

at appendix A. In a direct final rule 

published on January 15, 2016 (‘‘January 

2016 Direct Final Rule’’), DOE clarified 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICESEN22NO23.256</GPH>
81400 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 22, 2023 / Notices 

8ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 37–2009, Methods of 

Testing for Rating Electrically Driven Unitary AirConditioning and Heat Pump Equipment (‘‘ANSI/ 

ASHRAE 37–2009’’). Available at online at: 

webstore.ansi.org. 

9ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 37–2005, Methods of 

Testing for Rating Electrically Driven Unitary AirConditioning and Heat Pump Equipment (‘‘ANSI/ 

ASHRAE 37–2005’’). Available at online at: 

webstore.ansi.org. 

10 DOE notes that it recently published a notice 

of proposed rulemaking (‘‘NOPR’’) regarding the 

test procedures for commercial unitary air 

conditioners and heat pumps, including doubleduct air conditioners and heat pumps. 88 FR 56392 

(August 17, 2023). This NOPR proposes a new test 

procedure that specifies the new metrics integrated 

ventilation, economizer, and cooling (‘‘IVEC’’) and 

integrated ventilation and heating efficiency 

(‘‘IVHE’’). These proposed new metrics would 

change the condenser ESP requirement from zero to 

0.5 in. H2O for double-duct air conditioners and 

heat pumps. Were DOE to adopt the test procedures 

for IVEC and IVHE for double-duct systems as 

proposed, testing to those metrics would not be 

required until DOE adopts energy conservation 

standards for double-duct systems in terms of those 

metrics. 

11Condenser fan motor performance at condenser 

ESPs as low as zero is listed in the product 

datasheets for the Carrier Omnizone and Skypeak 

D-series double-duct model lines. These examples 

can be found on the docket at regulations.gov/EERE2023-BT-WAV-0016. 

that double-duct air conditioners are 

tested and rated under the same test 

conditions as single-duct air 

conditioners, without any ducting 

connected to, or an external static 

pressure applied on, the condenser side. 

81 FR 2420, 2445. 

The DOE test procedure at appendix 

A references certain sections of both 

AHRI 340/360–2007 and ANSI/ 

ASHRAE 37–2009.8 As mentioned by 

UCA, Table 3 of AHRI 340/360–2007 

uses the term ‘‘outdoor section’’ in a 

header for columns providing test 

conditions. This term refers to the 

section of an air conditioning or heat 

pump system that rejects or absorbs heat 

(during mechanical cooling or heating 

mode, respectively), and does not apply 

only to units installed outdoors. For an 

air-cooled air conditioner, the test 

conditions under the heading ‘‘indoor 

section’’ are used for indoor air (i.e., the 

evaporator airstream) and the test 

conditions under the heating ‘‘outdoor 

section’’ are used for outdoor air (i.e., 

the condenser airstream), regardless of 

whether the components are intended 

for indoor or outdoor installation. DOE 

notes that condenser temperature 

conditions for testing water-cooled 

commercial unitary air conditioners 

(‘‘WCUACs’’) are also specified under 

the ‘‘outdoor section’’ header, but 

similar to double-duct systems, both the 

indoor and outdoor sections of 

WCUACs are generally intended for 

indoor installation. Similarly, DOE 

notes that in rooftop air-cooled and 

evaporatively-cooled commercial 

unitary air conditioners, the ‘‘indoor 

section’’ (i.e., the section conditioning 

indoor air) is located outdoors. Further, 

DOE notes that both ANSI/ASHRAE 37– 

2009 (which is referenced in the current 

DOE test procedure at appendix A) and 

ANSI/ASHRAE 37–2005 9 (which is 

referenced by AHRI 340/360–2007) use 

the term ‘‘outdoor side’’ to refer to the 

condensing section of an airconditioning system. Specifically, both 

versions of ASHRAE Standard 37 define 

‘‘outdoor side’’ as ‘‘that part of the 

system that rejects heat to or absorbs 

heat from a source external to the indoor 

airstream.’’ This definition does not 

specify or require that the outdoor side 

is located outdoors. Therefore, DOE has 

tentatively determined that UCA has not 

demonstrated that the basic models 

subject to the petition contain a design 

characteristic that prevents testing of the 

basic model according to the prescribed 

test procedures because the test 

procedure applies to double-duct 

systems regardless of intended 

installation location. 

DOE also evaluated UCA’s petition to 

determine whether the prescribed test 

procedures evaluate the subject basic 

models in a manner so unrepresentative 

of their true energy consumption 

characteristics as to provide materially 

inaccurate comparative data. Relevant to 

this evaluation, DOE notes that the 

current energy conservation standards 

for double-duct air conditioners are 

defined in terms of the energy efficiency 

ratio (‘‘EER’’) metric, which as defined 

by the test procedure at appendix A, 

represent the performance of an air 

conditioner when operating at zero 

condenser ESP. DOE further notes that 

the rating conditions associated with a 

metric are integral to the metric— 

performance measured at a different 

condenser ESP, for example, would not 

represent an EER value (as that metric 

is currently defined in appendix A) and 

would therefore not provide 

comparative data with which to 

compare to other equipment on the 

market subject to the same EER 

standard. As such, DOE evaluated 

UCA’s suggested alternate test 

procedure to determine whether it 

would provide a more representative 

measure of EER (i.e., a more 

representative measure of performance 

at zero condenser ESP) compared to the 

current Federal test procedure.10 DOE 

reviewed UCA’s proposed alternate test 

procedure, including the additional 

confidential data provided to DOE by 

UCA, within this framework. 

UCA’s suggested alternate test 

procedure specifies testing at a 

manufacturer-specified non-zero 

condenser ESP and then adjusting the 

measured condenser fan power down to 

reflect operation at zero condenser ESP. 

This adjustment of the measured 

condenser fan power requires an 

assumption regarding the efficiency 

value of the condenser fan. In its 

petition, UCA requested to use an 

assumed fan efficiency value of 0.3. 

Based on its review, DOE has tentatively 

concluded that the fan efficiency value 

of 0.3 suggested by UCA is 

unrepresentatively low. In particular, 

confidential data provided by UCA 

suggests that for some of the models 

subject to UCA’s petition for waiver, 

assuming a fan efficiency value of 0.3 

would result in the fan power 

adjustment exceeding the actual fan 

power consumed at zero condenser ESP, 

thus resulting in negative condenser fan 

power being reflected in the metric. 

As a result, the test procedure 

suggested by UCA would underrepresent the condenser fan power that 

would be expected at zero condenser 

ESP because it subtracts an 

unrepresentatively high adjustment 

factor from the measured value of 

condenser fan power. This would result 

in EER ratings of performance at zero 

condenser ESP that are 

unrepresentatively high and therefore 

not comparable to EER ratings 

developed by other manufacturers of 

double-duct systems based on testing at 

zero condenser ESP (i.e., ratings 

developed without any adjustment to 

measured condenser fan power). 

Therefore, DOE has tentatively 

concluded that the alternate test 

procedure suggested in UCA’s petition 

for waiver would not evaluate the 

performance of the subject models in a 

manner more representative of the 

energy consumption characteristics of 

each basic model, within the context of 

representing EER performance at zero 

condenser ESP. 

Additionally, DOE notes that multiple 

other manufacturers of double-duct 

systems list condenser fan motor 

performance at ESPs as low as zero in 

their product literature, demonstrating 

that there is nothing inherent to doubleduct systems that prevents representing 

EER performance at zero condenser ESP 

in accordance with the current Federal 

test procedure.11 Therefore, DOE has 

tentatively concluded that UCA has not 

demonstrated that the basic models 

subject to the petition contain a design 

characteristic that prevents testing of 

those models according to the 

prescribed test procedure or that the 

prescribed test procedure evaluates the 

basic model in a manner so 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 22, 2023 / Notices 81401 

12See 10 CFR 431.401 (Petitions for waiver and 

interim waiver). 

13 Id. § 431.96. 

14To the best of UCA’s knowledge, AboveAir 

Technologies, Skymark, Task Applied Products, 

Skil-aire, and Compu-Aire are the only 

manufacturers of other commercial air conditioning 

basic models distributed in commerce in the United 

States to incorporate design characteristic(s) similar 

to those found in the models that are the subject 

of this petition. To the best of UCA’s knowledge, 

AirPac, Carrier, and Addison used to produce 

similar products but no longer do. 15 Double-duct air conditioner or heat pump 

means air-cooled commercial package air 

conditioning and heating equipment that— 

(1) Is either a horizontal single package or splitsystem unit; or a vertical unit that consists of two 

components that may be shipped or installed either 

connected or split; 

(2) Is intended for indoor installation with 

ducting of outdoor air from the building exterior to 

and from the unit, as evidenced by the unit and/ 

or all of its components being non-weatherized, 

including the absence of any marking (or listing) 

indicating compliance with UL 1995, ‘‘Heating and 

Cooling Equipment,’’ or any other equivalent 

requirements for outdoor use; 

(3)(i) If it is a horizontal unit, a complete unit has 

a maximum height of 35 inches; (ii) If it is a vertical 

unit, a complete unit has a maximum depth of 35 

inches; and 

Continued 

unrepresentative of its true energy 

consumption characteristics as to 

provide materially inaccurate 

comparative data with other doubleduct systems. Absent such data, DOE is 

unable to conclude that UCA’s petition 

for waiver will likely be granted. 

Further, DOE does not find that 

public policy reasons weigh in favor of 

granting immediate relief pending a 

determination on the petition for 

waiver. As previously indicated, 

multiple other manufacturers certify to 

DOE EER ratings for double-duct 

systems that are compliant with the 

currently applicable EER standards and 

are based on the current Federal test 

procedure, which reflects performance 

at zero condenser ESP. These models 

demonstrate that commercial consumers 

currently have multiple options for 

installing double-duct systems; 

therefore, DOE does not find granting 

immediate relief to UCA is necessary. 

For these reasons, DOE is denying 

UCA’s petition for interim waiver and 

requesting comment. 

DOE makes decisions on waivers and 

interim waivers for only those basic 

models specifically set out in the 

petition, not future models that may be 

manufactured by the petitioner. UCA 

may submit a new or amended petition 

for waiver and request for grant of 

interim waiver, as appropriate, for 

additional basic models of double-duct 

air conditioners and heat pumps. 

While DOE declines to approve the 

use of UCA’s suggested alternate test 

procedure in an interim waiver at this 

time, DOE may consider including an 

alternate procedure in a subsequent 

Decision and Order. DOE solicits 

comments from interested parties on all 

aspects of the petition, including any 

alternate test procedure. 

V. Signing Authority 

This document of the Department of 

Energy was signed on November 17, 

2023, by Jeffrey Marootian, Principal 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy 

Efficiency and Renewable Energy, 

pursuant to delegated authority from the 

Secretary of Energy. That document 

with the original signature and date is 

maintained by DOE. For administrative 

purposes only, and in compliance with 

requirements of the Office of the Federal 

Register, the undersigned DOE Federal 

Register Liaison Officer has been 

authorized to sign and submit the 

document in electronic format for 

publication, as an official document of 

the Department of Energy. This 

administrative process in no way alters 

the legal effect of this document upon 

publication in the Federal Register. 

Signed in Washington, DC, on November 

17, 2023. 

Treena V. Garrett, 

Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. 

Department of Energy. 

Before the United States Department of 

Energy, Washington, DC 20585 

In the Matter of: Energy Efficiency 

Program: Test Procedure for 

Commercial Air Conditioners and Heat 

Pumps 

Petition of United CoolAir Corporation 

for Waiver and Application for Interim 

Waiver of Test Procedure for 

Commercial Air Conditioners and Heat 

Pumps 

United CoolAir Corporation (UCA) 

respectfully submits this Petition for 

Waiver and Application for Interim 

Waiver 12 from DOE’s test procedure for 

commercial air conditioners and heat 

pumps. UCA seeks a waiver because the 

current DOE test procedure 13 does not 

address the unique characteristics of 

UCA’s double-duct technology. 

Therefore, UCA’s double-duct models 

cannot be tested under the DOE test 

procedure. UCA also requests expedited 

treatment of the Petition and 

Application. 

I. UCA 

Since 1988, UCA has been a small, 

family-owned and operated American 

company. It is a specialty manufacturer 

of double-duct commercial air 

conditioners and other air conditioning 

products. It is located at 491 E Princess 

Street, York, PA 17403 (tel. 717–843– 

4311; https://unitedcoolair.com). UCA’s 

start came with the creation of air 

conditioning units built to meet 

extremely high standards for the U.S. 

Military. Since then, UCA has evolved 

into a full service provider of unique 

and often complex HVAC systems. 

II. Double-Duct Commercial Air 

Conditioners 

UCA specializes in double-duct 

commercial air conditioners. They are 

used to provide efficient central air 

conditioning in older buildings that are 

being renovated or updated and where 

there is only limited space available. 

These systems fit entirely inside a 

building and thus are dramatically 

different from the bulky products that 

have outdoor as well as indoor 

components. Their modular sections 

can be taken through standard doors or 

smaller openings, around corners, down 

hallways, and placed into service 

elevators. Indoor installation (above the 

ceiling and crawl spaces) minimizes 

expensive handling, rigging, or permits, 

and avoids the need for building 

modifications. It also eliminates 

expensive repairs and replacements due 

to weather damage, theft, and 

vandalism. All of these products are 

built-to-order and adapted to the 

different requirements of unique 

buildings, while providing the latest in 

control and design technologies. 

III. Basic Models for Which a Waiver Is 

Requested 

The basic models for which a waiver 

is requested are set forth in the 

Appendix. They are double-duct 

commercial air conditioners distributed 

in commerce under the UCA brand 

name. The models are within the 

following series: C-Series; C13-Series; 

VertiCool Classic; and VertiCool 

Aurora.14 The C-Series and C13-Series 

are indoor horizontal air conditioners. 

The VertiCool Classic and VertiCool 

Aurora series have vertical cabinets that 

fit neatly along walls, in closet spaces, 

or in mechanical rooms. 

IV. Need for the Requested Waiver 

The UCA double-duct models are 

specialized, niche products intended for 

indoor installation—almost entirely in 

old buildings. They are ideal for 

replacement or renovation applications, 

where space constraints prohibit rooftop or other types of products. They do 

not have an outdoor section, and their 

energy characteristics are different from 

products that have one. They have 

ducting to an outside wall or window 

for the supply and discharge of outside 

air to and from the indoor condenser.15


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
81402 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 22, 2023 / Notices 

(4) Has a rated cooling capacity greater than or 

equal to 65,000 Btu/h and up to 300,000 Btu/h. 

10 CFR 431.92. 

16Energy Conservation Program for Certain 

Industrial Equipment: Energy Conservation 

Standards for Small, Large, and Very Large AirCooled Commercial Package Air Condition and 

Heating Equipment and Commercial Warm-Air 

Furnaces, 81 FR 2420, 2446 (Jan. 15, 2016). 

17 10 CFR 431.96. 

18ANSI/AHRI Standard 340/360–2007 (formerly 

ARI Standard 340/360–2007), 2007 Standard for 

Performance Rating of Commercial and Industrial 

Unitary Air-Conditioning and Heat Pump 

Equipment. 

19AHRI 340/360–2007 § 6.1. 

20 Id. § 6.1, Table 3. 

21 Id. § 6.1.3. 

22Energy Conservation Program for Certain 

Industrial Equipment: Energy Conservation 

Standards for Small, Large, and Very Large AirCooled Commercial Package Air Condition and 

Heating Equipment and Commercial Warm-Air 

Furnaces, 81 FR at 2446. 

23 10 CFR 431.401(f)(2). 

24ANSI/ARI/ASHRAE ISO Standard 13256– 

1:1998. 

25AHRI 340/360–2007, App. A §§ A1, A1.7. 

26 10 CFR part 431, subpart F. 

DOE’s test procedure does not account 

for this technology and is therefore 

inapplicable for these products. 

DOE has recognized the useful, 

unique nature of double-duct products 

such as UCA’s. 

DOE agrees that these [double-duct] 

units have features that justify 

establishing separate equipment classes 

for them. Double-duct units, as 

evidenced by several commenters, offer 

a unique utility that may otherwise 

become unavailable if these units were 

subjected to the more rigorous standards 

required by this direct final rule for 

other CUAC and CUHP equipment. DOE 

notes that double-duct units, which are 

installed within the building envelope 

and use ductwork to transfer outdoor air 

to and from the outdoor unit, would 

have added challenges in meeting more 

stringent energy conservation standards 

due to space constraints and added 

condenser fan power.16

Even though DOE has agreed that 

double-duct products are unique and 

useful, its test procedure has not yet 

been amended to address and take into 

account their unique characteristics. 

Rather, the test procedure is silent on 

these products. 

Instead, DOE’s test procedure 17

incorporates AHRI Standard 340/360– 

2007,18 which was developed to test 

units that have both outdoor and indoor 

sections. Specifically, AHRI 340/360- 

2007 requires: ‘‘Standard Ratings shall 

be established at the Standard Rating 

Conditions specified in Table 3.’’ 19

Table 3, ‘‘Conditions for Standard 

Rating and Operating Tests,’’ mandates 

conditions for an ‘‘Indoor Section’’ and 

‘‘Outdoor Section.’’ 20 ‘‘Table 3 indicates 

the tests and test conditions which are 

required to determine values of standard 

capacity and ratings and values of 

energy efficiency.’’ 21 Therefore, doubleduct units, which do not have an 

outdoor section, simply cannot be tested 

by the DOE test procedure. Moreover, 

even though DOE acknowledges ‘‘added 

condenser fan power’’ as a 

distinguishing characteristic of doubleduct products,22 the DOE test procedure 

does not account for the higher 

condenser motor horsepower of these 

products. Nor does it account for the 

smaller but deeper coil required for the 

double-duct systems to move air 

through the duct and discharge it to the 

outside. 

An outdoor condenser/condensing 

unit utilizes a propeller fan (light duty) 

to move large volumes of air against low 

air pressure (0′′ External Static 

Pressure—ESP) and utilizes a relatively 

small motor. In addition, since space 

(footprint/volume/height) and air path 

(perimeter inlet and top discharge) 

through the outdoor coil of such models 

are not an issue, outdoor condensing 

sections typically utilize 1 or 2 row 

deep ‘U/L’ shaped condenser coils to 

maximize heat transfer and minimize air 

pressure drop. 

In contrast, a double-duct unit’s 

condenser fan (heavy duty—typically 

centrifugal and belt driven) has to be 

designed to move condenser air against 

significant air pressure (0.5–1.5′′ ESP), 

and it utilizes a relatively larger motor. 

Double-duct models also have smaller 

and deeper condenser coils than models 

with outdoor condensing sections, since 

cabinet space is much smaller than an 

outdoor condensing section. An indoor 

condenser coil is typically 3–4 rows 

deep, with higher pressure drop than an 

outdoor condensing section. Such 

higher pressure drop consumes more 

energy than that associated with an 

outdoor condensing section. 

Since the DOE test procedure does not 

address and account for double-duct 

technology, a waiver is necessary. DOE’s 

rules provide that DOE ‘‘will grant a 

waiver from the test procedure 

requirements’’ in such circumstances.23

Accordingly, UCA urges that a waiver 

be granted for the basic models in the 

Appendix that will allow use of the 

alternate test procedure discussed 

below. Unlike the current test 

procedure, the alternate test procedure 

is designed to properly take into 

account UCA double-duct technology. 

The waiver should continue until DOE 

adopts an applicable amended test 

procedure. 

V. Proposed Alternate Test Procedure 

UCA proposes the following alternate 

test procedure to evaluate the 

performance of the basic models listed 

in the Appendix. It is the same as the 

existing DOE test procedure for 

commercial air conditioners, except that 

it takes double-duct technology into 

account. It does so by utilizing a 

formula drawn from Section 4.1.3.2 of 

ANSI/ARI/ASHRAE ISO Standard 

13256- 1:1998 24 to adjust for the motor 

horsepower expended in moving air 

through the indoor ducts. It bears noting 

that AHRI 340/360–2007 provides that 

ISO 13256–1:1998 is among those 

publications ‘‘essential to the formation 

and implementation of the standard 

[340/360]. All references in this 

appendix [to 340/360] are considered as 

part of the standard.’’ 25

The formula in Section 4.1.3.2 of ISO 

13256–1 normalizes the double-duct 

condenser motor horsepower by 

adjusting the condenser motor 

horsepower to account only for the 

motor horsepower utilized in 

overcoming internal resistance of the 

unit. 

The waiver should provide that UCA 

shall be required to test the performance 

of the basic models listed in the 

Appendix hereto according to the test 

procedure for commercial air 

conditioners and heat pumps in 10 CFR 

part 431, subpart F (including AHRI 

340/360–2007), except as follows: 

1. Duct the condenser fan, and impose 

ESP, each as per manufacturer’s 

instructions. 

2. Adjust kW input by subtracting 

‘‘added’’ condenser motor horsepower 

utilizing the following formula. (No 

changes to unit cooling capacity or 

heating capacity is required.) 

Where: 

jfa is the fan power adjustment, in watts; 

h is 0.3 × 103 by convention; 

DP is the measured ESP difference, in 

pascals; and 

q is the nominal airflow rate, in litres per 

second. 

VI. Application for Interim Waiver 

UCA also hereby applies for an 

interim waiver of the applicable test 

procedure requirements for the UCA 

basic models set forth in the Appendix. 

UCA meets the criteria for an interim 

waiver. UCA’s Petition for Waiver is 

likely to be granted, because the current 

DOE test procedure 26 clearly does not 

address the unique characteristics of 

these UCA basic models. Without 

waiver relief, UCA would be subject to 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICESEN22NO23.257</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 22, 2023 / Notices 81403 

1 18 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) § 157.9. 

2 18 CFR 157.10(a)(4) 

3 18 CFR 385.211 

requirements that are inappropriate for 

these products. Additionally, UCA will 

suffer economic hardship and be at a 

competitive disadvantage if it must wait 

to rate these basic models pending a 

determination on the petition for 

waiver. DOE approval of UCA’s interim 

waiver application is also supported by 

sound public policy. As noted above, 

these products offer property owners 

and developers the ability to install new 

efficient central air conditioning in old 

buildings. 

VII. Conclusion 

UCA respectfully requests that DOE 

grant its Petition for Waiver of the 

applicable test procedure for specified 

basic models, and also grant its 

Application for Interim Waiver. UCA 

also requests expedited treatment of the 

Petition and Application. 

Respectfully submitted, 

/s/ 

Scott Blake Harris John Hodges, Harris, 

Wiltshire & Grannis LLP, 1919 M Street 

NW Washington, DC 20036, (202) 730– 

1313 

November 19, 2018 

Appendix 

The waiver and interim waiver requested 

herein should apply to testing and rating of 

the following basic models that are 

manufactured by UCA: 

C-Series commercial indoor horizontal 

double-duct air conditioner models C...T..., 

H...T..., E...T..., B...T..., and BC...T..., with 

nominally rated capacities of 72000, 96000, 

120000, 144000 and 180000 Btu/h. 

C13-Series commercial indoor horizontal 

double-duct air conditioner models C...H..., 

H...H..., E...H..., B...H..., and BC...H..., with 

nominally rated capacities of 72000, 96000 

and 120000 Btu/h. 

VertiCool Classic commercial indoor 

vertical double-duct air conditioner models 

VA...T..., VAR...T..., VARC...T..., BVA...T..., 

BCVA...T..., and EVA...T..., with nominally 

rated capacities of 72000, 96000, 120000, 

144000, 180000, 240000 and 300000 Btu/h. 

VertiCool Aurora commercial indoor 

vertical double-duct air conditioner models 

VA...H..., VAR...H..., VARC...H..., BVA...H..., 

BCVA...H..., and EVA...H..., with nominally 

rated capacities of 72000, 96000, 120000, 

144000, 180000, 240000 and 300000 Btu/h. 

[FR Doc. 2023–25872 Filed 11–21–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

[Docket No. CP24–14–000] 

Total Peaking Services, LLC; Notice of 

Amendment of Authorization and 

Establishing Intervention Deadline 

Take notice that on November 6, 2023 

Total Peaking Services, LLC (TPS), 775 

Oronoque Road, Milford, CT 06460, 

filed an application under section 7(b) 

of the Natural Gas Act (NGA), and Part 

157 of the Commission’s regulations 

requesting authorization to abandon by 

sale to its affiliate, the Southern 

Connecticut Gas Company (SCG), its 

liquefied natural gas (LNG) storage tank 

and associated liquefaction and 

revaporization facilities located in 

Milford, Connecticut (Milford Facility). 

TPS also requests authorization to 

cancel its FERC Gas Tariff in its entirety. 

Post-abandonment, the Milford Facility 

will be operated by SCG, the sole 

existing customer for the Milford 

Facility’s output, and will remain in 

service under State of Connecticut 

jurisdiction. TPS states that the 

proposed abandonment by sale will not 

harm existing or prospective shippers 

and will not have any effect on the 

environment, all as more fully set forth 

in the application which is on file with 

the Commission and open for public 

inspection. 

In addition to publishing the full text 

of this document in the Federal 

Register, the Commission provides all 

interested persons an opportunity to 

view and/or print the contents of this 

document via the internet through the 

Commission’s Home Page 

(www.ferc.gov) using the ‘‘eLibrary’’ 

link. Enter the docket number excluding 

the last three digits in the docket 

number field to access the document. At 

this time, the Commission has 

suspended access to the Commission’s 

Public Reference Room. For assistance, 

contact the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission at FercOnlineSupport@

ferc.gov or call toll-free, (886) 208–3676 

or TTY (202) 502–8659. 

Any questions regarding the proposed 

project should be directed to Danielle 

Mechling, Networks FERC Legal 

Director, Avangrid (UIL), 180 Marsh Hill 

Road, Orange, CT 06477, by phone at 

(203) 836–7464 or by email at 

Danielle.mechling@avangrid.com. 

Pursuant to Section 157.9 of the 

Commission’s Rules of Practice and 

Procedure,1 within 90 days of this 

Notice the Commission staff will either: 

complete its environmental review and 

place it into the Commission’s public 

record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or 

issue a Notice of Schedule for 

Environmental Review. If a Notice of 

Schedule for Environmental Review is 

issued, it will indicate, among other 

milestones, the anticipated date for the 

Commission staff’s issuance of the final 

environmental impact statement (FEIS) 

or environmental assessment (EA) for 

this proposal. The filing of an EA in the 

Commission’s public record for this 

proceeding or the issuance of a Notice 

of Schedule for Environmental Review 

will serve to notify federal and state 

agencies of the timing for the 

completion of all necessary reviews, and 

the subsequent need to complete all 

federal authorizations within 90 days of 

the date of issuance of the Commission 

staff’s FEIS or EA. 

Public Participation 

There are three ways to become 

involved in the Commission’s review of 

this project: you can file comments on 

the project, you can protest the filing, 

and you can file a motion to intervene 

in the proceeding. There is no fee or 

cost for filing comments or intervening. 

The deadline for filing a motion to 

intervene is 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on 

December 6, 2023. How to file protests, 

motions to intervene, and comments is 

explained below. 

The Commission’s Office of Public 

Participation (OPP) supports meaningful 

public engagement and participation in 

Commission proceedings. OPP can help 

members of the public, including 

landowners, environmental justice 

communities, Tribal members and 

others, access publicly available 

information and navigate Commission 

processes. For public inquiries and 

assistance with making filings such as 

interventions, comments, or requests for 

rehearing, the public is encouraged to 

contact OPP at (202) 502–6595 or OPP@

ferc.gov. 

Comments 

Any person wishing to comment on 

the project may do so. Comments may 

include statements of support or 

objections, to the project as a whole or 

specific aspects of the project. The more 

specific your comments, the more useful 

they will be. 

Protests 

Pursuant to sections 157.10(a)(4) 2 and 

385.211 3 of the Commission’s 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES