1 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

The Parker Ranch installation in Hawaii

BUILDING TECHNOLOGIES PROGRAM

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) Public 

Meeting on Energy Conservation Standards 

and Test Procedures for Certain Equipment in 

ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010

Mohammed Khan

Department of Energy

Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy

Mohammed.Khan@ee.doe.gov

February 14, 2012
2 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• Introductions

• Role of the Facilitator

• Ground Rules (norms)

– Listen as an ally

– Use short, succinct statements/keep to the point

– Hold sidebar conversations outside the room

– Focus on issues, not personalities

– One person speaks at a time (raise hand to be recognized; state your 

name for the record)

– Set cell phones to silent/vibrate

• Housekeeping Items

Welcome and Introductions
3 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

Purpose of the Public Meeting

• Purpose

– To invite comment on proposed energy conservation standard levels; 

– To present methodologies and characterize results of the rulemaking analyses;

– To discuss specific issues related to each analysis;

– To seek input from interested parties on methodologies, assumptions, data 

sources, and results from the analyses; and

– To describe next steps in the standards and test procedure rulemakings.

• Comments from Participants

– Participants are invited to provide summary comments or statements and 

raise additional issues for discussion. 

– The NOPR was published in the Federal Register on January 17, 2012 (77 FR 

2356), and the NOPR comment period closes Monday, April 2, 2012.
4 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

Request For Comment

Issue box numbering corresponds to the list of issues published at the end of the 

NOPR, available at: 

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/commercial/ashrae_Equipments_docs

_meeting.html

Issue Box: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) welcomes comments, 

data, and information concerning its NOPR for American Society of 

Heating, Refrigeration, and Air-conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) 

equipment. Issues that correspond to those raised in the DOE’s 

published material will be numbered in accordance with that material. 

Whether invited by an issue box or not, comments are welcome on any 

part of DOE’s analysis.

(Issue #)
5 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• In all correspondence, include all of the following:

– Energy Conservation Standards for ASHRAE Equipment

– Docket Number: EERE-2011-BT-STD-0029

– Regulatory Identification Number (RIN):1904-AC47

• Contact Information

 Comment period closes: Monday, April 2, 2012

Postal Mail: 

Ms. Brenda Edwards

U.S. Department of Energy

Building Technologies Program

Mailstop EE-2J

1000 Independence Avenue, S.W.

Washington, DC 20585-0121

Courier: 

Ms. Brenda Edwards

U.S. Department of Energy

Building Technologies Program

950 L’Enfant Plaza, S.W., 6th Floor

Washington, DC 20024 

Telephone: (202) 586-2945

DOE Seeks Comments on its 

Proposal

Email: ASHRAE90.1-2011-STD-0029@ee.doe.gov
6 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

Public Meeting Agenda

Markups Analysis; Energy Use Analysis; Life-Cycle 

Cost and Payback Period Analysis

Shipments Analysis; National Impact Analysis; Utility 

Impact and Emissions Impact Analysis

Certification, Compliance & Enforcement

4

5

6

Test Procedures

2

Market Assessment and Engineering Analysis

3

1 Introduction and Overview

Determination of Scope

7

8 Closing Remarks
7 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• The Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) directs DOE to 

consider amending the existing Federal energy conservation 

standard for each type of equipment listed at 42 U.S.C. 

6313(a)(6)(A)(i), each time ASHRAE Standard 90.1 is amended 

with respect to such equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)-(B))

• For each type of equipment, EPCA directs that if ASHRAE 

Standard 90.1 is amended, DOE must review and adopt 

amended standards at the new efficiency level in ASHRAE 

Standard 90.1, unless clear and convincing evidence supports 

a determination that adoption of a more stringent efficiency 

level would:

– Produce significant additional energy savings;

– Be technologically feasible; and

– Be economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii))

Introduction and Overview

Statutory Authority
8 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• Opening Remarks

– At this time, DOE welcomes opening remarks from interested parties 

on the NOPR for certain ASHRAE equipment

• Comments from Participants

– Participants are invited to provide summary comments or statements;

– Participants are invited to raise additional issues for discussion today; 

and

– Participants are invited to submit comments during the NOPR 

comment period, which is open through April 2, 2012

Introduction and Overview

Opening Remarks
9 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

Public Meeting Agenda

Markups Analysis; Energy Use Analysis; Life-Cycle 

Cost and Payback Period Analysis

Shipments Analysis; National Impact Analysis; Utility 

Impact and Emissions Impact Analysis

Certification, Compliance & Enforcement

4

5

6

Test Procedures

2

Market Assessment and Engineering Analysis

3

1 Introduction and Overview

Determination of Scope

7

8 Closing Remarks
10 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• To determine scope of coverage for the NOPR, DOE first 

reviewed all the changes made in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-

2010.

• DOE identified any increase in the efficiency levels in ASHRAE 

Standard 90.1-2010 in comparison to the existing Federal 

conservation standards, thereby triggering DOE action.

• DOE also identified any changes to the relevant sections of 

test procedure documents for covered ASHRAE equipment.

Determination of Scope
11 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• DOE believes ASHRAE Standard 90.1 does not cover commercial package air 

conditioning and heating equipment used for industrial, manufacturing, or 

commercial processes, with the exception of the specific industrial equipment 

listed in the standard. 

• DOE’s standards for commercial package air conditioning and heating 

equipment are intended to have the same scope as ASHRAE Standard 90.1 and 

apply only to equipment used for comfort space conditioning, with the 

exception of those equipment types listed in ASHRAE that are used for 

commercial or industrial processes.

• To aid regulated entities in determining whether their equipment falls within 

the scope of DOE’s regulatory requirements, DOE is providing the following 

guidance:

– Equipment meeting the definition of “commercial package air conditioning and heating 

equipment” in 10 CFR 431.92 that is used exclusively for manufacturing and/or industrial 

processes and is not listed as one of the equipment types specifically added to ASHRAE 

Standard 90.1, are not covered under DOE’s regulatory program.

– Determinations of coverage will be made on a case-by-case basis depending on factors 

such as how the model is advertised, marketed, and/or sold for use in buildings, the 

extent to which the equipment provides comfort conditioning to occupants, and how 

the equipment is designed and manufactured.

Determination of Scope
12 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

Determination of Scope

DOE seeks comments on ways manufacturers currently differentiate 

commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment used 

solely for manufacturing and industrial processes from that equipment 

of the same type that is used in buildings.

(Issue #1)
13 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• Previous editions of ASHRAE Standard 90.1 did not cover 

“equipment and portions of building systems that use energy 

primarily to provide for industrial, manufacturing, or commercial 

processes,” such as computer room air conditioners (CRACs).

• ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 expanded its scope to include 

equipment used for process loads and created a product class for 

“air conditioners and condensing units serving computer rooms.”

• Thus, DOE determined in the notice of data availability (NODA) and 

reiterated in the NOPR that DOE has the authority to cover 

computer room air conditioners.

Determination of Scope

Computer Room Air Conditioners
14 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

Determination of Scope

Equipment with Amended ASHRAE Levels

Equipment Class DOE’s Proposed Action

Water-cooled Air Conditioners Adopting ASHRAE levels*

Evaporatively-cooled Air Conditioners Adopting ASHRAE levels*

Variable Refrigerant Flow (VRF) Multi-split Water-source Heat 

Pumps, <17,000 Btu/h

Adopting ASHRAE levels*

Variable Refrigerant Flow (VRF) Multi-split Water-source Heat 

Pumps, ≥135,000 Btu/h

Adopting ASHRAE levels*

Computer Room Air Conditioners Adopting ASHRAE levels

Single-Package Vertical Air Conditioners (SPVACs) and SinglePackage Vertical Heat Pumps (SPVHPs)Further analysis in a separate 

rulemaking

* Due to a de minimis energy savings potential, DOE did not perform a cost/benefit analysis for this equipment class.

• The table below shows the equipment types amended in ASHRAE Standard 90.1- 2010, and DOE’s proposed action regarding these equipment classes.
15 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• There were minimal energy savings (or no models on the market) 

for the following equipment classes:

– Water-cooled and evaporatively-cooled air conditioners

– Water-source VRF heat pumps with a cooling capacity <17,000 Btu/h

– Water-source VRF heat pumps with a cooling capacity ≥135,000 Btu/h

• For computer room air conditioners, there was a lack of clear and 

convincing evidence in the downstream analysis for higher 

standards due to:

– Uncertainty in seasonal coefficient of performance (SCOP) efficiency data 

derived using “rule-of-thumb” method

– Uncertainty in the price-efficiency relationship

– Inability for DOE to assess future changes in equipment efficiencies

– Lack of shipment information for the United States

• For SPVACs and SPVHPs, analysis will be conducted in a separate 

rulemaking.

Rationale for Adoption of ASHRAE 

Standard 90.1-2010 Levels
16 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• DOE conducted a potential energy savings analysis for small, large, and 

very large water-cooled air conditioners, and for very large evaporativelycooled air conditioner classes in the May 5, 2011 NODA (76 FR 25622). 

• Energy savings were estimated for adoption of the efficiency levels in 

ASHRAE 90.1-2010 and for up to four efficiency levels above ASHRAE 90.1-

2010 levels. 

• Unit energy consumption was based on spreadsheet models of equipment 

energy consumption, incorporating annual cooling load profiles from large 

office building simulations. 

• 30-year National Energy Savings (NES) estimates were calculated for two 

shipment scenarios for each product class for each higher efficiency level 

examined. The sum of NES for standards above ASHRAE 90.1-2010 levels 

was minimal.

Analysis of Water- and EvaporativelyCooled Air Conditioners
17 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• DOE conducted a potential energy savings analysis for >135 kBtu/h 

Variable Refrigerant Flow Water-Source Heat Pumps with and without 

heat recovery for the NOPR. 

• Unit energy consumption (UEC) estimates established for ASHRAE 90.1-

2010 efficiency levels and four higher efficiency levels including a maxtech level (14.5 EER, ~4.6 COP). Max-tech level presumes only ductless 

indoor units. 

• Unit energy consumption developed from building simulations that 

modeled water-source VRF heat pumps used in a 20,000 ft2 office building 

in 15 U.S. climates.

• Shipment forecast estimated based on historical water-source heat pump 

shipments and relative fraction of models in analyzed VRF product classes.

• 30-year NES estimates calculated for both equipment classes. The sum of 

NES for standards exceeding ASHRAE 90.1-2010 levels were minimal.

Analysis of > 135 kBtu/h Variable Refrigerant 

Flow Water-Source Heat Pumps
18 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

Public Meeting Agenda

Markups Analysis; Energy Use Analysis; Life-Cycle 

Cost and Payback Period Analysis

Shipments Analysis; National Impact Analysis; Utility 

Impact and Emissions Impact Analysis

Certification, Compliance & Enforcement

4

5

6

Test Procedures

2

Market Assessment and Engineering Analysis

3

1 Introduction and Overview

Determination of Scope

7

8 Closing Remarks
19 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• EPCA requires DOE to amend any test procedure for ASHRAE products to 

the latest version generally accepted by the industry, as referenced in 

ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1, unless the Secretary determines that clear and 

convincing evidence exists that the latest version of the industry test 

procedure does not meet the requirements for test procedures under 42 

U.S.C. 6314(a)(2)-(3). (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(4)(A)-(B))

• EPCA also requires DOE to conduct an evaluation of the test procedures for 

covered equipment at least once every 7 years. (42 U.S.C.6314(a)(1)(A))

• 42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2) states that test procedures shall be reasonably 

designed to produce test results which reflect the energy efficiency or 

energy use of a type of industrial equipment during a representative 

average use cycle and shall not be unduly burdensome to conduct.

• DOE reviewed the updated test procedures in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010.

Test Procedures

Authority
20 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• DOE is proposing updating to the following test procedures:

– AHRI 210/240-2008 for small (<65,000 Btu/h) commercial packaged air 

conditioning and heating equipment 

– AHRI 340/360-2007 for small (≥65,000 Btu/h), large, and very large 

commercial packaged air conditioning and heating equipment 

– UL 727-2006 for oil-fired commercial warm-air furnaces

– ANSI Z21.47-2006 for gas-fired commercial warm-air furnaces

– ANSI Z21.10.3-2004 for commercial water heaters

• DOE is proposing to adopt the following new test procedures:

– AHRI 390-2003 for SPVACs and SPVHPs

– AHRI 1230-2010 with Addendum 1 for VRF multi-split systems

– ASHRAE 127-2007 for computer room air conditioners

• DOE notes that the AHRI and ASHRAE test procedures contain 

tolerances allowing the published ratings to be within a certain 

percentage of the measured ratings (e.g., measured test results 

shall not be less than 95% of published ratings). DOE does not 

intend to adopt these provisions in the final rule.

Test Procedures

Updates
21 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

Test Procedures

Issues

DOE seeks comment on all relevant aspects of the proposed test 

procedures for ASHRAE equipment included in this rulemaking as part of 

the seven year review.

(Issue #2)

DOE seeks comment about the proposed adoption of the new test 

procedures: AHRI 390-2003, AHRI 1230-2010, and ASHRAE Standard 

127-2007, especially on any shortcomings or potential modifications to 

these test procedures.

(Issue #6-8)

DOE seeks comment about the proposed adoption of the following 

updated test procedures: AHRI 210/240-2008, AHRI 340/360-2007, UL 

727-2006, ANSI Z21/10.3-2004, and ANSI Z21.47-2006.

(Issue #3-5)
22 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• As part of its ongoing testing efforts in support of DOE’s regulatory 

program, the Department has received ad hoc requests from 

manufacturers regarding the need for tailored modifications to the testing 

set-up or operating conditions for a basic model. 

• For DOE’s testing efforts, the Department uses only the conditions 

specified in the DOE test procedure for a given covered equipment along 

with any additional guidance that is presented in the installation and/or 

operating manuals shipped with those units for any DOE-initiated testing. 

• No additional information (e.g., additional specificity for the placement or 

types of specific testing sensors) will be used for any DOE verification or 

enforcement testing that are not part of installation and/or operating 

manuals shipped with the unit.

• DOE wishes to harmonize the way it conducts its testing with the testing 

done by manufacturers, and does not intend to change the way 

manufacturers currently test their products for the purposes of 

determining their certified ratings.

Test Procedures

General Guidelines
23 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

Test Procedures

Issues

DOE seeks comments generally on whether there are additional settings 

beyond the tolerances and specifications in the test procedure for all 

types of commercial air conditioning and heating equipment that DOE 

should consider when testing such equipment. If additional settings are 

basic-model specific, DOE is interested in having manufacturers disclose 

these instructions as part of their initial certifications for a given basic 

model and seeks comment on this issue as well.
24 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• Through review of the Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute 

(AHRI) certification program, DOE discovered that AHRI testing allows for the 

use of a compressor “break-in” period for commercial unitary equipment, 

which manufacturers may be using when conducting certification testing.

• This “break-in” period would allow the performance of the compressor to be 

more representative of the actual field performance. 

• DOE is proposing to allow the manufacturers to use the optional break-in 

period at their discretion, so that the test procedure may produce results that 

better reflect the energy efficiency of their units, as required by EPCA. 

• DOE is proposing to allow manufacturers the option of a “break-in” period of 

up to 16 hours.

• If manufacturers choose to use this optional break-in period, they will be 

required to report the length of time (up to 16 hours) they used to break in 

their equipment and maintain it in the test data underlying their certified 

ratings.

Test Procedures

Break-in Provision
25 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

Test Procedures

Issues

DOE seeks comment about the use of an optional compressor “breakin” period as part of the following test procedures: AHRI 210/240, 

AHRI 340/360, AHRI 390, and AHRI 1230, or the need for a “break-in” 

period for computer room air conditioners.

(Issue 3,4,7,8,17)
26 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• In reviewing AHRI 1230 for VRF systems, DOE found that there are 

provisions stating that skilled personnel with knowledge of the control 

software will be required for inverter driven equipment. Additionally, the 

procedure states that if the equipment cannot be maintained at steady 

state conditions by its normal controls, then the manufacturer shall 

modify or over-ride such controls so that steady state conditions are 

achieved.

• DOE would like to learn more about how these systems operate to achieve 

steady state conditions for testing. Specifically, DOE understands that at 

least some units require additional control instruction and/or control 

system override to conduct the test, which requires manufacturer 

assistance in order to test the unit according to AHRI 1230. 

• DOE is interested in options that would eliminate manufacturer 

involvement in testing, but maintain the operation as specified by the 

manufacturer. DOE's goal is to not change how the unit is designed to 

operate, but to allow testing that follows set procedures that eliminates 

manufacturer intervention. 

Test Procedures

VRF Systems
27 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

Test Procedures

Issues

DOE seeks comment about the testing conditions, the basic model 

operating points, and set-up for VRF multi-split air conditioners and heat 

pumps. Specifically, DOE is interested in how the procedure can be 

improved such that it can be run independently and manufacturer 

involvement in the testing is not required.

(Issue #9)
28 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

Public Meeting Agenda

Markups Analysis; Energy Use Analysis; Life-Cycle 

Cost and Payback Period Analysis

Shipments Analysis; National Impact Analysis; Utility 

Impact and Emissions Impact Analysis

Certification, Compliance & Enforcement

4

5

6

Test Procedures

2

Market Assessment and Engineering Analysis

3

1 Introduction and Overview

Determination of Scope

7

8 Closing Remarks
29 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

NODA NOPR Final 

Rule

Effective 

Date

Engineering

Analysis

Energy Use & 

End Use Load

Characterization

Shipments

Analysis

National

Impact

Analysis

Markups for

Equipment

Price

Determination

Life-Cycle Cost 

and Payback 

Period Analysis

NOPR

Rulemaking Stage

Utility

Impact and 

Emissions Impact

Analysis

Market 

Assessment
30 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

Market Assessment

• Purpose

– Characterize the market for applicable ASHRAE equipment types to

determine available equipment efficiencies, manufacturers, and 

shipments

• Sources

– AHRI Directory of Certified Product Performance

– California Energy Commission (CEC) Appliance Efficiency Database

– Manufacturers’ websites

• A detailed description of the methodology and results is 

contained in Chapter 2 of the NOPR TSD.
31 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• There is currently no definition for variable refrigerant flow (VRF) air 

conditioners and heat pumps because DOE’s existing standards do 

not separate this type of equipment from other classes of 

commercial air conditioners and heating equipment.

• DOE is proposing the following definitions for this equipment class:

– Variable refrigerant flow multi-split air conditioner means a unit of commercial package air 

conditioning and heating equipment that is configured as a split-system air-conditioner 

incorporating a single refrigerant circuit, with one or more outdoor units, at least one variablespeed compressor or an alternate compressor combination for varying the capacity of the 

system by three or more steps, and multiple indoor fan coil units, each of which is individually 

metered and individually controlled by an integral control device and common 

communications network and which can operate independently in response to multiple 

indoor thermostats. Variable refrigerant flow implies three or more steps of capacity control 

on common, inter-connecting piping.

Market Assessment

VRF Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps Definitions
32 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• DOE is also proposing the following definitions for this equipment class:

– Variable refrigerant flow multi-split heat pump means a unit of commercial package air conditioning 

and heating equipment that is configured as a split-system heat pump that uses reverse cycle 

refrigeration as its primary heating source and which may include secondary supplemental heating 

by means of electrical resistance, steam, hot water, or gas. The equipment incorporates a single 

refrigerant circuit, with one or more outdoor units, at least one variable-speed compressor or an 

alternate compressor combination for varying the capacity of the system by three or more steps, and 

multiple indoor fan coil units, each of which is individually metered and individually controlled by a 

control device and common communications network and which can operate independently in 

response to multiple indoor thermostats. Variable refrigerant flow implies three or more steps of 

capacity control on common, inter-connecting piping. 

– Heat recovery (in the context of variable refrigerant flow multi-split air conditioners or variable 

refrigerant flow multi-split heat pumps) means that the air conditioner or heat pump is also capable 

of providing simultaneous heating and cooling operation, where recovered energy from the indoor 

units operating in one mode can be transferred to one or more other indoor units operating in the 

other mode. A variable refrigerant flow multi-split heat recovery heat pump is a variable refrigerant 

flow multi-split heat pump with the addition of heat recovery capability.

Market Assessment

VRF Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps Definitions
33 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• There are also no definitions for computer room air conditioners since 

DOE previously did not cover this type of equipment.

• DOE is proposing the following definition: 

– Computer room air conditioner means a unit of commercial package air-conditioning 

and heating equipment that is advertised, marketed, and/or sold specifically for use in 

computer rooms, data processing rooms, or other precision cooling applications, and is 

rated for performance using ASHRAE Standard 127. Such equipment may not be 

marketed or advertised as equipment for any other space conditioning applications, and 

may not be rated for performance using AHRI Standard 210/240 or AHRI Standard 

340/360.

Market Assessment

Computer Room Air Conditioners Definitions
34 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

Market Assessment

Issues

DOE seeks comment about the proposed definitions of “variable 

refrigerant flow multi-split air conditioner,” “variable refrigerant flow 

multi-split heat pump,” and “heat recovery.”

(Issue #10)

DOE seeks comment about the proposed definition of “computer room 

air conditioner.” Specifically, DOE is interested in whether there are any 

physical features or components that could allow DOE to differentiate 

between computer room air conditioners and commercial package air 

conditioners used for comfort conditioning.

(Issue #11)
35 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 divides computer room air 

conditioners into 30 equipment classes based on:

– Cooling Type (Air-cooled, Water-cooled, Glycol-cooled)

– Sensible Cooling Capacity (<65,000 Btu/h, ≥65,000 and <240,000 

Btu/h, ≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h)

– Orientation (upflow, downflow)

– Presence of a fluid economizer

• DOE compiled a database of computer room air conditioners 

divided into 30 equipment classes, as outlined above.

• DOE found 1364 different models (from 22 equipment lines) 

from the CEC database and manufacturers’ websites.

Market Assessment

Computer Room Air Conditioners
36 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

NODA NOPR Final 

Rule

Effective 

Date

Engineering

Analysis

Energy Use & 

End Use Load

Characterization

Shipments

Analysis

National

Impact

Analysis

Markups for

Equipment

Price

Determination

Life-Cycle Cost 

and Payback 

Period Analysis

NOPR

Rulemaking Stage

Utility

Impact and 

Emissions Impact

Analysis

Market 

Assessment
37 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

 Choose equipment classes sizes to be analyzed in the engineering 

and life-cycle cost analysis. 

 Define characteristics of baseline models in each representative 

equipment class.

 Develop efficiency levels (ELs) that span the range of efficiency 

from baseline to max-tech level. 

 Determine prices for computer room air conditioners for the full 

range of efficiencies.

 Scale results to equipment classes not directly analyzed.

 Results of the price-efficiency curve.

Engineering Analysis:

Methodology

Choose 

Representative 

Equipment Size

Scale to Equipment 

Classes Not 

Analyzed

Define Baseline 

Models

Develop Pricing 

Data

Develop Efficiency 

Levels

Results
38 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• DOE chose the average sensible capacity (rounded to the nearest 

ton) for each equipment class for computer room air conditioners 

as the representative capacity for analysis.

• DOE chose the representative sensible capacity based upon each 

of the following size categories:

• <65,000 Btu/h – DOE chose 36,000 Btu/h (3 tons)

• ≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h – DOE chose 132,000 Btu/h (11 tons)

• ≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h – DOE chose 288,000 Btu/h (24 tons)

• DOE centered the downstream analyses around these 

representative sensible capacities.

Engineering Analysis:

Representative Equipment Size

Choose 

Representative 

Equipment Size

Scale to Equipment 

Classes Not 

Analyzed

Define Baseline 

Models

Develop Pricing 

Data

Develop Efficiency 

Levels

Results
39 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• DOE selects the baseline levels as reference points against which DOE 

measures changes resulting from potential amended energy conservation 

standards.

• A baseline piece of equipment refers to a model having features and 

technologies typically found in the equipment currently offered for sale.

• Usually, units at the baseline efficiency level just meet the Federal energy 

conservation standards; however, computer room air conditioners do not 

currently have a Federal energy conservation standard.

• Since EPCA requires DOE to adopt either the ASHRAE Standard 90.1 level or a 

more-stringent standard, DOE used the efficiency levels in ASHRAE Standard 

90.1-2010 as the baseline efficiency level.

• To simplify the engineering analysis, DOE only selected baseline efficiency 

levels for equipment classes in the downflow orientation. (For upflow models, 

DOE assumed the results of the cost/benefit analysis would be the same as 

downflow and did not analyze these products directly in the engineering 

analysis.)

Engineering Analysis:

Baseline Models

Choose 

Representative 

Equipment Size

Scale to Equipment 

Classes Not 

Analyzed

Define Baseline 

Models

Develop Pricing 

Data

Develop Efficiency 

Levels

Results
40 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• Since DOE does not currently regulate computer room air 

conditioners, manufacturers are not required to report the 

ratings of their equipment, and there was no SCOP data available 

at the time of DOE’s analysis.

• DOE had to rely on efficiency information found in manufacturer 

literature and in the CEC appliance efficiency databases.

• Since SCOP is a new metric in ASHRAE Standard 127-2007, all 

efficiency information DOE found in these sources were in the 

form of energy efficiency ratio (EER).

• DOE converted the EER information (when available) into SCOP 

using the “rule of thumb” formula found in the appendix of 

ASHRAE Standard 127-2007 to approximate the SCOP ratings of 

equipment on the market.

Engineering Analysis:

Efficiency Levels

( )( ) 3.5

SHR SCOP = EEROld

Choose 

Representative 

Equipment Size

Scale to Equipment 

Classes Not 

Analyzed

Define Baseline 

Models

Develop Pricing 

Data

Develop Efficiency 

Levels

Results
41 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• For those equipment classes for which DOE had efficiency 

information, DOE identified the max-tech efficiency level on the 

market.

• DOE chose evenly-spaced levels between the baseline and maxtech levels for its analysis, which generally corresponded to the 

levels with the most models on the market 

• For those equipment classes where little or no efficiency 

information was available, DOE selected levels for analysis based 

on the differences in efficiency between equipment classes in 

ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010.

Engineering Analysis:

Efficiency Levels

Choose 

Representative 

Equipment Size

Scale to Equipment 

Classes Not 

Analyzed

Define Baseline 

Models

Develop Pricing 

Data

Develop Efficiency 

Levels

Results
42 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• DOE contacted the 5 known manufacturers of this equipment and 

was able to obtain efficiency information and pricing information 

from 3 of those manufacturers.

• DOE selected models for pricing that were as close to the 

representative cooling capacity as possible (generally within 15%).

• DOE received pricing information for 32 models total.

• DOE used these pricing data together with the SCOP information to 

produce price-efficiency curves.

Engineering Analysis:

Pricing Survey

Choose 

Representative 

Equipment Size

Scale to Equipment 

Classes Not 

Analyzed

Define Baseline 

Models

Develop Pricing 

Data

Develop Efficiency 

Levels

Results
43 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• Due to limited efficiency information, DOE only had enough pricing 

and efficiency data to directly analyze four equipment classes:

• Air-cooled with a sensible cooling capacity <65,000 Btu/h

• Air-cooled with a sensible cooling capacity ≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h

• Water-cooled with a sensible cooling capacity <65,000 Btu/h

• Water-cooled with a sensible cooling capacity ≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h

• For the remaining 11 equipment classes to be analyzed, DOE scaled 

the price-efficiency curves from these four classes.

Engineering Analysis:

Pricing Survey

Choose 

Representative 

Equipment Size

Scale to Equipment 

Classes Not 

Analyzed

Define Baseline 

Models

Develop Pricing 

Data

Develop Efficiency 

Levels

Results
44 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

Engineering Analysis:

Scaling to Other Equipment Classes

Small Air-cooled 

Computer Room 

AC

Large Air-cooled 

Computer Room 

AC

Very Large Aircooled Computer 

Room AC

SCOP – 0.20 

Price x 1.44

Small Watercooled Computer 

Room AC

Large Watercooled Computer 

Room AC

Very Large Watercooled Computer 

Room AC

SCOP – 0.10

Price x 1.90

Small Glycolcooled Computer 

Room AC

Large Glycolcooled Computer 

Room AC

Very Large Glycolcooled Computer 

Room AC

SCOP 

– 0.1

SCOP 

– 0.35

SCOP 

– 0.30

Same Price

Same Price

Same Price

• For equipment classes with a fluid economizer, DOE used the corresponding equipment class 

without the fluid economizer and subtracted 0.05 from the SCOP and multiplied the price by 1.0582

Choose Translation to Equipment Classes Without a Fluid Economizer

Representative 

Equipment Size

Scale to Equipment 

Classes Not 

Analyzed

Define Baseline 

Models

Develop Pricing 

Data

Develop Efficiency 

Levels

Results
45 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

Engineering Analysis:

Results

Choose 

Representative 

Equipment Size

Scale to Equipment 

Classes Not 

Analyzed

Define Baseline 

Models

Develop Pricing 

Data

Develop Efficiency 

Levels

Results

• The results of the engineering analysis are a set of price-efficiency 

tables. The full set of tables for all equipment classes can be found in 

Chapter 3 of the NOPR TSD.

• Based on the pricing data that were obtained, DOE observed that the 

price increases with increased efficiency for small and large air-cooled 

equipment and large water-cooled equipment.*

• Based on the pricing data, DOE observed that the price decreases with 

increased efficiency for small water-cooled equipment.*

• DOE notes that factors other than the efficiency of equipment (e.g., how 

competitive the market is, warranty, and other features) impact pricing. DOE 

believes that the negative correlation for small water-cooled equipment 

may have occurred because of the impacts from such factors. These factors 

may also have influenced the results for the other equipment classes, even 

though the efficiency trend alone may have shown a positive correlation in 

those classes.

*Consequently, all equipment classes for which the price-efficiency relationship was translated from 

these classes have the same general trend for the price-efficiency relationship.
46 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

Engineering Analysis

Issues

DOE seeks comment about the results of the pricing analysis and on any 

data or information on the price-efficiency relationship for computer 

room air conditioners.

(Issue #12)
47 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

Public Meeting Agenda

Markups Analysis; Energy Use Analysis; Life-Cycle 

Cost and Payback Period Analysis

Shipments Analysis; National Impact Analysis ; Utility 

Impact and Emissions Impact Analysis

Certification, Compliance & Enforcement

4

5

6

Test Procedures

2

Market Assessment and Engineering Analysis

3

1 Introduction and Overview

Determination of Scope

7

8 Closing Remarks
48 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

NODA NOPR Final 

Rule

Effective 

Date

Engineering

Analysis

Energy Use & 

End Use Load

Characterization

Shipments

Analysis

National

Impact

Analysis

Markups for

Equipment

Price

Determination

Life-Cycle Cost 

and Payback 

Period Analysis

NOPR

Rulemaking Stage

Utility

Impact and 

Emissions Impact

Analysis

Market 

Assessment
49 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• Energy use based on a temperature bin analysis.

• Temperature bin performance maps created for 15 classes of 

equipment.

– Air-cooled, glycol-cooled, and glycol-cooled with economizer: use 

outdoor drybulb (Tdb) temperature bins

– Water-cooled with and without economizers: use outdoor wetbulb 

(Twb) temperature bins.

• Annual unit energy consumption (UECclimate) by efficiency level 

estimated for 239 climate locations using TMY3 climate data.

• Further aggregated to State-level UECstate using population-based 

weighting factors.

Energy Use Characterization

Computer Room Air Conditioners 
50 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• Server load averaged 65% of sensible capacity.

• Efficiency is a function of condensing fluid or ambient air 

temperature and, thus, varies with temperature bin. 

• Load reductions for fluid economizers were included (separate 

airside economizers not considered in analysis).

• Supply fan power was based on a review of manufacturer data and 

held constant at all efficiency levels within a product class.

• Condenser performances varies

 with condensing conditions.

• Part-load performance curves were

 also included in the energy 

 analysis.

Energy Use Calculation - CRAC

Performance Map Development

COOL-EIR-FT_air cooled = -0.000006 OAT2 + 0.004941 OAT + 0.584620

R2 = 0.997371

COOL-EIR-FT_glycol = 0.0000228 EFT2 - 0.0001787 EFT + 0.7700841

R2 = 0.9973387

COOL-EIR-FT_water cooled = 0.00001566 EFT2 + 0.00065099 EFT + 0.79467383

R2 = 0.99992938

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

EIR (T) / EIR (Nominal)

Entering Condenser Fluid or Air Temperature (F)

Air Cooled Unit

Glycol Cooled Unit

Water Cooled Unit

Poly. (Air Cooled Unit)

Poly. (Glycol Cooled Unit)

Poly. (Water Cooled Unit)
51 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

Energy Use Calculation - CRAC

UEC calculations

• 

• 

Power bin = Powercond,T + Powersupplyfan 

Unit Energy Consumption by Climate (UECClimate) 

UECClimate = LBinPowerBin X HoursBin 

• Unit Energy Consumption by State (UECState) 

UECstate = LClimate WeightClimate in State X UECClimate 

• National UEC reported in LCC spreadsheet output 
52 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

Markups Analysis

Distribution Channels for computer room air conditioner 

(CRAC) Equipment (Replacement and New 

Construction)

Manufacturer

or Distributor

Mechanical 

Contractor Consumer
53 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• DOE developed markups to relate manufacturer selling prices (MSP) to 

end-user CRAC prices for one distribution channel for markups analysis.

Markups Analysis

Markup Factor Baseline 

Markup

Incremental 

Markup

Mechanical Contractor 1.474 1.184

Sales tax (National 

population-weighted 

average)

1.073 1.073

Overall Markup 1.581 1.270

• DOE markups vary by State based on 2007 Economic Census 

(Mechanical Contractors). 
54 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

NODA NOPR Final 

Rule

Effective 

Date

Engineering

Analysis

Energy Use & 

End Use Load

Characterization

Shipments

Analysis

National

Impact

Analysis

Markups for

Equipment

Price

Determination

Life-Cycle Cost 

and Payback 

Period Analysis

NOPR

Rulemaking Stage

Utility

Impact and 

Emissions Impact

Analysis

Market 

Assessment
55 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• Economic evaluation from the end-user perspective.

• Results are expressed as LCC savings (baseline minus the 

standard level).

• Simple payback period (PBP) is also calculated and 

reported in this analysis.

Life-Cycle Cost and

Payback Period Analysis

Combine 

Changes 

in Costs

LCC Results First Cost

(End-User Price + Installation Cost)

Operating 

Expenses

Convert to 

Present 

Value
56 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

Installation Cost (Showing Air-Cooled)

Tons kBtu/hr Base 

Installation 

Cost

3 36 $ 1,415 

5 60 $ 1,977 

5.4 64.8 $ 2,079 

12.7 152.4 $ 3,636 

20 240 $ 4,893 

23 276 $ 5,361 

• DOE calculated installation cost as a function of capacity in tons 

from RS Means CostWorks data for cooling type, but had no 

information on installation costs by efficiency level.

• DOE assumed that installation cost would not vary with efficiency 

level. 

y = 690.13x0.6538

R2 = 0.9623

$0.00

$1,000.00

$2,000.00

$3,000.00

$4,000.00

$5,000.00

$6,000.00

$7,000.00

0 5 10 15 20 25
57 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

Installation Cost (Cont.)

DOE requests comments on whether computer room air conditioner 

installation cost increases as a function of increased efficiency. If so, how 

should the increase in cost be estimated or derived?

(Issue #13)
58 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• From 2011 RS Means data, DOE calculated a cost curve showing 

one-time baseline repair costs as a percentage of original 

equipment cost for different equipment capacities. 

• To estimate baseline repair cost for each capacity analyzed, DOE 

then multiplied the calculated percentage from the cost curve at 

each capacity times the original equipment cost from the current 

analysis. 

• The one-time baseline repair cost was then converted to a baseline 

average annual repair cost.

• For higher-efficiency levels, DOE scaled the material portion of the 

baseline repair cost by the relative equipment price at each higher 

level, then added baseline repair labor expense to get total repair 

cost. 

Repair Cost
59 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• DOE based its estimates on 2011 RS Means maintenance data. 

• Annualized maintenance costs were estimated at $84/yr for 

units up to 240 kBtu/hr, $102/yr for larger units

• Maintenance costs include cleaning evaporator coils, 

lubricating motors, cleaning condenser coils, checking and 

refilling refrigerant as necessary, and similar activities. Such 

costs are almost entirely attributable to labor expenses, and 

were assumed not to vary with efficiency level. 

Maintenance Cost
60 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• Discount rates represent how future monetary expenditures or 

benefits are “discounted” to the present and indicate how much 

value a consumer places on a dollar in the future compared to one 

in the present.

• Discount rates were sampled for three classes of customers: (1) 

private companies; (2) State and local government (including 

education); and (3) Federal government.

• Commercial discount rates: based on capital asset planning model 

(weighted cost of equity and debt).

• Source of underlying data for private companies was 938 

companies in health care, education, and finance and services on 

the Damodaran Online website.

• For State and local government, a 10-yr. AA municipal bond rate 

was used.

• For the Federal government, 1971-2010 geometric average of long- term (>10 yr) U.S. government securities was used. 

Discount rates 
61 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• Based on a survey of the available literature (7 sources), DOE concluded 

that a range of 10-25 years with an average of 15 years was appropriate.

• Lifetimes were assumed to follow a Weibull probability distribution:

Lifetime of Equipment 
62 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• In general, LCC savings were strongly negative above the ASHRAE level 

(indicating increased life-cycle costs to the consumer).

• Exceptions – positive LCC savings seen:

– For smallest air-cooled units at Levels 1 and 2 (PBPs >8 years)

– For medium and large air-cooled units (PBPs were <4 years)

– For smallest water-cooled and glycol-cooled units (PBPs were 

negative)

– For medium and large water-cooled and glycol-units (PBPs were 

either negative or else > 9 years) 

• Payback periods were generally longer than equipment lifetimes.

• In cases where paybacks were negative for one of two reasons:

– There are reduced first costs for higher efficiency levels with some 

equipment classes. 

– Repair and maintenance cost increases outweigh energy costs savings 

resulting in net increases in operating costs (compared with the 

baseline ASHRAE standard level).

LCC-PBP Analysis Results
63 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

Public Meeting Agenda

Markups Analysis; Energy Use Analysis; Life-Cycle 

Cost and Payback Period Analysis

Shipments Analysis; National Impact Analysis; Utility 

Impact and Emissions Impact Analysis

Certification, Compliance & Enforcement

4

5

6

Test Procedures

2

Market Assessment and Engineering Analysis

3

1 Introduction and Overview

Determination of Scope

7

8 Closing Remarks
64 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

NODA NOPR Final 

Rule

Effective 

Date

Engineering

Analysis

Energy Use & 

End Use Load

Characterization

Shipments

Analysis

National

Impact

Analysis

Markups for

Equipment

Price

Determination

Life-Cycle Cost 

and Payback 

Period Analysis

NOPR

Rulemaking Stage

Utility

Impact and 

Emissions Impact

Analysis

Market 

Assessment
65 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• Purpose

‒ To estimate the National Energy Savings (NES) from adoption of standards 

at the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 efficiency levels and also at morestringent levels.

‒ To estimate the national economic impact on the nation in terms of 

national Net Present Value (NPV) from adoption of computer room air 

conditioner standards higher than the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 

efficiency levels.

• Components

‒ Shipment Analysis;

‒ National Energy Savings Calculations; and

‒ National Net Present Value Calculations.

National Impact Analysis
66 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• Purpose

‒ To estimate shipments of equipment 

over time.

• Methodology

‒ Obtained historical and forecasted 

shipments (2000-2020) for Australia.

‒ Used the ratio of number of 

business establishments in Australia 

and US to inflate the Australia 

shipments to the US.

‒ Estimated future shipments by 

extrapolating the historical trend.

‒ Disaggregated shipments into 

product classes first using Australia 

market shares to allocate shipments 

to six broad product classes and 

then using market information of 

models in the US to further 

disaggregate into all product classes.

‒ DOE did not distinguish between 

upflow and downflow units.

Shipments Analysis

Year

Aircooled 

<65

AirCooled 

65-240

Aircooled 

>240

Watercooled 

<65

Watercooled 

65-240

Watercooled 

>240

Watercooled 

<65 FE

Watercooled 

65-240 

FE

Watercooled 

>240 FE

Glycol 

cooled 

<65

Glycol 

cooled 65-

240

Glycol 

cooled 

>240

Glycol 

cooled 

<65 FE

Glycol 

cooled 

65-240 

FE

Glycol 

cooled 

>240 

FE

2012 671 - - 74 - - 46 - - 69 - - 69 - -

2013 691 7,499 1,677 76 1,233 470 47 1,036 180 71 1,233 387 71 1,431 345

2014 711 7,722 1,727 79 1,270 484 49 1,067 185 73 1,270 398 73 1,473 356

2015 732 7,951 1,778 81 1,308 498 50 1,098 190 75 1,308 410 75 1,517 366

2016 754 8,186 1,831 83 1,346 513 52 1,131 196 78 1,346 422 78 1,562 377

2017 776 8,427 1,885 86 1,386 528 53 1,164 202 80 1,386 435 80 1,608 388

2018 799 8,674 1,940 88 1,427 543 55 1,198 208 82 1,427 447 82 1,655 399

2019 823 8,933 1,998 91 1,469 559 56 1,234 214 85 1,469 461 85 1,704 411

2020 847 9,192 2,056 94 1,512 576 58 1,270 220 87 1,512 474 87 1,754 423

2021 847 9,198 2,057 94 1,513 576 58 1,271 220 87 1,513 474 87 1,755 424

2022 866 9,401 2,103 96 1,546 589 59 1,299 225 89 1,546 485 89 1,794 433

2023 885 9,604 2,148 98 1,580 602 61 1,327 230 91 1,580 495 91 1,832 442

2024 903 9,807 2,194 100 1,613 614 62 1,355 235 93 1,613 506 93 1,871 452

2025 922 10,009 2,239 102 1,646 627 63 1,383 240 95 1,646 516 95 1,910 461

2026 941 10,212 2,284 104 1,680 640 64 1,411 245 97 1,680 527 97 1,948 470

2027 959 10,415 2,330 106 1,713 652 66 1,439 249 99 1,713 537 99 1,987 480

2028 978 10,618 2,375 108 1,746 665 67 1,467 254 101 1,746 548 101 2,026 489

2029 997 10,821 2,420 110 1,780 678 68 1,495 259 103 1,780 558 103 2,064 498

2030 1,015 11,023 2,466 112 1,813 690 70 1,523 264 104 1,813 569 104 2,103 508

2031 1,034 11,226 2,511 114 1,846 703 71 1,551 269 106 1,846 579 106 2,142 517

2032 1,053 11,429 2,557 116 1,880 716 72 1,579 274 108 1,880 590 108 2,181 526

2033 1,071 11,632 2,602 118 1,913 729 73 1,607 279 110 1,913 600 110 2,219 536

2034 1,090 11,835 2,647 120 1,947 741 75 1,635 283 112 1,947 610 112 2,258 545

2035 1,109 12,038 2,693 122 1,980 754 76 1,663 288 114 1,980 621 114 2,297 554

2036 1,127 12,240 2,738 125 2,013 767 77 1,691 293 116 2,013 631 116 2,335 564

2037 1,146 12,443 2,783 127 2,047 779 79 1,719 298 118 2,047 642 118 2,374 573

2038 1,165 12,646 2,829 129 2,080 792 80 1,747 303 120 2,080 652 120 2,413 582

2039 1,183 12,849 2,874 131 2,113 805 81 1,775 308 122 2,113 663 122 2,451 592

2040 1,202 13,052 2,919 133 2,147 817 82 1,803 313 124 2,147 673 124 2,490 601

2041 1,221 13,254 2,965 135 2,180 830 84 1,831 317 126 2,180 684 126 2,529 610

2042 - 13,457 3,010 - 2,213 843 - 1,859 322 - 2,213 694 - 2,567 620

Cumulative 28,518 315,793 70,636 3,152 51,940 19,780 1,954 43,628 7,563 2,935 51,940 16,288 2,935 60,250 14,542

CRAC Shipments
67 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

NES and NPV Methodology

• National Energy Savings (NES) calculated for a period of 30 years from the 

earliest possible standard compliance date (depends on effective date in 

ASHRAE and size of product).

– 2012 to 2041 for CRACs <65 kBtu/h

– 2013 to 2042 for larger CRACs

• National NPV for CRACs calculated from 2012-2055 or 2013-2056, which 

covers life-cycle installation and operational expenses for all equipment 

shipments between 2012 and 2041 or 2013 and 2042.

– Assumes a 15 year product lifetime. 

• Both NES and NPV analyses take into account a four-year to five-year delay 

for DOE to set standards more stringent than the efficiency levels in 

ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010.

– Amended energy conservation standards at the ASHRAE efficiency levels 

would be implemented in 2012 or 2013.

– Amended energy conservation standards at more-stringent efficiency levels 

than those in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 would be implemented in 2017.
68 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

NES and NPV Methodology – Cont’d

• Used national average customer prices, annual energy use, energy prices, 

and annual repair and maintenance expenditures from LCC analysis.

– These inputs were based on downflow units but are assumed to represent upflow units 

as well. The SCOPs for upflow units were adjusted upward by 0.11 (based on ASHRAE) 

prior to developing efficiency distributions to allow for this approach.

• Streams of energy use and total costs calculated over analysis time 

periods with all costs (expenditures) discounted to the present. 

• Used a constant price assumption for the default national impact analysis 

(NIA) forecast, as discussed in the LCC analysis
69 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• Analysis used a distribution of shipments mapped to each of the efficiency 

levels considered (i.e., those efficiency levels include a level below-ASHRAE 

(baseline), the ASHRAE level, and up to 4 higher efficiency levels) based on 

mapping the market assessment data for available models to the analyzed 

efficiency levels.

• Amended energy conservation standards assumed to “roll up” less-efficient 

equipment to standard level, but not to affect projected shipments at higher 

efficiency levels.

• Once an amended standard is in place, new equipment enters the market 

according to the new efficiency mix.

Example Distribution of Efficiencies for Air-Cooled CRACs <65,000 btu/h

Energy Efficiency Level

2.00 SCOP

(Baseline)

2.20 SCOP

(ASHRAE) 

2.40 

SCOP

2.60

SCOP

2.80 

SCOP

3.00 SCOP

(Max-Tech)

Base Case 2% 9% 20% 45% 18% 5%

NES and NPV Methodology – Cont’d
70 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

DOE seeks comment on whether there would be a rebound effect in 

computer room air conditioner equipment energy use as a result of 

improvements in the efficiency of such units. 

(Issue #14)

DOE seeks comment on whether shipments of computer room air 

conditioners would change with higher standard levels. 

(Issue #15)

DOE seeks comment on the NES-forecasted base-case distribution of 

efficiencies and DOE’s prediction of how amended energy conservation 

standards would affect the distribution of efficiencies in the standards 

case. 

(Issue #16)

NIA Issues for Comment
71 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

NIA Results

• Cumulative NES results showed savings of 0.01 quad for establishing 

amended energy conservation standards at efficiency levels in 

ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010.

– Cumulative NES savings ranged from 0.07 to 0.98 quads for establishing 

amended energy conservation standards at efficiency levels higher than 

ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010.

• Cumulative NPV savings ranged from -$2.25 to +$0.01 billion (2011$) 

for establishing amended energy conservation standards at efficiency 

levels higher than ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 using both 3-percent 

and 7-percent discount rates.
72 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

NODA NOPR Final 

Rule

Effective 

Date

Engineering

Analysis

Energy Use & 

End Use Load

Characterization

Shipments

Analysis

National

Impact

Analysis

Markups for

Equipment

Price

Determination

Life-Cycle Cost 

and Payback 

Period Analysis

NOPR

Rulemaking Stage

Utility

Impact and 

Emissions Impact

Analysis

Market 

Assessment
73 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

Purpose of the National Impact Analysis • Purpose

‒ Assess the overall impacts on domestic energy supplies that would result 

from the adoption of energy conservation standards.

• Method

‒ DOE used NEMS-BT, a variant of the NEMS (National Energy Modeling 

System) developed and used by DOE/Energy Information Administration 

(EIA) for their Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) report, as the basis of the 

Utility Impact Analysis.

‒ Outputs of the utility impact analysis include forecasts of electricity sales 

and avoided capacity resulting from a comparison of base and standards 

cases.

‒ DOE modeled the energy savings impacts from amended energy 

conservation standards using NEMS-BT to generate forecasts that deviate 

from the AEO reference case.

Utility Impact Analysis
74 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

Shipment Analysis • Purpose

‒ Estimate national environmental impacts from new energy efficiency standards for products 

covered under this rule.

• Methodology

‒ For emissions from power plants, DOE used the environmental impacts predicted from the 

NEMS-BT modeling analysis used for the Utility Impacts Analysis. The following emissions are 

assessed:

• Carbon dioxide (CO2)

‒ NEMS-BT calculates quantities of CO2 emissions from power plants under standards.

• Sulfur dioxide (SO2)

‒ Clean Air Act amendments of 1990 cap SO2 emissions.

‒ NEMS-BT does not show any measurable impact from standards.

• Nitrogen oxides (NOx)

‒ Clean Air Interstate Rule (assumed in effect in AEO2011 NEMS) caps NOx emissions in 28 eastern States 

and DC.

‒ NEMS-BT calculates quantities of U.S. emissions of NOx from power plants in 22 “non-capped” States.

‒ For the 28 “capped” States and DC, NEMS-BT does not show any measurable impact from standards.

• Mercury (Hg)

‒ AEO2011 NEMS does not include EPA’s recent Mercury and Air Toxics Standard.

‒ NEMS-BT calculates quantities of Hg emissions from power plants under standards.

Emissions Impact Analysis
75 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

Shipment Analysis

• To value avoided CO2 emissions, DOE uses the most current Social Cost 

of Carbon (SCC) values developed by interagency process.

‒ SCC is intended to be a monetary measure of the incremental damage 

resulting from greenhouse gas emissions, including but not limited to 

agricultural productivity loss, human health effects, property damage from 

rising sea level, and changes in the ecosystem.

• The most recent interagency estimates of the potential global benefits 

resulting from reduced CO2 emissions in 2010 are $5.00, $22.70, $37.20, 

and $68.80 per metric ton in 2011 dollars.

‒ For emission reductions that occur in later years, these values grow in real 

terms over time.

• DOE also estimated the potential monetary benefit of reduced NOx 

emissions resulting from the considered standard levels.

Emissions Impact Analysis

Monetization of Emissions Reductions
76 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

Public Meeting Agenda

Markups Analysis; Energy Use Analysis; Life-Cycle 

Cost and Payback Period Analysis

Shipments Analysis; National Impact Analysis; Utility 

Impact and Emissions Impact Analysis

Certification, Compliance & Enforcement

4

5

6

Test Procedures

2

Market Assessment and Engineering Analysis

3

1 Introduction and Overview

Determination of Scope

7

8 Closing Remarks
77 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

Sampling Plans for all ASHRAE 

Equipment

Generate Certified Rating Between Minimum and Maximum Values

Determine Minimum and Maximum Rating Values

Compare Mean to Energy Conservation Standard Per Regulations

Calculate the Product Specific Certification Statistics

Sample Mean (x)

Determine which Federal Conservation Standards Apply to the Product

431.77, 431.87, 431.97, 431.110, 

Test the Minimum Number of Units of a Basic Model Specified in Sections 429.11 and 

429.43 Using the Applicable DOE Test Procedure

(Maximum Number of Units is at the Discretion of the Manufacturer)
78 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

Public Meeting Agenda

Markups Analysis; Energy Use Analysis; Life-Cycle 

Cost and Payback Period Analysis

Shipments Analysis; National Impact Analysis; Utility 

Impact and Emissions Impact Analysis

Certification, Compliance & Enforcement

4

5

6

Test Procedures

2

Market Assessment and Engineering Analysis

3

1 Introduction and Overview

Determination of Scope

7

8 Closing Remarks
79 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• Closing Remarks

– At this time, DOE welcomes any additional remarks or questions 

from interested parties on the NOPR for certain ASHRAE Equipment.

• DOE specifically invites comment on:

– The proposed test procedure amendments;

– The proposed energy conservation standard levels (i.e., the 

efficiency levels specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010) for the 

products in this NOPR.

Closing Remarks and Comments
80 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

• In all correspondence, include all of the following:

– Energy Conservation Standards for ASHRAE Equipment

– Docket Number: EERE-2011-BT-STD-0029

– Regulatory Identification Number (RIN):1904-AC47

• Contact Information

 Comment period closes: Monday, April 2, 2012

Postal Mail: 

Ms. Brenda Edwards

U.S. Department of Energy

Building Technologies Program

Mailstop EE-2J

1000 Independence Avenue, S.W.

Washington, DC 20585-0121

Courier: 

Ms. Brenda Edwards

U.S. Department of Energy

Building Technologies Program

950 L’Enfant Plaza, S.W., 6th Floor

Washington, DC 20024 

Telephone: (202) 586-2945

Email: ASHRAE90.1-2011-STD-0029@ee.doe.gov

Closing Remarks and Comments