### US DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Workshop Regarding Test Procedures, Labeling, StandardsCompliance and Related Matters for CommercialWater Heaters, Boilers, Furnaces, Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps ForrestalBuilding, Room 1 E-245

1000Independence Avenue, SW Washington,DC 20585 April 14 and 15,1998
PRELIMINARY AGENDA Purpose of theWorkshop 

### Thepurpose ofthe workshop is todiscuss test procedures for commercial waterheaters, boilersandfirnaces, andair

conditioners and heatpumps, aswell as related issues involvingsampling, certiification, labeling and enforcement. TheDepartment will consider the views presented and the comments submitted in formulating its proposed rule for test procedures covering theseproducts and in suggesting revisions toASHEZAE Standard 90.1. 

### Tuesday, April 14, 1998
9:00 - 

### 9:15 Opening remarks and introduction 9:15 - 

### 9:30 Overview of the rulemaking process and statutory framework 9:30 -

### 9:40 Agenda review Test Protocols for commercial water heaters 9:40 - 

### 10:OO DOE introduction and NIST overview 10:OO

### - 10:45 Clarification of coverage and definitions The table of coveragein ASHRAE 90.lb- 

### 1989 (Table 11.1)can be conksing, and the subcategoriesdo not always mesh with EPCA, or the correspondingrecommendedtest procedures. 

### Questions and request for cornvents 1)How should Table 11.1be interpreted or clarified to ensure that relevant test procedures are applied toEPCA-covered products? Does the corresponding table in the proposed ASHRAE 90.1provide a clearer representation? USDEPARTMrnNTOFENERGY Workshop Regarding Test Procedures, Labeling, Standards Compliance and Related Matters for Commercial Water Heaters, Boilers, Furnaces, Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps Forrestal Building, Room lE-245

1000 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20585 

### April 14 and 15, 1998
PRELIMINARY AGENDA Purpose ofthe Workshop The purpose of the workshop is to discuss testprocedures for commercial water heaters, boilers and furnaces, andair conditioners andheatpumps, as wellas related issues involving sampling, certification, labeling and enforcement. The Departmentwill consider the views presentedandthe comments submittedin formulating its proposedrule for testprocedures covering theseproducts and in suggesting revisions toASHRAE Standard 90.1. Tuesday, 

### April 14, 1998
9:00

- 9: 15 Opening remarks and introduction 9:15

- 9:30 Overview ofthe rulemaking process and statutory framework 9:30

- 9:40 Agenda review Test Protocols for commercial water heaters 9:40

- 10:00 DOE introduction and NIST overview 10:00

- 10:45 Clarification ofcoverage and definitions The table ofcoverage in ASHRAE 90.1b 1989 (Table 11.1) can be confusing, and the subcategories do not always mesh with EPCA, or the corresponding recommended test procedures. Questions andrequest for comr,nents 1) How should Table 11.1 be interpreted or clarified to ensure that relevant test procedures are applied to EPCA-covered products? Does the corresponding table in the proposed ASHRAE 90. 1 provide a clearer representation?

### 2) Should equipment that canbe used alternativelyfor either space heating or domestic hot water be defined as a boiler or as a water heater for test procedure purposes? 10:45

### - 1

### 1

### :00 Break 1 1:00 

### - 12:00 Unfired storage tanks EPCA exempts certain unfired storage tanks and storage water heaters based on tank volume, thermal insulation value and use of a standing pilot light, and it establishes 

### a maximum heat loss of 

### 6.5 ~tu/hr/ft* for nonexempt unfired storage tanks. ASHRAE 90.1 currently references no procedure for determining eitherthe insulation value or the heat loss. 

### Questions and request for comments 1)How shouldthe insulationvalue be determined? 2) What procedure should be employed to measurethe heat loss? 12:00 - 

### 12:30 Other issues raised by participants 1230

### - 1:30 Lunch (on your om) Test Protocols for commercial boilers and furnaces 1.30 -

### 2:00 DOE introduction and NIST overview 2:00 -

### 2:30 Definition ofbbpackaged" boiler EPCA defines generally what is meant by "packaged boiler," but it does not specifLan upper limit on boiler rated capacityfor coverageunder the statute.The HydronicsInstitute and Underwriters Laboratoriesboth have different definitions with similarmeanings. 

### Questionsandrequest for comments 1)Does the definition of "packaged boiler" need clarification? 2) Does the definition of "commercial packaged boiler" imply 

### an upper capacitylimit, and if so, is it the same for steam and hot water boilers? 2:30 - 

### 3:00 Thermal vs. combustion efliciency;jacket losses Boilers and &maces can be rated either in terms of combustion efficiency, based on a measure offlue loss, or in terms of thermal efficiency, based on an input-output method that accounts forjacket losses. 

### Questions and request for comments 1) SinceEPCA calls for combustion efficiency, and outdoorboilers are now rated in terms ofthermal efficiency,should a combustion efficiency be calculated for outdoorboilers, with ajacket loss measurement,to satisfl EPCA? 2) Should equipment that can be used alternatively for either space heating or domestic hot water be defined as a boiler or as a water heater for test procedure purposes? 10:45

- 11:00 Break 11 :00

- 12:00 Unfired storage tanks EPCA exempts certain unfired storage tanks and storage water heaters based on tank volume, thermal insulation value and use ofa standing pilot light, and it establishes a maximum heat loss of6.5 Btu/hr/ft2 for nonexempt unfired storage tanks. ASHRAE 90.1currentIy references no procedure for determining either the insulation value or the heat loss. Questions andrequest for comments 1) How should the insulation value be determined? 2) What procedure should be employed to measure the heat loss?



# . 12:00

- 12:30 Other issues raised by participants 12:30

- 1:30 Lunch (on your own) Test Protocols for commercial boilers and furnaces 1:30

- 2:00 DOE introduction and NIST overview 2:00

- 2:30 Definition of"packaged" boiler

. EPCA defines generally what is meant by "packaged boiler," but it does not specifY an upper limit on boiler rated capacity for coverage under the statute. The Hydronics Institute and Underwriters Laboratories both have different definitions with similar meanings. Questions andrequest for comments 1) Does the definition of"packaged boiler" need clarification? 2) Does the definition of"commercial packaged boiler" imply an upper capacity limit, and ifso, is it the same for steam and hot water boilers? 2:30

- 3:00 Thermal vs. combustion efficiency; jacket losses Boilers and furnaces can be rated either in terms ofcombustion efficiency, based on a measure offlue loss, or in terms ofthermal efficiency, based on an input-output method that accounts forjacket losses. Questions andrequest for comments 1) Since EPCA calls for combustion efficiency, and outdoor boilers are now rated in terms ofthermal efficiency, should a combustion efficiency be calculated for outdoor boilers, with ajacket loss measurement, to satisfy EPCA?

### 2) Ifjacket losses are to be measured, what method is appropriate, e.g., ANSI 221.47or ASME 

### PTC 4.I?

e 

### 3) Should DOE adopt default jacket losses from ASME PTC 

### 4.1 in lieu of actual tests or allow it as an option? 4) Should parasitic electric consumptionbe considered as an energy input in calculatingefficiencies? 3.00-3.15 Break 3:15 - 

### 3:45 Uniformity oftest conditions, procedures and setup requirements AS)lf;'4iE 90.1-1989references several industrialtest standardswith different testingrequirements, and ASHRAE 90.1Rreferencesyet another set of standards. 

### Questionsandrequest for comments 1) SinceUL-727 does not specify a method for calculating flue lossesin oil-fired &maces, should 

### DOE adopt the method in HI-1989 for this purpose? 2)' Insulation ofthe vent pipe and elbow are not required in the referenced standard for fumaces. Does this introduce a seriousinaccuracy in the measurement offlue gas temperature? 3) Should DOE allow a thermocouplegrid as an optional alternativeto a single thermocouple traversing nine sample points, as specified in the referenced standard for measuring flue gas temperature in fumaces? 3.45 -

### 4:15 Provisions for unusual design features Some boilers and &maces are designed for unique applicationsor have features that do not lend themselves perfectly to referenced test procedures. 

### Questionsandrequest for comments 1) Should DOE specifytwo boiler rating conditions, one for high temperature (steam and hot water) and another for low temperature water? 2) 

### Should condensing boilers and furnacesbe considered? If so, should cgndensatebe measured accordingto ASHRAE 103-1993? 3) Should DOE'S procedure specifytests at both maximum and minimum rated input for modulating boilers and fumaces? 4) Ifmodularboiler systems are sold as a package, should the individual boilers be tested, or the installation as a whole? 

# , 2) If jacket losses are to be measured, what method is appropriate, e.g., ANSI Z21.47 or ASME PTC 4.1? 3) Should DOE adopt defaultjacket losses from ASME PTC 4. 1 in lieu of actual tests or allow it as an option? 4) Should parasitic electric consumption be considered as an energy input in calculating efficiencies? 3:00

- 3:15 Break 3:15

- 3:45 Uniformity oftest conditions, procedures and setup requirements ASHRAE 90.1-1989 references several industrial test standards with different testing requirements, and ASHRAE 90.1R references yet another set ofstandards. Questions andrequest for comments 1) Since UL-727 does not specifY a method for calculating flue losses in oil-fired furnaces, should DOE adopt the method in HI-1989 for this purpose? 2) Insulation ofthe vent pipe and elbow are not required in the referenced standard for furnaces. Does this introduce a serious inaccuracy in the measurement offlue gas temperature? 3) Should DOE allow a thermocouple grid as an optional alternative to a single thermocouple traversing nine sample points, as specified in the referenced standard for measuring flue gas temperature in furnaces? 3:45

- 4: 15 Provisions for unusual design**fe~tures** Some boilers and furnaces are designed for unique applications or have features that do not lend themselves perfectly to referenced test procedures. Questions andrequest for comments 1) Should DOE specifY two boiler rating conditions, one for high temperature (steam and hot water) and another for low temperature water? 2) Should condensing boilers and furnaces be considered? Ifso, should c<lndensate be measured according to ASHRAE 103-1993? 3) Should DOE's procedure specifY tests at both maximum and minimum rated input for modulating boilers and furnaces? 4) Ifmodular boiler systems are sold as a package, should the individual boilers be tested, or the installation as a whole?5) 

### Should a steamhot water boiler be tested on both steam and hot water, or on steam only? 4: 15 -4:45 

### Other issues raised by 

### participants

Q, 

### Wednesday, April 15,1998
Test protocols for commercial air conditioners and heat pumDs 9:00 

### - 9: 15 

### DOE introduction and NIST overview 9: 15 

### - 9:45 

### External static pressure requirements 

### Criticshave observed that ARI Standard 2101240 

### calls for external static pressures under test conditions that are lower than generally encountered in commercialbuildings, potentiallyleading to an overstated efficiency rating. Others counterthat the present procedureis adequate for purposes of comparing products relative to one another, and a changewould be unnecessarily burdensome. 

### Questionsandrequest for comments 1) 

### Does the present 

### ANprocedure introducean error, and if so, is it significant? 2) 

### If so, what is the appropriateexternal staticpressure? 3) 

### How burdensomewould a change in the specification be? 9:45 - 10:15 

### Other issues raised by participants 10:15 - 10:30 

### Break Sampling, certification and enforcement 10:30 - 1050 

### DOE introduction and NIST overview 10:50

### - 11:30 

### Statistical sampling 

### DOE is seeking to establish sampling regimes for certification and enforcement that strike an appropriatebalance between cost and reliability of efficiency determination. 

### Questionsandrequest for comments 1) 

### What is the appropriate sample size for each product to be tested?

6 2) 

### How should sample units be selected? 3) 

### Where should testing be performed and by whom? 5) Should a steamlhot water boiler be tested on both steam and hot water, or on steam only? 4:15

- 4:45 Other issues raised by participants 

### " Wednesday, April 15, 1998

Test protocols for commercial air conditioners and heat pumps 9:00

- 9:15 DOE introduction and NIST overview 9: 15

- 9:45 External static pressure requirements Critics have observed that ARI Standard 210/240 calls for external static pressures under"test conditions that are lower than generally encountered in commercial buildings, potentially leading to an overstated efficiency rating. Others counter that the present procedure is adequate for purposes of comparing products relative to one another, and a change would be unnecessarily burdensome. Questions andrequest for comments 1) Does the present ARI procedure introduce an error, and ifso, is it significant? 2) Ifso, what is the appropriate external static pressure? 3) How burdensome would a change in the specification be? 9:45

- 10: 15 Other issues raised by participants 10: 15

- 10:30 Break Sampling, certification and enforcement 10:30

- 10:50 DOE introduction and NIST overview 10:50

- 11 :30 Statistical sampling DOE is seeking to establish sampling regimes for certification and enforcement that strike an appropriate balance between cost and reliability ofefficiency determination. Questions andrequest for comments 1) What is the appropriate sample size for each product to be tested? 2) How should sample units be selected? 3) Where should testing be performed and by whom?

### 4) 

### How should compliance be determined from test results, e.g.by employing arithmetic averaging or statistical confidence intervals? 5) 

### Should derating or other special adjustmentfactorsbe used? 6) 

### Should the scheme applied in enforcementdiffer from that used for certification? 7) 

### Shouldthe enforcement samplingplan be used to determinethe validity oflabeling representations?

Q 

### 11:30 - 

### 12:10 

### Sampling limited populations Many productsto be covered by the test procedure are produced in limited numbers, either because of their large size or because of the number of variationsin design demanded by their purchasers. This complicatesthe determinationof statistical sampling plans due to concerns of cost and testingburden. 

### Questions and request for comments 1)

### Are specialprovisionsneeded for very large capacity, site-assembled, or low production quantity units? 2) 

### Can productsbe grouped as minor variations on a more limited number ofbasic models? If so, how many models need to be tested, and what is the best way to extrapolate the results to other productswithin a group? Is simulationtesting a valid approach? Should limitations be placed on its use? 32

### What relevant experiencedo other organizations,like the Gas Appliance Manufacturers Association, Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute, American Boiler Manufacturers Association, or the CaliforniaEnergy Commission, have to address this problem? 12: 10 - 

### 12:30 

### Other issues raised by participants 12:30- 

### 1:30 

### Lunch (on your own) Labeling 1.30- 

### 1.45 

### DOE introduction and overview 1.45-

### 2: 10 

### Justification for labeling Before requiring a label, DOE must first determine that such a requirement would be technically feasible and economically justified, that significant energy savings would result, and that labeling would be likely to assist consumersin making purchasing decisions. 4) How should compliance be determined from test results, e.g. by employing arithmetic averaging or statistical confidence intervals? 5) Should derating or other special adjustment factors be used? 6) Should the scheme applied in enforcement differ from that used for certification? 7) Should the enforcement sampling plan be used to determine the validity oflabeling representations?



### " 11:30

- 12:10 Sampling limited populations Many products to be covered by the test procedure are produced in limited numbers, either because oftheir large size or because ofthe number of variations in design demanded by their purchasers. This complicates the determination ofstatistical sampling plans due to concerns ofcost and testing.burden. Questions andrequest for comments 1) Are special provisions needed for very large capacity, site-assembled, or low production quantity units? 2) Can products be grouped as minor variations on a more limited number ofbasic models? Ifso, how many models need to be tested, and what is the best way to extrapolate the results to other products within a group? Is simulation testing a valid approach? Should limitations be placed on its use? 3**~** What relevant experience do other organizations, like the Gas Appliance Manufacturers Association, Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute, American Boiler Manufacturers Association, or the California Energy Commission, have to address this problem? 12: 10

- 12:30 Other issues raised by participants 12:30 1:30 Lunch (on your own) Labeling 1:30

- 1:45 DOE introduction and overview 1:45

- 2: 10 Justification for labeling Before requiring a label, DOE must first determine that such a requirement would be technically feasible and economicallyjustified, that significant energy savings would result, and that labeling would be likely to assist consumers in making purchasing decisions.

### Questions and

### request for comments 1)Would labelsbe technically feasible and economically justified for all classes ofequipment discussed at this workshop? 2) 

### What energy savings, if any, would result iflabels were required? 3)Would labels assist consumersin making purchasing decisions? 2: 10

### -2:35 Label location and content Under 

### EPCA, the Secretary ofEnergy has some latitude in specifying information that will appear on permanent nameplates or on labels permanently affixed to tested products. DOE seeks suggestionsconcerning the location oflabels, the appropriatelevel ofdetail for information that might appear on them, as well as the potential burden imposed on manufacturersby requiring alternative labeling schemes. 

### Questionsand

### request for comments 1)What information should appear on the manufacturer's nameplate, and what should appear on a separate label? Is the answerthe same for all equipment classes? 2) ShouldDOE consider including any additional data beyond the efficiency rating for purposes of enforcement of standards. These might include a compliance certification number or message, reference to the test procedure, operating conditions under which the efficiencyrating applies, comparative efficiency ranking within a class of products, or other consumer information. 3) How should DOE account for special purpose labels that may be required under ASHRAE 90.lR, e.g.,labels indicatingthat certain package terminal air conditionersand heat pumps are restricted to replacement installation only?

4 

### 2:35 - 

### 3:00 Labeling mixed component systems Some systems covered by these test procedures are made up of separate components, often krnished by different manufacturers, raising questions ofhow theseproducts shouldbe labeled and by whom. 

### Questionsandrequest for comments 1)

### Should component manufacturers or systemintegratorsbe responsible - 

### for affixing labels? 

### 2) If manufacturers are responsible for labeling, is there a way for them to account for the fact that they do not control how the balance of the system is designed? 3) If systemintegrators are responsible, is there a way for them to make custom labels correspondingto the different combinationsof components they might specify? 

### Questions andrequest for comments 1) Would labels be technically feasible and economicallyjustified for all classes ofequipment discussed at this workshop? 2) What energy savings, ifany, would result iflabels were required? 3) Would labels assist consumers in making purchasing decisions? 

### 2:10

- 2:35 Label location and content Under EPCA, the Secretary ofEnergy has some latitude in specifYing information that will appear on permanent nameplates or on labels permanently affixed to tested products. DOE seeks suggestions concerning the location.oflabels, the appropriate level ofdetail for information that might appear on them, as well as the potential burden imposed on manufacturers by requiring alternative labeling schemes. 

### Questions andrequest for comments 1) What information should appear on the manufacturer's nameplate, and what should appear on a separate label? Is the answer the same for all equipment classes? 2) Should DOE consider including any additional data beyond the efficiency rating for purposes ofenforcement ofstandards. These might include a compliance certification number or message, reference to the test procedure, operating conditions under which the efficiency rating applies, comparative efficiency ranking within a class ofproducts, or other consumer information. 3) How should DOE account for special purpose labels that may be required under ASHRAE 90.1R, e.g., labels indicating that certain package terminal air conditioners and heat pumps are restricted to replacement installation only?



### " 2:35

- 3:00 Labeling mixed component systems Some systems covered by these test procedures are made up ofseparate components, often furnished by different manufacturers, raising questions ofhow these products should be labeled and by whom. 

### Questions andrequest for comments 1) Should component manufacturers or syst€?mintegrators be responsible for affixing labels? 2) Ifmanufacturers are responsible for labeling, is there a way for them to account for the fact that they do notcontrol how the balance ofthe system is designed? 3) Ifsystem integrators are responsible, is there a way for them to make custom labels corresponding to the different combinations ofcomponents they might specifY?3.00 - 3:

### 15 Other issues raised by participants 3:15 - 3:30 

### Next steps and closing remarks 3:30 

### Adjournment 

## ,

3:00

- 3: 15 Other issues raised 

### by participants 3:15

- 3:30 Next steps and closing remarks 3:30 Adjournment