Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 1 

## BUILDING TECHNOLOGIES PROGRAM

Framework Public Meeting for Automatic Commercial Ice - Maker (ACIM) Equipment 

## pictures

Charles Llenza December 16, 2010 ACIM -2010-STD -0037@ee.doe.govBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 2 

## • Meeting Agenda • Introductions • Role of the Facilitator • Ground Rules

– Listen as an ally

– Focus on issues

– Use short, succinct statements/keep to the point

– One person speaks at a time (raise hand to be recognized; state your name for the record)

– Hold sidebar conversations outside the room

– Set cell phones to silent/vibrate • Housekeeping Items 

# Welcome and IntroductionsBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 3 

# Attending Parties Opening Statements

At this time DOE welcomes opening remarks/statements on the framework document for automatic commercial ice - makers .Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 4 

### Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) Analyses Closing Remarks, Contacts & Information 

# Public Meeting Slides Topics

5 6 7 Regulatory History 2 Rulemaking Overview and Framework 4 1 Introduction
3 ScopeBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 5 

# Meeting Purpose
• Present procedural and analytical approaches to evaluate energy conservation standards for automatic commercial ice - makers.
• Provide a forum for public discussion of rulemaking issues.
• Encourage interested parties to submit data, information, and written comments.
• Inform interested parties and facilitate the rulemaking process. 

# IntroductionBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 6 

# Introduction
Issue Box: In the Rulemaking Framework Document for Automatic Commercial Ice - Making Equipment, DOE welcomes comments on particular issues raised in a text box like this. Throughout this presentation, specific issues will be raised for discussion on slides such as this, with identifying numbers corresponding to those in the framework document. In addition, DOE has added some questions that are not in the framework document. These questions are identified by a letter. Nonetheless, comments concerning any part of the document or presentation are welcome . Note: The presentation contains the majority of the questions as presented in the Framework document. For a complete set of questions, please refer to Appendix A of the Framework document. 

# Request for Comment FormatBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 7 

### Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) Analyses Closing Remarks, Contacts & Information 

# Public Meeting Slides Topics

5 6 7 Regulatory History 2 Rulemaking Overview & Framework 4 1 Introduction
3 ScopeBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 8 

# Regulatory History

• Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) of 1975 ( Public Law 94- 163).

– Established the energy conservation program.

– Energy Policy Act (EPACT) 2005 amendment to EPCA.

– Prescribed standards for cube ice - makers with capacities between 50 and 2,500 lb per 24- hour period, effective January 1, 2010.

– Authorizes DOE to issue standards for other types of automatic commercial ice - makers that are not covered by 42 U.S.C. 6313(d)(2)(A).

– Directed DOE, no later than January 1, 2015, to issue a final rule after determining whether amending the applicable standards is technologically feasible and economically justified. 42 U.S.C. 6313(d)(3)(A) 

# Energy Conservation StandardBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 9 

# Test Procedure

• The previous DOE test procedure final rule, published in December 2006, adopted ARI Standard 810- 2003 as the DOE test procedure. 71 FR 71340, 71350.

– References ASHRAE Standard 29 -1988 (RA 2005) as the method of test.

– Adopts a revised method for calculating the energy consumption rate.
• An updated AHRI test procedure has since been published – AHRI Standard 810-2007.
• ASHRAE has since updated its standard to ASHRAE Standard 29-2009. 

# Regulatory HistoryBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 10 

### Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) Analyses Closing Remarks, Contacts & Information 

# Public Meeting Slides Topics

5 6 7 Regulatory History 2 Rulemaking Overview & Framework 4 1 Introduction
3 ScopeBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 11 

# Scope Regulatory Definition

• Section 136(a)(4) of EPACT 2005 defines “automatic commercial ice maker” as:

– [A] factory- made assembly (not necessarily shipped in one package) that – • (A) consists of a condensing unit and ice - making section operating as an integrated unit, with means for making and harvesting ice; and • (B) may include means for storing ice, dispensing ice, or storing and dispensing ice.Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 12 

### • ECS – Energy Conservation Standard. • Ice Making Head (IMH): A model with the ice - making mechanism and the condensing unit in a single package, but with a separate ice storage bin. • Remote Condensing Unit (RCU) or Split System Unit: A model in which the ice - making mechanism and condenser or condensing unit are in separate sections. • Self-Contained (SCU): A model in which the ice - making mechanism and storage compartment are in an integral cabinet. • Cubed: Cubed ice machines have an alternate freezing and harvesting period. Water is circulated over an evaporator where it freezes until cubes are fully formed. The cubed ice is then harvested and moved to storage. The ice may be in cube shape, or in a variation of a solid shape. • Flake: Flake ice machines produce ice continuously, usually in a barrel - shaped evaporator. An auger inside the evaporator scrapes ice off the sides into a storage bin. • Nugget: Nugget ice machines use the same process as flake machines but compress the ice flakes into nuggets. • Potable water: Potable water is the water used in making ice that becomes ice or is drained as dump water. 

# Scope Definitions for Today’s DiscussionBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 13 

# Scope

• EPCA, as amended by EPACT 2005, prescribed standards for automatic commercial ice - makers, effective January 1, 2010. 42 U.S.C. 6313(d) Equipment Type* Type of Cooling Harvest Rate lb ice/24 hours Maximum Energy Use kWh/100 lb ice Maximum Condenser Water Use --gal/100 lb ice Ice - Making Head Water <500 7.80 - 0.0055H b 200 - 0.022H ≥500 and <1,436 5.58 - 0.0011H 200 - 0.022H ≥1,436 4.0 200 - 0.022H Air <450 10.26 - 0.0086H N/A ≥450 6.89 - 0.0011H N/A Remote Condensing (but not remote compressor) Air <1,000 8.85 - 0.0038H N/A ≥1,000 5.10 N/A Remote Condensing and Remote Compressor Air <934 8.85 - 0.0038H N/A ≥934 5.3 N/A Self- Contained Water <200 11.40 - 0.019H 191 - 0.0315H ≥200 7.60 191 - 0.0315H Air <175 18.0 - 0.069H N/A ≥175 9.80 N/A 

## *Applicable to cube machines onlyBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 14 

# Key Issues • Coverage of ice produced, e.g. block, flake, nugget, cracked

– DOE is considering to issue a new standard for continuous -type flake and nugget, and tube machines with capacities between 50 and 4,000 lb per 24- hour period. • Coverage as it relates to size, defined by 24- hour harvest rate,

– DOE is considering amending the existing standard for cube machines and extending it to include machines with capacities up to 4,000 lb per 24- hour period. • Test Procedure update. • Potable water use. • Stand - by and off- mode energy use. 

# Scope

Additional Comment A - DOE welcomes the identification of additional key scoping issues not identified here or within the framework document.Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 15 

### Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) Analyses Closing Remarks, Contacts & Information 

# Public Meeting Slides Topics

5 6 7 Regulatory History 2 Rulemaking Overview & Framework 4 1 Introduction
3 ScopeBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 16 

# Rulemaking Overview & Framework EPCA Seven Factors • 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)( i ) directs DOE to consider seven factors when setting energy conservation standards: EPCA Factors DOE Analysis 1. Economic impact on consumers and manufacturers Life-Cycle Cost Analysis and Manufacturer Impact Analysis 2. Lifetime operating cost savings compared to increased cost for the equipment Life-Cycle Cost Analysis 3. Total projected energy savings National Impact Analysis 4. Impact on utility or performance Engineering Analysis and Screening Analysis 5. Impact of any lessening of competition Manufacturer Impact Analysis 6. Need for national energy conservation National Impact Analysis 7. Other factors the Secretary considers relevant Environmental Assessment, Utility Impact Analysis, and Employment Impact AnalysisBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 17 

# Rulemaking Overview & Framework

Framework Document Preliminary Analysis Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) Final Rule


## • DOE published a Federal Register notice on November 19, 2010. 75 FR 70852
• Today’s public meeting covers the Framework documents for automatic c ommercial ice - makers (ACIM).
• Framework document provides:

– Overview of the rulemaking process

– Provides avenues for interested parties to submit comments by January 18, 2011.

– The framework information and materials are available online at: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/commercial/automatic_ice_making_equipment.html 

# Rulemaking Process StepsBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 18 Framework Document Public Meeting December 16, 2010 

# Rulemaking Overview & Framework

ECS Preliminary Analysis Public Meeting Planned - September 2011 ECS NOPR Public Meeting Planned - May 2012 2011 2014 2010 2012 2013 2016 Estimated ECS Final Rule Compliance Date January 2015 2015
TP NOPR Public Meeting Planned – Spring 2011 

# Rulemaking TimelineBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 19 

### Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) Analyses Closing Remarks, Contacts & Information 

# Public Meeting Slides Topics

5 6 7 Regulatory History 2 Rulemaking Overview & Framework 4 1 Introduction
3 ScopeBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 20 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

Market & Technology Screening Analysis Engineering Analysis Energy Use Characterization Shipments Analysis National Impact Analysis Markups for Equipment Price Determination Life- Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis Framework Document Preliminary Analysis NOPR Final Rule

Preliminary Manufacturer Impact AnalysisBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 21 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure Market and Technology Assessment
• Characterize the markets, the automatic commercial ice - maker industry , and the potential technological measures that improve efficiency. Method
• Identify and characterize manufacturers of automatic commercial ice - makers; • Estimate shipments and trends in the market; • Identify regulatory and non - regulatory initiatives intended to improve the efficiency of the equipment covered under this rulemaking; and • Identify technologies that could improve efficiency of equipment.Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 22 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

Item 3 - 1 DOE seeks information on annual shipments into the U.S. market from 1995 to 2010 (both domestic and imports) by equipment class, and the corresponding shipment-weighted average efficiency of these shipments. Item 3 -2 DOE seeks information on the proportion(s) of equipment shipped annually that replaces existing equipment. Additional Comment B - DOE seeks input and data on estimates of market shares, equipment features, and efficiency trends for the automatic commercial ice - makers covered in this rulemaking. Additional Comment C - DOE seeks input on distribution channels used for sales of covered equipment. 

# Request for CommentsBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 23 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure Proposed Classes for Commercial Ice- Makers Type of Ice Equipment Type Type of Cooling Harvest Capacity Rate lb/day Cube Flake Nugget
Ice- Making Head Water <500 Existing Potential Potential ≥500 and <1,436 Existing Potential Potential ≥1,436 Existing Potential Potential Air <450 Existing Potential Potential ≥450 Existing Potential Potential Remote Condensing (but not remote compressor) Air <1,000 Existing Potential Potential ≥1,000 Existing Potential Potential Remote Condensing and Remote Compressor Air <934 Existing Potential Potential ≥934 Existing Potential Potential Self-Contained Unit Water <200 Existing Potential Potential ≥200 Existing Potential Potential Air <175 Existing Potential Potential ≥175 Existing Potential Potential Designed for Connection to a Compressor Rack System TBD ALL N/A Potential PotentialBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 24 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure
Item 3 -4 DOE requests feedback on promulgating a new standard to include flake, nugget, and tube -type ice - making machines. Item 3 -6 DOE requests feedback on tube -type machines. DOE understands the machines have tube - shaped evaporators and/or make tube - shaped ice and that these machines operate cyclically like cube machines, but they do not produce clear ice. DOE requests comment on whether separate equipment classes should be established for such equipment. If yes, what are the appropriate capacity ranges for these classes? If not, with which of the proposed equipment classes should the tube machines be grouped? 

# Request for CommentBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 25 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure Additional Comment D - DOE seeks comments on whether a separate product class is needed for ice makers designed for connection to a remote compressor rack system. Additional Comment E - DOE seeks comment on the appropriate capacity breakdown by harvest rate for ice rack- connected machines. Item 3 -7 DOE requests feedback concerning the proposed harvest rate breakdowns, and if they accurately reflect the current market. Item 3 -9 DOE requests comment on including ice - makers with capacities greater than 4,000 pounds per day in this rulemaking. If DOE should include standards for ice - makers with capacities larger than 4,000 pounds per day, what should the range of capacities be in this rulemaking 

# Request for Comment (cont.)

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

Commercial Ice Maker Energy Use by Sector. ADL, 1996. Office

4% Retail 9% Food Service 14%

Food Sales

4% Education 8% Lodging 22% Health

Care 39% 

### ENERGY STAR – No specified building use type FEMP – No specified building use type CEE – Member programs target restaurant applications 

## Additional Comment F - DOE requests input on regulatory and non regulatory initiatives, in addition to ENERGY STAR, the CEE, and FEMP. 

# Regulatory and Non - Regulatory ImpactsBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 27 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure Equipment Applicability Technology Options Cube Flake Nugget Tube Note Higher- efficiency compressors √ √ √ √ Larger condenser √ √ √ √ Higher- efficiency condenser fan/motor, more condenser air flow √ √ √ √ N/A for water cooled equipment Higher- efficiency auger motor N/A √ √ N/A Higher- efficiency pump/motor √ N/A N/A √ Drain water thermal exchange √ N/A N/A N/A Reduced harvest meltage √ N/A NA √ Reduced evaporator thermal cycling √ N/A NA √ Better/thicker insulation √ √ √ √ More condenser water flow √ √ √ √ N/A for air cooled machines Less potable water flow √ N/A N/A N/A Larger- diameter suction line √ √ √ √ Remote - compressor equipment Brazed plate condenser √ √ √ √ Only for water cooled equipmentBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 28 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

Item 3- 10 What technologies or designs, if any, should be added to or removed from the above list? If certain technologies on the list are not applicable to all equipment classes, what equipment classes are affected? In commenting on design options, please discuss any potential impacts on safety, performance, and consumer utility. 

# Request for CommentBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 29 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

• EPACT 2005 established standards for condenser water use for water- cooled automatic commercial ice - makers. • DOE has identified several issues pertaining to the amendment of the condenser water use standards:

– Reduction of condenser water use can increase energy use.

– The cost impacts of condenser water use reductions can vary, depending on the source (tap water flushed down the drain, cooling tower, chilled water, pumped well water).

– The energy saving technologies indirectly allow reduction of condenser water use by preventing energy use increase when condenser water flow is decreased, however DOE has not identified technology options that directly reduce condenser water use. 

## Additional Comment G - DOE seeks comment whether any technology options not yet identified are available to reduce condenser water use; and seeks data sources on the prevalence of different sources for cooling water. 

# Consideration of Condenser Water UseBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 30 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure Potable Water

• DOE is considering the regulation of potable water used in making ice, in addition to condenser water use. • Reducing potable water use is expected to reduce energy use; hence the energy standard tends to indirectly limit potable water use.Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 31 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure
Item 3 - 11 DOE requests feedback on potable water use as a metric. Item 3 - 12 DOE requests comment on the relationship between potable water use and energy efficiency. Specifically, to what degree is potable water efficiency likely to increase with increased stringency of energy efficiency requirements for the ice - makers covered under this rulemaking without explicit potable water efficiency requirements? Item 3 - 13 DOE seeks feedback on including total water use in the technological assessment. Item 3 - 14 DOE seeks input on what technologies or designs should be considered to improve water efficiencies (both potable and condenser water). 

# Request for CommentBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 32 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

Market & Technology Screening Analysis Engineering Analysis Energy Use Characterization Shipments Analysis National Impact Analysis Markups for Equipment Price Determination Life- Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis Framework Document Preliminary Analysis NOPR Final Rule

Preliminary Manufacturer Impact AnalysisBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 33 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

Impacts on health or safety Impacts on equipment utility or availability to consumers Practicability to manufacture, install, and service Technological feasibility 

## • Purpose - Screen out technology options that DOE will not consider in the engineering analysis for automatic commercial ice - maker equipment. • Approach - DOE will evaluate each technology option based on the following four screening criteria :

Item 4- 1 DOE welcomes comments on the four screening criteria. 

# Screening AnalysisBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 34 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

Market & Technology Screening Analysis Engineering Analysis Energy Use Characterization Shipments Analysis National Impact Analysis Markups for Equipment Price Determination Life- Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis Framework Document Preliminary Analysis NOPR Final Rule

Preliminary Manufacturer Impact AnalysisBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 35 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

• A key factor in setting the standard is the increased cost of more - efficient equipment.
• The engineering analysis determines the relationship between cost and efficiency. Rulemaking Analyses
• Life -Cycle Cost and Payback Period • Manufacturer Impact Analysis • Employment Impact Analysis Manufacturer Selling Price – Efficiency RelationshipManufacturerSelling Price
Efficiency Level 

# Engineering Analysis GoalsBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 36 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

Item 5 -6 DOE requests feedback on the use of a combined analysis approach that uses multiple information sources to determine the relationship between manufacturer selling price and energy consumption for automatic commercial ice - makers. • Engineering Analysis Approaches

– Design Option Approach : Determination of efficiency and improvement potential based on individual and groups of design options.

– Efficiency Level Approach : Cost information collected (i.e., from the industry) at predetermined efficiency levels to represent cost/efficiency relationship.

– Reverse Engineering Approach : Costs for the efficiency levels associated with reverse - engineered products are calculated using a manufacturing cost model.



## • DOE intends to use a combination of these approaches, using multiple available data sources to develop the cost-efficiency relationships. 

# E ngineering Analysis MethodologyBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 37 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

• DOE must consider the potential tradeoffs between energy use and condenser water use of water- cooled equipment in its engineering analysis.
Item 5- 1 DOE seeks comments from stakeholders providing insights regarding such trade - offs. Item 5-4 DOE seeks comment on simplifying assumptions that may be made to reduce the potential complexity of maximizing benefits associated with both water and energy use reductions. 

# Energy Use/Condenser Water Use TradeoffsBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 38 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

• In many rulemakings, DOE requests cost- efficiency data from the industry to supplement its own analysis. • This data is generally collected and aggregated by the applicable trade organization (AHRI for automatic commercial ice - makers) to protect the privacy of the information provided by individual manufacturers. 

## Item 5-2 DOE requests comments on the best ways to collect such information from the industry. DOE anticipates that such data might be collected and aggregated by AHRI for submittal to DOE. Item 5 -3 DOE requests input on appropriate categories and questions to be included in such requests for data. Item 5 -4A DOE seeks comments and recommendations regarding the potential data collection efforts that might be made by industry participants to support this rulemaking, and the possible structure of data request forms that could be used to assist such efforts. 

# Industry Data CollectionBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 39 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

# Equip. Type Capacity lb/24 hr Energy kWh/100 lb ice Potable Water gal/100 lb ice Condenser Water gal/100 lb ice Width in. Energy Test 1 IMH - A 270 7.7 20 0 30 x 2 IMH - A 324 5.8 22.6 0 22 x 3 IMH - A 780 5.7 20.5 0 30 4 IMH - A 844 5 18.4 0 30 5 IMH - A 1,460 4.95 20 0 48 6 IMH - A 1,560 4.1 18.8 0 48 x 7 IMH - W 851 4.4 19.7 153 30 8 IMH - W 2,820 3.6 19.7 166 48 x 9 RCU - A 1,510 4.59 20 0 48 10 RCU - A 1,694 3.8 18.1 0 36 x 11 RCU - A 2,350 4.64 19.7 0 48 12 SCU - A 121 8.4 17.8 0 23.75 x 13 SCU - A 112 11.8 34 0 24 14 SCU - W 285 5.5 18 180 30 x 

### • DOE plans to purchase for teardown the following cube -type ice - making machines. • Roughly half will be tested prior to teardown, as indicated. 

# Product Teardowns and TestingBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 40 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

# Equip. Type Flake/ Nugget Capacity lb/24 hr Energy kWh/100 lb ice Width in. Energy Test 15 IMH - A N 310 7.4 22 16 IMH - A N 822 5.4 30 17 IMH - A F 845 3.4 21 x 18 RCU - A F 1780 2.5 42 x 19 SCU - A N 280 5.7 16 x 

## • DOE plans to purchase for teardown the following flake and nugget machines. Some will be tested, as indicated.

Additional Comment H - DOE requests comments on its plans for teardowns and testing. In particular, what types, capacities, or sizes of equipment are not sufficiently well represented? 

# Product Teardowns and Testing (contd.)Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 41 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

Item 5 - 5 DOE is also interested in receiving equipment test data (test procedure used, rating conditions, harvest rate, voltage, integrated average product temperature, daily energy consumption, etc.). Test data representative of the baseline model in each equipment class is particularly important. • DOE realizes that its own test efforts are limited and that additional test data may be helpful for both the engineering analysis and the test procedure rulemaking. 

# Equipment Test DataBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 42 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

• DOE proposes the following baseline efficiency levels for the analyses. • Numerical Levels are presented in the Framework Document.

Item 3- 17 DOE seeks feedback on the proposed baselines.

* Th e NRCan standard for Flake/Nugget machines distinguishes only the type of cooling (air or water) and capacity (<700 lb/day and >700 lb/day). 

### Equipment Class Baselines for both Energy Use and Condenser Water Use (for watercooled equipment) Potable water Use (if regulated) Cubers Current DOE Standard Average for the class Flake and Nugget Machines Option 1: Natural Resources Canada ( NRCan ) Standard* Option 2: Two - part curves based on best fit of the equipment efficiency data Not applicable, since variation is not expected. 

# Baseline Efficiency LevelsBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 43 Description * Baseline EL1 EL2 EL3 EL4 EL5 Max. Available IMH -W-Small DOE Standard 10% 15% 20% 25% IMH -W- Med DOE Standard 10% 15% 20% 22% IMH -W- Large DOE Standard 10% 15% 20% 23% IMH -A-Small DOE Standard 10% (E -STAR) 15% (CEE3) 20% 24% IMH -A- Large DOE Standard 10% (E -STAR) 15% (CEE3) 20% 21% RCU - NRC-Small DOE Standard 9% (E -STAR) 15% (CEE3) 20% 25% 20% RCU - NRC- Large DOE Standard 9% (E -STAR) 15% (CEE3) 20% 25% 27% RCU - RC-Small DOE Standard 9% (E -STAR) 15% (CEE3) 12% RCU - RC- Large DOE Standard 9% (E -STAR) 15% (CEE3) 15% SCU -W-Small DOE Standard 7% 15% 20% 25% 25% SCU -W- Large DOE Standard 7% 15% 20% 25% 28%** SCU -A-Small DOE Standard 7% (E -STAR) 15% (CEE3) 20% 25% 30% 32% SCU -A- Large DOE Standard 7% (E -STAR) 15% (CEE3) 20% 25% 30% 31%



# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure Incremental Proposed efficiency levels (EL) for cube machines

*ENERGY STAR and CEE labels apply to air- cooled cube machines at the efficiency levels indicated. **This is the max available for “ undercounter” self- contained equipment.Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 44 

# Proposed efficiency levels (EL) for flake and nugget machines (Option 1) Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

Description Baseline Min. Available* EL1 EL2 EL3 EL4 EL5 EL6 Max. Available* IMH -W-Small NRCan Standard 28% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 46% IMH -W- Large NRCan Standard 19% 48% IMH -A-Small NRCan Standard
- 33% 10% 20% 30% 35% 40% 45% 47% IMH -A- Large NRCan Standard 16% 52% RCU - NRC-Small NRCan Standard 16% 15% 25% 35% 40% 45% 50% 28% RCU - NRC- Large NRCan Standard 19% 64% RCU - RC NRCan Standard 20% 10% 20% 25% 30% RCU - Rack NRCan Standard 60% ** 91% SCU -W-Small NRCan Standard 15% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% SCU -W- Large NRCan Standard No products currently available SCU -A-Small NRCan Standard
- 11% 10% 20% 30% 35% 40% 45% 46% SCU -A- Large NRCan Standard No products currently available *DOE determined “Min Available” and “Max Available” efficiency levels based on products on manufacturer websites and in the CEC, ENERGY STAR, CEE, AHRI, and Natural Resources Canada ( NRCan ) databases. ** Efficiency levels reported for these products are based on the NRCan Standard, but the ultimate selection will depend on decisions made for measurement of their energy use.Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 45 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

Additional Comment I - DOE seeks input from stakeholders about its proposed efficiency levels (these may be used for collecting incremental cost data from manufacturers). DOE also seeks input from stakeholders on appropriate maximum technologically feasible efficiency levels. 

# Request for CommentBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 46 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

• DOE will evaluate all design options that are commercially available or present in a working prototype, including proprietary designs and technologies . • Proprietary designs will only be considered if they do not present a unique path to a given efficiency level . • The confidentiality of manufacturers will be maintained . Item 5 -8 Are there proprietary designs that DOE should consider in the analyses for any of the equipment under consideration by this rulemaking? If so, how should DOE acquire the cost data necessary for evaluating these designs? Conversely, are there proprietary designs that should not be considered? Which products use these designs? 

# Proprietary DesignsBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 47 

### • Current DOE Test Procedure

– ARI Standard 810- 2003, final rule published in December 2006 (71 FR 71340, 71350)

– References ASHRAE Standard 29 - 1988 (RA 2005) as the method of test.

– Adopts a revised method for calculating the energy consumption rate.



### • Updates for the Current Test Procedure Rulemaking

– An updated AHRI test procedure has since been published – AHRI Standard 810- 2007.

– ASHRAE has since updated its standard to ASHRAE Standard 29 - 2009.

– Standby and Off Modes are not being considered. 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure Test Procedure UpdateBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 48 

### • EPCA provides that if ARI Standard 810- 2003 is amended, the Secretary shall amend the DOE test procedure to be consistent unless to do so would not meet the EPCA requirements for test procedures. 42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(7)(B) • DOE is considering referencing AHRI Standard 810- 2007 as the DOE test procedure.

– Expands the test procedure to apply to cube - (or batch - ) type and continuous type automatic commercial ice - makers, regardless of ice type, with capacities up to 4,000 lb per day. • DOE is also considering referencing ASHRAE Standard 29 - 2009 in the DOE test procedure.

– Reflects same changes as AHRI Standard 810-2007. 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

Additional Comment J - DOE requests comment on modifying the current DOE test procedure to reference the updated AHRI Standard 810- 2007 and ASHRAE Standard 29 - 2009. 

# Updating to Current Industry VersionsBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 49 

## • DOE recognizes that there are automatic ice - makers in the market with capacities larger than 4,000 lb per 24 hours.
• DOE understands larger capacity machines can be tested using the test methods in AHRI Standard 810- 2007 and ASHRAE Standard 29 - 2009. 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

Additional Comment K - DOE requests comment on applying the AHRI 810- 2007 test procedure to larger capacity equipment. 

# Larger Capacity Equipment TestingBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 50 

## • The current DOE test procedure requires reporting condenser water use only.
• DOE is considering adding a method to calculate the total water use: 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

Additional Comment L - DOE requests comment on the proposed calculation of total water use. 

# total water use (gal/100 lb ice) = condenser water use (gal/100 lb ice) + potable water used in making ice (gal/100 lb ice) Total Water Use Metric CalculationBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 51 

## • Inconsistency in reporting of energy use of remote condensing ice makers :

– Ice Makers with dedicated remote condensing units report energy consumption of the total ice making machine, including the ice making head, compressor and condenser.

– Ice Makers that are meant to be used with a remote compressor rack that could serve multiple appliances report only the energy use of the ice making head. 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure Remote Condensing Unit Testing IssueBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 52 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure DOE sees three potential options to address this issue: 1. A calculation method that applies a default factor to the IMH energy consumption that is representative of remote condenser and compressor rack energy use 2. A measurement method that measures the energy use of a remote condensing ice maker with a designated remote condenser 3. Continue to report only energy consumed by the IMH without remote condenser or compressor energy use 

## Additional Comment M - DOE requests comment on how the energy consumption of ice makers that are designed to be connected to a remote rack should be calculated in the DOE test procedure. Specifically, DOE requests comment on the pros and cons of the three proposed methods . 

# Remote Condensing Unit Testing Issue (cont.)Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 53 

### • DOE has identified several factors that may affect the accuracy and repeatability of test procedure results, including:

– Water Hardness

– Ice quality

– Ice temperature

– Diameter and insulation of refrigeration line

– Condenser air inlet temperature

– Top clearance above ice - maker 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

Additional Comment N - DOE requests comment on potential inaccuracies or sources of error in the test procedure, including but not limited to the items listed above. If large sources of error exist, DOE requests comment on how the test procedure might be amended to address these inaccuracies. 

# Test Procedure AccuracyBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 54 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

Market & Technology Screening Analysis Engineering Analysis Energy Use Characterization Shipments Analysis National Impact Analysis Markups for Equipment Price Determination Life- Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis Framework Document Preliminary Analysis NOPR Final Rule

Preliminary Manufacturer Impact AnalysisBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 55 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

Proposed Percentage Distribution of Shipments by Market Channel Self-Contained* Equipment % New and Replacement Construction National Account Distributor Contractor 30 35 35 

### Remote Condensing Equipment % New and Replacement Construction National Account Distributor Contractor 70 15 15 

### * Self-Contained equipment includes Ice- Making Head and Self-Contained as defined by EPACT 2005, and Flake and Nugget analogues. Remote Condensing includes all other equipment types.Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 56 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure Types of Markups in Distribution Chain

• Baseline Markups:

– Markups relate consumer price to cost of goods sold (CGS).

– Baseline markups relate price to cost prior to a change in efficiency.

– Baseline markups indicate a consumer price that covers all of a distributor’s or contractor’s expenses plus profit.
• Incremental Markups:

– Incremental markups relate the incremental change in consumer price to the incremental change in CGS.

– Certain costs, such as direct labor costs (salaries, payroll, rental and occupancy), do not vary with efficiency induced changes in CGS and remain constant in the calculation of incremental markups.

– Incremental markups cover only expenses that vary with CGS **−** in this case, expenses that increase due to an increase in equipment efficiency.Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 57 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

Item 7- 1 DOE requests information on the proposed distribution channels for the commercial ice - making equipment covered under this rulemaking. Item 7- 2 DOE requests information on whether the distribution channels differ by the types of buildings that comprise the market for automatic commercial ice - makers, namely, food sales establishments, food service establishments, health care facilities, lodging facilities, and others. Item 7- 3 DOE requests feedback on its proposal to use incremental distribution channel markups for the LCC analysis. Item 7-4 DOE seeks comment on sources of food service equipment distribution chain data that could be used to characterize markups for the food service equipment industry. Item 7- 5 DOE seeks comment on appropriate transportation and shipping costs to include in the analysis and whether those costs are likely to vary for higher- efficiency equipment. 

# Request for CommentBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 58 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

Market & Technology Screening Analysis Engineering Analysis Energy Use Characterization Shipments Analysis National Impact Analysis Markups for Equipment Price Determination Life- Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis Framework Document Preliminary Analysis NOPR Final Rule

Preliminary Manufacturer Impact AnalysisBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 59 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure Energy Use Characterization

• Analyze energy and water use and end - use load characterization to assess the energy and water savings potential of different equipment efficiencies. • Provide the basis for the unit energy costs used in the life - cycle cost a nalysis. Issues

• Assumptions regarding the distribution, both by number and type of ice maker by building occupancy type • The relationship between building occupancy type and utilization factor • Energy use impacts of utilization factors and resulting down - cycling • Impact of indoor machines on heating and cooling loadsBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 60 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure Current Use and Utilization Factor Assumptions Building Type Utilization Factor (Duty Cycle) Percent Remote Condensing Units Education .5 TBD Food Sales .5 TBD Food Service .5 TBD Health Care .5 TBD Lodging .5 TBD Retail .5 TBD Office .5 TBDBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 61 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure
Item 6- 1 DOE seeks data or data sources that could be used to characterize the energy use of automatic commercial ice - making equipment. Item 6-2 DOE seeks feedback on the assumption that commercial ice making machine operation has a negligible impact on the building space conditioning loads. Additional Comment O – DOE seeks confirmation of number of equipment by building type, as shown on the previous slide Additional Comment P – DOE seeks confirmation of current utilization factors as is shown on the previous slide, or if it varies by building type, and if that factor captures both percentage of total use and down cycling, or whether those are two different factors. 

# Request for CommentBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 62 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

Market & Technology Screening Analysis Engineering Analysis Energy Use Characterization Shipments Analysis National Impact Analysis Markups for Equipment Price Determination Life- Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis Framework Document Preliminary Analysis NOPR Final Rule

Preliminary Manufacturer Impact AnalysisBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 63 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure Life-Cycle Cost (LCC) and Payback Period (PBP) Analysis • Assess the net LCC and PBP for different efficiency levels. Analysis

• LCC equals consumer price plus the sum of annual operating costs discounted to a particular base year. • Economic evaluation performed from the consumer perspective. • Analysis implemented in an Excel spreadsheet. • Results expressed as LCC difference (baseline minus standard level). • Simple payback equals the incremental first cost divided by the operating cost savings for 1 year . Consumer Life Cycle Cost (baseline and standard ) 

### LCC Impacts (difference between baseline and standard) 

### Operating Cost (sum & discount to present value) 

### First Cost (consumer price & installation )Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 64 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure LCC Flowchart Baseline Manufacturer Price Std-Level Manufacturer Price

Installation Cost From Engineering Analysis (Price is a Function of

Efficiency)
From Markups for Equipment Price Determination Analysis

Repair Cost Maintenance Cost Lifetime Discount Rate

Electricity Price Trend From Energy Use Characterization Analysis Energy and Water Consumption

Power and Water Demand

Distributor

Markup

Sales Tax Mechanical Contractor

Markup Consumer Price

Data Inputs Intermediate Analysis Output Results Total Installed Cost

Annual Energy Expense Annual Operating Expense Lifetime Operating Expense Payback

Period Life-Cycle Cost

Electricity and Water PricesBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 65 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

• DOE proposes to develop nationwide estimates of water and wastewater costs and incorporate these estimates into the annual operating cost, LCC, and PBP analyses. • Sources such as the American Water Works Association’s (AWWA’s) biennial price survey and other surveys of retail water purveyors will be compiled to establish base year prices. • DOE anticipates using data from multiple years’ surveys to establish trends for purposes of developing water price forecasts.

Item 8-8 DOE seeks input on the proposed methodology for developing estimates of national water costs and potential savings associated with the proposed rule. 

# Water PricesBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 66 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

• DOE bases repair costs on annualized costs of key components and frequency of replacement in the field. • Maintenance costs will be based on estimates of preventative maintenance and a separate estimate of maintenance for different ice - making technologies. • Unless the efficiency increases considered for this rulemaking result in significantly larger or heavier equipment, DOE expects that more - efficient automatic commercial ice - making equipment will not incur increased installation costs. 

# Installation, Maintenance, and Repair CostsBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 67 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

Item 8-3 DOE seeks answers to the question: What are the typical installation, maintenance, and repair costs and practices during the life cycle of an originally manufactured automatic commercial ice - making machine? Item 8-4 What is a typical time period between the sale of a new product and the first maintenance or repairs? What are the typical cycles of maintenance and repairs? Item 8- 5 DOE seeks feedback on whether and how routine maintenance, repair, and installation costs will change for products that are more energy and water efficient. Item 8-6 If it is not appropriate to assume that changes in maintenance, repair, or installation costs would be negligible for more - efficient products, DOE seeks feedback on appropriate methodologies for assessing changes to each of these costs. 

# Request for CommentBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 68 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

• Current research shows an automatic commercial ice - maker machine life typically ranges from 7 to 10 years, with an average of 8.5 years.
• DOE will use information from additional various literature sources (e.g., Appliance Magazine, handbooks published by ASHRAE) and input from manufacturers and other interested parties to better establish average equipment lifetimes for use in the LCC and subsequent analyses. Item 8-7 DOE seeks comment on appropriate equipment lifetimes for the classes of equipment covered in this rulemaking. 

# Equipment LifetimesBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 69 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

Market & Technology Screening Analysis Engineering Analysis Energy Use Characterization Shipments Analysis National Impact Analysis Markups for Equipment Price Determination Life- Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis Framework Document Preliminary Analysis NOPR Final Rule

Preliminary Manufacturer Impact AnalysisBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 70 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure Shipments Analysis

• Estimate product shipments in base case and potential new or amended energy efficiency standards scenarios. Approach

• Data sources: AHRI, Appliance Magazine, US Census Bureau, AEO, North American Association of Food Equipment Manufacturers (NAFEM). • Estimate base case forecast – what would the shipments be without new or amended energy conservation standards? • Estimate impact of standards – what, if any, increase/decrease in shipments in each equipment class would occur due to new/amended energy conservation standards?Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 71 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure
Item 9- 1 DOE seeks information on historical shipments of automatic commercial ice - making equipment for each equipment class covered under this rulemaking, as well as industry-trend data regarding relative growth in each equipment class. Item 9-2 DOE seeks information on representative saturation rates for each equipment class covered under this rulemaking, as well as industrytrend data regarding relative growth in each equipment class. Item 9-3 DOE requests input from manufacturers on the potential impact of new energy conservation standards on equipment shipments. Other interested parties are also welcome to provide input. DOE also requests input on any market- pull programs that currently exist to promote the adoption of more - efficient equipment. 

# Request for CommentBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 72 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

Market & Technology Screening Analysis Engineering Analysis Energy Use Characterization Shipments Analysis National Impact Analysis Markups for Equipment Price Determination Life- Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis Framework Document Preliminary Analysis NOPR Final Rule

Preliminary Manufacturer Impact AnalysisBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 73 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure National Impact Analysis (NIA)

• Estimate national energy savings (NES ), national water savings, and national net present value (NPV) of consumer savings for higher- efficiency standard levels . Analysis

• Rebound effect is assumed to not apply to this rulemaking because, usually, automatic commercial ice machines are presumed to run continuously, and operating settings are based on the amount of ice to be produced. • NES spreadsheets will be used for calculation of NES and NPV of consumer savings.Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 74 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

• National Energy and Water Savings :

– Compare national energy and water consumption of base case and higher- efficiency equipment – year- by-year calculations.

– Site -to - source conversion factors account for energy losses in generation, transmission, and distribution of electricity – from EIA’s National Energy Modeling System (NEMS ).
• NPV of consumer savings will be calculated, as per OMB guidance, with two different discount rates: 3% and 7%.



## Item 10- 1 DOE requests information on whether a rebound effect exists and should be incorporated in the NIA. Item 10-2 DOE welcomes comments from interested parties on the use of NIA spreadsheet models for estimating national impacts of amended energy and water conservation standards for automatic commercial ice making equipment. 

# National Impact Analysis (cont.)Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 75 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

Market & Technology Screening Analysis Engineering Analysis Energy Use Characterization Shipments Analysis National Impact Analysis Markups for Equipment Price Determination Life- Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis Framework Document Preliminary Analysis NOPR Final Rule

Preliminary Manufacturer Impact AnalysisBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 76 

# Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure

• The MIA consists of three main phases:

Industry profile Develop straw- man GRIM Develop interview guide Interviews & industrywide / subgroup analyses Assess direct employment, competition, cumulative burden Phase 2 Phase 3 Preliminary MIA Interviews Phase 1 Preliminary Analysis NOPR



### Item 12- 1 DOE seeks comment on the establishment of manufacturer subgroups for automatic commercial ice - making equipment, particularly small businesses and niche manufacturers. Item 12-2 What regulations or pending regulations should DOE consider in the analysis of cumulative regulatory burden? 

# Preliminary Manufacturer Impact AnalysisBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 77 

### Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) Analyses Closing Remarks, Contacts & Information 

# Public Meeting Slides Topics

5 6 7 Regulatory History 2 Rulemaking Overview & Framework 4 1 Introduction
3 ScopeBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 78 

# NOPR Analyses

Manufacturer Impact Analysis Utility Impact Analysis Employment Impact Analysis Life- Cycle Cost Subgroup Analysis Environmental Assessment Regulatory Impact Analysis
Life-Cycle Cost & Payback Period Analyses National Impact Analysis Revise Preliminary Analysis
Engineering Analysis Framework Document Preliminary Analysis NOPR Final Rule 

# NOPR Process StepsBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 79 

# NOPR Analyses

Item 12- 1 DOE seeks comment on the establishment of manufacturer subgroups for automatic commercial ice - making equipment, particularly small businesses and niche manufacturers. Item 12-2 What regulations or pending regulations should DOE consider in the analysis of cumulative regulatory burden? Item 13-1 DOE seeks input from interested parties on its proposed use of NEMS - BT to conduct the utility impact analysis. Item 13- 2 DOE seeks input on methodology of assessing the overall impact on the water utility industry. Item 14-1 DOE requests feedback on this approach to employment impact analysis. Item 15 -1 DOE seeks input on its plans to use NEMS - BT to conduct the environmental impact analysis on the equipment covered by this rulemaking. DOE is particularly interested in whether there are any other approaches to the environmental assessment that it should consider and the advantages and disadvantages for each approach. 

# Request for CommentBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 80 

### Preliminary Analysis & Test Procedure Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) Analyses Closing Remarks, Contacts & Information 

# Public Meeting Slides Topics

5 6 7 Regulatory History 2 Rulemaking Overview & Framework 4 1 Introduction
3 ScopeBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 81 

### Please reference all correspondence for this rulemaking with the following information:

– Automatic Commercial Ice - Maker Rulemaking

– Docket Number EERE -2010- BT-STD-0037

– Regulatory Identification Number (RIN) 1904-AC39 Email : ACIM -2010-STD-0037@ee.doe.gov

Comment period ends: January 18, 2011 

# Closing Remarks, Contacts & Information

Postal: Courier : Ms. Brenda Edwards U.S. Department of Energy Building Technologies Program Mailstop: EE - 2J, Room 1J -018 1000 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20585 -0121 Ms. Brenda Edwards U.S. Department of Energy Building Technologies Program, 6th Floor 950 L’Enfant Plaza, SW Washington, DC 20024 Tel: 202 -586-2945 

# ACIM Comment Submittal InformationBuilding Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 82 

## • DOE Appliance Standards

– http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/
• Automatic Commercial Ice- Maker Rulemaking

– http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/comme rcial/automatic_ice_making_equipment.html
• Contact Charles Llenza, Project Manager, from the Appliance Standards Program for additional information:

– Charles.Llenza@ee.doe.gov

– 202.586.2192

• Contact John Cymbalsky, Supervisor, from the Appliance Standards Program for additional information:

– John.Cymbalsky@ee.doe.gov

– 202.287.1692 

# Closing Remarks, Contacts & Information ACIM WebPages and DOE Contacts