1

BEFORE THE

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Washington, D.C. 20585

In the Matter of:

Panasonic Appliances Refrigeration

Systems Corporation of America,

Petitioner

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case Number: RF-022; RF-301

REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF

WAIVER AND INTERIM WAIVER

Panasonic Appliances Refrigeration Systems Corporation of America (“PAPRSA”)

respectfully submits this Request for Extension of Waiver and Interim Waiver (“Request”)

pursuant to 10 C.F.R. § 430.27(g). PAPRSA intends to introduce a new basic hybrid wine

chiller/beverage center model (“hybrid model”) listed below that contains the same design

characteristics that prevent testing of the basic model according to the test procedures prescribed

in 10 C.F.R. § 430, subpart B, appendix A and for which PAPRSA received two previous

waivers and interim waivers as a result. As detailed more fully below, the Department of Energy

(“DOE”) has previously granted PAPRSA1two separate waivers from DOE’s electric

refrigerator and refrigerator-freezer test procedures for determining the energy consumption of

substantially similar hybrid models in Case Nos. RF-022 and RF-301 (the “waiver hybrid

models”).2PAPRSA has developed a new basic hybrid model, PR5180JKBC, that contains the

same design characteristics as its waiver hybrid models that make it impossible to certify, rate,

and sell this new hybrid model under the existing testing procedures. PAPRSA therefore

respectfully requests that DOE extend the previously granted waivers and interim waivers to

these new basic hybrid models and that it be permitted to employ the alternative testing method

for this new basic hybrid model that has already been approved by DOE for the waiver hybrid

models.

1

The first waiver granted in Case No. RF-022 was issued to SANYO E&E Corporation.

Effective April 1, 2013, SANYO E&E Corporation changed its corporate name to Panasonic

Appliances Refrigeration Systems Corporation of America. Throughout this Petition, PAPRSA

will be used to refer to both SANYO E&E Corporation and Panasonic Appliances Refrigeration

Systems Corporation of America, unless otherwise indicated.

2 PAPRSA notes at the outset that its waiver hybrid models were tested and certified by

incorporating the standards contained 10 C.F.R. § 430, subpart B, appendix A1 as they relate to

the refrigerated beverage compartment of these single cabinet units. For the new basic hybrid

model, PAPRSA is electing to utilize 10 C.F.R. § 430, subpart B, appendix A prior to the

September 15, 2014 effective date to measure the energy consumption of its new basic hybrid

model.
2

1. Existing Waiver Background and Product Characteristics of PAPRSA’s Hybrid

Models

On June 2, 2011, PAPRSA submitted a petition for waiver with respect to the test

procedures for its waiver hybrid models that consist of a combination of a refrigerated “beverage”

compartment in the top portion of these single-cabinet units and a wine storage compartment on

the bottom of the units, and for which an alternative testing procedure was necessary in order to

certify, rate, and sell such models. The waiver hybrid models include the following models:

JUB248LB, JUB248RB, JUB248LW, JUB248RW, KBCO24LS, KBCS24LS, KBCO24RS,

KBCS24RS, and MBCM24FW.

As PAPRSA previously explained, PAPRSA designed the wine storage compartments of

its waiver hybrid models to operate between a minimum temperature of 45 oF and a maximum

temperature of 64 oF, with an average temperature of 55 to 57 oF. In fact, heaters are used to

ensure that the temperature in the wine storage compartment never drops below 45 oF, as wines

chilled below this temperature risk becoming crystallized and, therefore, ruined. Currently,

however, DOE’s testing procedures contained in 10 C.F.R. § 430, subpart B, appendix A1,

mandate that energy consumption be measured when the compartment temperature is set at 38 oF.

Based on the design characteristics of its waiver hybrid models noted above, however, PAPRSA

needed a waiver with respect to DOE’s testing procedures in order to properly “certify, rate, and

sell such models,” because the existing test procedures contained in 10 C.F.R. § 430, subpart B,

appendix A1, do not contemplate a product that is designed to be incapable of achieving a

temperature below 45 oF.

On April 2, 2012, DOE published PAPRSA’s previous petition for waiver and sought

public comment, and DOE subsequently extended the deadline for comments after PAPRSA

submitted a request for extension to clarify the scope of its original petition for waiver. See

Federal Register, Vol. 77, No. 96, 29331-29333. No comments were filed opposing the relief

requested in PAPRSA’s petition for waiver.

On August 9, 2012, DOE granted PAPRSA a waiver from DOE’s electric refrigerator

and refrigerator-freezer test procedures for determining the energy consumption of the basic

models listed in its June 2, 2011 petition for waiver. See Federal Register, Vol. 77, No. 159,

49443-44. In permitting PAPRSA to test the wine chiller compartment at 55 oF, DOE noted

“that the test procedures for wine chillers adopted by the Association of Home Appliance

Manufacturers (AHAM), California Energy Commission (CEC), and Natural Resources Canada

all use a standardized compartment temperature of 55 oF for wine chiller compartments, which is

consistent with [PAPRSA’s] approach.” Id. at 49444.

On September 26, 2012, DOE issued a correction to its August 9, 2012 order that

incorporated the K factor (correction factor) value of .85 that PAPRSA should utilize when

calculating the energy consumption of its waiver hybrid models. See Federal Register, Vol. 77,

No. 193, 60688-89. Accordingly, DOE ultimately directed PAPRSA to utilize the following test

procedure for its waiver hybrid models:

Energy consumption is defined by the higher of the two values calculated by the

following two formulas (according to 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, Appendix A1):
3

Energy consumption of the wine compartment:

EWine = (ET1 + [(ET2–ET1) x (55 oF–TW1) / (TW2–TW1)]) *0.85

Energy consumption of the refrigerated beverage compartment:

EBeverage Compartment= ET1 + [(ET2–ET1) x (38 oF–TBC1) / (TBC2–TBC1)].

See Federal Register, Vol. 77, No. 193 at 60689.

On April 29, 2013, PAPRSA submitted a second petition for waiver and interim waiver

for a substantially similar hybrid model, SR5180JBC, that shares the same design characteristics

that led DOE to approve PAPRSA’s June 2, 2011 waiver request. No comments were filed

opposing the relief requested in PAPRSA’s second petition for waiver and interim waiver. On

September 17, 2013, DOE again granted PAPRSA a waiver from DOE’s electric refrigerator and

refrigerator-freezer test procedures for determining the energy consumption of basic hybrid

model SR5180JBC. See Federal Register, Vol. 78, No. 180, 57139-41.

2. Request to Extend Scope of Previously Granted Waivers and Interim Waivers to

New Basic Hybrid Model under Previously Approved Alternative Testing

Procedure

As indicated above, PAPRSA has developed a new basic hybrid model, PR5180JKBC,

that shares the same design characteristics that led DOE to approve PAPRSA’s two prior

petitions for waiver. This new basic hybrid model is a single cabinet hybrid model that would be

classified as a compact refrigerator with automatic defrost without through-the-door ice service,

but which has a wine-chiller compartment designed for an average temperature of 55 to 57 oF.

Just as PAPRSA’s waiver hybrid models, this new basic hybrid model contains a heater that

makes it impossible for the temperature of the wine-chiller compartment to reach a temperature

below 45 oF. Thus, testing this new hybrid model at 39 oF is simply not possible and not

representative of the energy consumption characteristics of this new basic hybrid model.

Further, this new basic hybrid model, just as PAPRSA’s waiver hybrid models, will have

a door-opening usage aligned with household freezers, thus 0.85 should also be the employed K

factor (correction factor) for this basic hybrid model. See Appendix B1 to Subpart 430, 5.2.1.1,

because Subpart 430 does not recognize wine chiller as a category.

In short, there are no material differences between this new basic hybrid model and

PAPRSA’s waiver hybrid models as it impacts this Request. The design differences between the

new basic hybrid model and the waiver hybrid models are the introduction of a more efficient

compressor and new external electronic controls. Although the new basic hybrid model will be

more energy efficient, the design characteristics of the new basic hybrid model are the same as

the characteristics of PAPRSA’s waiver hybrid models that led DOE to grant the prior two

waivers. Accordingly, PAPRSA respectfully requests that it be permitted to use the following

testing procedure for its new basic hybrid model:
4

Energy consumption is defined by the higher of the two values calculated by the

following two formulas (according to 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, Appendix A):

Energy consumption of the wine compartment:

EWine = (ET1 + [(ET2–ET1) x (55 oF–TW1) / (TW2–TW1)]) *0.85

Energy consumption of the refrigerated beverage compartment:

EBeverage Compartment= ET1 + [(ET2–ET1) x (39oF–TBC1) / (TBC2–TBC1)].3

Accordingly, PAPRSA respectfully requests that DOE extend the waivers that DOE

previously granted it and that PAPRSA be permitted to use this approved alternative testing

method to test, certify and rate the new basic hybrid models in the same manner as its waiver

hybrid models subject to the existing waivers.

3. Grounds for Interim Waiver

Pursuant to 10 CFR part 430.27(b)(2), applicants for an interim waiver should address the

likely success of their petition and what economic hardships and/or competitive disadvantages

are likely to arise absent the grant of an interim waiver.

As detailed above, it is highly likely that DOE will grant this Request, as PAPRSA is

simply seeking to test a new basic hybrid model under the alternative testing procedure already

approved twice by DOE for PAPRSA’s other hybrid models subject to the existing waivers. The

new basic hybrid models contain no materially different design characteristics that should

warrant a different result.

Further, as DOE has previously stated, “[f]ully recognizing that product development

occurs faster than the test procedure rulemaking process, the Department’s rules permit

manufacturers of models not contemplated by the test procedures ... to petition for a test

procedure waiver in order to certify, rate, and sell such models.” GC Enforcement Guidance on

the Application of Waivers and on the Waiver Process at 2 (rel. Dec. 23, 2010);4see also DOE

FAQ Guidance Regarding Coverage of Wine Chillers, Etc. in the R/F Standard/Test Procedure at

2 (rel. Feb. 10, 2011) (“DOE recognizes the potential disparity in treatment among these hybrid

products. As DOE indicated ..., the Department plans to engage in a future rulemaking to more

comprehensively address these types of products.”).

3 As a result of electing to utilize Appendix A to Subpart B of Part 430 prior to the

September 15, 2014 effective date to measure the energy consumption of its new basic hybrid

model, testing of the refrigerated beverage compartment will be conducted at 39 oF as specified

in Appendix A, as opposed to 38 oF as specified in Appendix A1 and under which PAPRSA’s

waiver hybrid models were previously certified.

4 Available at

http://www.gc.energy.gov/documents/LargeCapacityRCW_guidance_122210.pdf.
5

Certain manufacturers design comparable hybrid models so that the beverage center

compartment does not reach below 40 oF, and thus are not covered products under DOE’s

regulations. Unless PAPRSA is granted an interim waiver, it will be at a competitive

disadvantage by being unable to introduce the new basic hybrid model to compete with

manufacturers that design their hybrid models in a manner that falls outside of DOE’s

jurisdiction.

Thus, given that this Request is likely to be granted and PAPRSA will face economic

hardship unless an interim waiver is granted, permitting PAPRSA to immediately certify the new

basic hybrid model under the alternative testing method already approved by DOE is in the

public interest.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/

Alan G. Fishel

Adam D. Bowser

ARENT FOX LLP

1717 K St., NW

Washington, DC 20036-5369

(202) 857-6450

fishel.alan@arentfox.com

bowser.adam@arentfox.com

Counsel for Panasonic Appliances Refrigeration

Systems Corporation of America

July 2, 2014