1-i CHAPTER

1. INTRODU CTION
TABLE OF CO NTENTS
1.1 PURPOSE OF DOCUMENT

............................................ 1-1 1.2 OVERVIEW OF APPLIANCE STANDARDS

.............................. 1-1 1.3 OVERVIEW OF RESI DENTIAL

FURNACES AND BOIL ERS STANDARDS

.... 1-2 1.3.1 Issues Related to Venting of Residential Furnaces and Boilers

....... 1-6 1.3.1.1 Background

.............................................. 1-6 1.3.1.2 Summary

of Stakeholder Comments

........................... 1-7 1.3.1.3 Department of Energy Analysis Considerations

.................. 1-9 1.4 STRUCTURE OF THE DOCUMENT

..................................... 1-9

LIST OF TABLE S
Table 1.3.1 History of Fur nace and Boiler Standards

.............................. 1-3 Table 1.3.2 Residenti al Furna ce and B oiler Ana

lys es Requir

ed by Process R

ule

........ 1-41-1 CHAPTER

1. INTRODU CTION

1.1 PURPOSE OF DOCUMENT This Technical Support Document (TSD) is a “stand-alone” re port that provides technical analyses a

nd results in support of the information presented in the Advance Notice of Propose d Rulemakin

g (ANO PR) for re sidential furnac es and bo ilers.

1.2 OVERVIEW OF APPLIANCE STANDARDS
Part B of Title II

I of the Energ

y Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA or Act), Public Law 94–163—as amended by

the National Energy

Conservation Policy Act (NECPA), Public L aw 95–619; the National Appliance Energy Conservation Act (NAECA) of 1987, Public Law 100–12; the National Appliance Energy Conservation Amendments of 1988 (NAECA 1988), Public Law 100–357; and the Energ y Policy Act of 1992 (EPACT), Public Law 102–486—created the Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products other than Automobiles. The consumer products subject to this Program (refer red to hereafter as ‘‘cove

red products’’) include residential furnaces a nd boilers. (42 U.S.C. 6295(f)) Before the Department deter mines whether to adopt a proposed energy conservation standard, it must first solicit comments on the proposed standard. (42 U.S.C. 6295 (p)) Any new or amen ded st andard must be des igned s o as to achiev e the m axim um im prove ment i n energy efficiency that is technologically

feasible and economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 6295 (o)(2)(A)) If a proposed standar

d is not designed to achieve the maximum improvement in energy efficiency or the ma ximum reduction in ene

rgy use that is

technolo gicall

y f easible , the Secr

etary must state the reasons for this in the proposed rule. (42 U.S.C. 6295 (p)(2)) To dete rmine whether economic justification exists, the Department must review comments on the proposal and determine that the benefits of the proposed standard excee d its burdens to the greatest extent practic able, we ighing

the follow

ing seve n factors:
1. The economic impact of the standard on the manufac turers and on the consumers of the products subject to such standard; 2. The savings in operating costs throughout the e stimated average life of the covered product in the ty

pe (or class) compared to any increase in the price of, or in the initial charges for maintenance e xpenses of, the covered products which are likely to result from the imposition of the standard; 3. The total projected amount of energy savings likely to re sult directly from the imposition of the standard; 4. Any

lessenin g of the utility or the pe rforman ce of the covere d produc ts likely

to result from the imposition of the standard; 5. The impact of any lessening of competition, as determined in writing by the Attorney Gene

ral, that is likely to result from the imposition of the standard;a

EPCA Secti on 321 (23) st ates that a “fu rnace” i ncludes forced- air an d gravit y cent ral f urnaces and low-pr essure steam and hot wat er boil ers, and that it must have a heat inpu t ra te of

les s t han 225, 000 Btu/hr for f orced-ai r and gravi ty ce ntral furnaces, and less than 300,000 Btu/hr for boilers. However, in the current furn ace and boil er rulemaki ng DOE adop ted the terminology us ed in the heati ng, ventil ating, and ai r-conditioning (HV AC) industry, whi ch considers furnaces and boilers as sepa rate categories.

1-2 6. The need for national energ y conserva

tion; and 7. Other fa

ctors the Secreta ry considers releva

nt.

1.3 OVERVIEW OF RESIDENTIAL FURNACES AND BOILERS STANDARDS The EPCA, a s amende d, requir es the De partmen t of Ener gy (DOE or D epartme

nt) to consider amending

the ener gy conserv ation stan

dards for certa

in major a

ppliance s. The NA

ECA legisla tion of 198 7 established eff iciency standar ds for re sidential

furnac es and bo ilers. a It set the standards in terms of the annual fuel utilization efficiency (AFUE) descriptor at a minimum value of 78 percent for most furnaces. F or boilers, it set the minimum AFUE at 75 percent for gas steam boilers and 80 percent for othe r boilers. For mobile home furnaces, it set the minimum AFUE at 75 percent. The effe ctive date for these standards was January 1, 1992.
For ‘‘small’’ f

urnace s (those having a

n input ra te of less than 45,0 00 British therma l units per hour ), the Act require d the Dep artment t o publish a

final rul e by

January 1, 1989, a

nd to set a minimum AFUE at a specific level not less than 71 percent and not more tha n 78 percent. (EPCA 325( f)(1)(B)(ii)) For t hese product s, the Depart ment publ ished an ANOP R (52 FR 46367, Decem ber 7, 1987), followed by a Notice o f Proposed R ulemaking (NOP R) (53 FR 48798 , Decem ber 2, 1988) , in wh ich th e Depar tment propo sed to estab lish an ener gy conservation standard of 78 percent AFUE for small gas furnaces. I n a final rule (54 FR 47916, Novembe r 17, 1989 ), the De

partmen t set the mi

nimum AFU

E for the se produc

ts at 78 pe

rcent, with an effective date of January 1, 1992. For mobile home furnaces, the Act directe d the Department to publish a final rule no later than January 1, 1992, to determine whe ther the standard should be amended. The Act re quired the eff ective d ate for amendme

nts to be Jan

uary 1, 1994. The Depar

tment star ted this ac

tivity and issued an ANOPR (55 FR 39624, September 28, 1990), followed by a NOPR. 59 FR 10464, March 4, 1994. The Department did not release a final rule for mobile home furnace standards. As part of this activ ity, the Depa

rtment pr oposed a new ene rgy descrip tor that a

ccounts f or both natural gas and electricity used by a fur

nace. The Department rejecte d this approach because of the difficulty of ac counting for source energ y associated w

ith electricity use. F

urther activities on this rulemaking were interrupted by several events, including a fiscal y ear 1996 moratorium on proposing or issuing new or amended applianc e energy conservation standards, and the development of an improved process for the Depa rtment’s energy

efficiency

standards rulemakings. No final rule for mobile home furnac e standards was published.1-3

The Act also required the Department to publish a final rule to de termine for all furnaces and boile rs whethe r the stan dards sho uld be ame

nded. The

Act requ ired tha t DOE publi sh this final rule no later than January 1, 1994, and, if the Department determined that the standards should be amended, the Act required that those amendments be e ffective on January 1, 2002. EPCA, section 325(f)(3)(B), 42 U.S.C. 6295(f)(3)(B ). The Department started this activity and published an ANOPR in

which it pr

esented the produ

ct classe s for fur

naces that it planned to analy ze, and a d

etailed d iscussion of the analy

tical met hodolog y a nd models t

hat it expec

ted to use in this r

ulemakin g. (58 F R 47326, Se

ptember 8, 1993) T

he Depa rtment inv

ited comme

nts and data on the accuracy

and feasibility of the planne d methodology a nd encouraged interested persons to recommend improvements or alternatives to DOE’s approa ch. The rulemaking was not completed by January 1, 1994.
In Se ptember 1995, the Department annou

nced a f ormal ef fort to consider improvemen ts to th e p ro ce ss us ed to de ve lo p a pp li an ce ef fi ci en cy s ta nd ar ds , c al li ng on ma nu fa ct ur er s, en er gyefficie ncy groups , trade a ssociations, State a gencie s, utilities , and othe r intere sted par

ties to provide input to guide the Department. On July 15, 1996, the Department published a Final Rule: Procedures for Consideration of New or Revised Energ y Conservation Standards for Consumer Products (Process Rule). 61 FR 36974. The Process Rule outlines the procedural improvements identified by the intere sted parties. The process improvement effort included a review of the economic models and the analy tical tools used in the rulemaking process, as well as the prior itization of

future r ules. In its fiscal y

ear 1998 Priority Setting f or the Appliance Rulemaking Process, the Department assig

ned a low priority level to r esidentia l furnac es and bo ilers, wh ich mean t it did not plan to

actively pursue the rulema

king ove r the next two ye ars. The Department limited

its work on these products to basic technology investigation. In the fiscal y

ear 2001 Priority Setting f or the Appliance Rulemaking Process, DOE assigned a high level of priority to residential furnaces and boilers, which meant the De partment planned t o pursue t he rulemaking a

ctively through meeting s, workshops, and p ublished n

otices.
Table 1. 3.1 summar

izes the his tory

of the sta ndards f or furna ces and b oilers.
Table 1.3.1 History o f Furnace and Boiler St andards Furnaces/boilers Small furnaces Mobi le ho me furnaces Original standard Source Publication year 78/75% AFUE NAECA 1987 78% AFUE Final Rule 1989 75% AFUE

NAECA 1987 Update Start FY2001 Part of furnaces NOPR, 1994 (*)
(*) not completed; included as a product class i n FY20 01 furnace rulemaking1-4

The current rulemaking has followed the requirements for developing effic iency standards, as described in Title 10 Energy , Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 430, Subpart C, Appendix A, Section 4, Process for Developing Efficiency Standards and Factors to be Considered. Throughout the process, DOE revie wed important issues with expert groups and stakehol ders. The Department held a workshop on July 17, 2001, to discuss the analytical fr amework proposed for this rulemaking. The framewor k presented at the workshop described the diffe rent analyses to be c onducted, the methods proposed for conducting them, and the r elationships among the various analyses as shown in Table 1.3.2.
Table 1.3.2 Resident

ial Furna ce and Boile r Analyse s Require d by Proc ess Rule ANOP R NOPR Final Ru le Market and technolog

y assessmen

t Revised ANO PR analyses Revised analy ses Screeni ng an alysis Life- cycle cost sub -g roup analysis Markups for equipm

ent price determination Manufac turer im pact an alysis
Engineering

analy sis Utility impa ct analy sis Energy use Environmen tal assessment Life-cycle cost and payback period analyses Net national emp loyment im pact analy sis Shipm ents ana lysis Regulatory im pact analysis Nationa l imp act anal

ysis

The Depa rtment he ld a public

workshop

on May 8, 2002, to

receiv e and disc

uss comments on issues related to venting for residential furnac es and boilers, and to discuss the Department’s research conc erning venting systems. As discussed in section 1.3.1, several stakeholders expressed concerns about safety and liability issues associated with condensa tion problems that may arise wi th highe r-effi ciency

non-condensing

furnac es and bo ilers.
In June 2002, DOE

asked the Gas Appli ance Ma

nufactu rers Ass ociation

(GAMA) t

o review DOE’s analysis of manufacturing costs. GAMA provided comments, which DOE consider ed in its fu

rther a naly sis. The Department’s analy

tical framework described a possible approa ch to regulating the electricity use

of residential furnaces and boilers that would involve specify ing a maximum annual electrical consumption based on the E AE parameter (averag e annual auxiliary elec trical consumption as defined in the test procedure), which is alrea dy reporte d in the GAMA directory1-5

for each model. The current DOE te st procedure (10 CFR430, Subpart B, Appendix N) provides a means to determine this value. In 1995, the Department consider ed development of a single descriptor that combines electricity use

and a measure of fuel efficie ncy, AFUE. 1 The approach considered at the time, which involved measuring the source ener gy input assoc iated with the electricity use of a furnace or boiler, was rejected by the Department in 1997 because the use of source energy is not permitted by EPCA, which specifie d that efficiency must be determined by e nergy use at the point of use (site). 2 The Department stated it would continue to explore and to solicit input on various options for the development of a descriptor that accounts sepa rately for fossil fuel and electri city used by furnac es and bo ilers. Commenting on DOE’s framework document for fur naces and boilers in 2001, the America n Council f

or an Ene rgy -Effic ient Econ

omy (ACEEE)sugge sted def

ining an electri city use stand ard in te rms of wa tts of ele ctricity

per unit o f air move d at spec ific stat ic press ure in cubic feet per minute (W/cfm). 3 This approach requires a knowledg e of furnace operating pa ra me te rs (p ow er (W ), ai r- fl ow ra te (c fm )) th at ar e n ot re qu ir ed to be re po rt ed cu rr en tl y. In August 2002, GAMA conve ned a meeting to discuss the above issues at which the Department, GAMA , and ACEEE presen ted their ideas. The Depar

tment con sidered

whether it has the legal authority

to regulate electricity

consumption in residential furnaces and boilers. Based on its review of the current statutory language, the Depa

rtment has decided that it lacks the authority to reg

ulate electricity

consumption in residential furnaces and boilers at this time. While considering the legal interpretation, the De partment analyzed a

ll design options that met the screening criteria, including design options specific to saving electricity . The Department presents the analy sis of design options specific to saving electricity in residential furnac es and bo ilers sep arately (in Appe ndix 8.5 of th

is TSD) for the pur

poses of: (a) full reportin g to the p ublic of the comple

te analy sis, and ( b) making

the infor mation av ailable f

or use in voluntary or other non-regulatory efforts by ma

nufacturers, utilities, and other interested parties.
In Se

ptember 2002, DOE

posted the

engine ering a

naly sis for fu

rnaces and boile rs on its website and asked for comments. GAMA, ACEEE, and Natura l Resources Canada (NRCan) provided comments, which DO E conside red in its f

urther a naly sis. In late 2002 and the beginning of 2003, DOE reviewed its preliminary analysis and pr ev io us st ak eh ol de r c om me nt s. In r es po ns e t o s ta ke ho ld er co mm en t, an d i n o rd er to ap pl y a more comprehensive and accura te analysis than pre

viously available, DOE c reated an “In stallation Model” i

n the spri ng of 20 03. I

n the summe

r of 2003, DOE comp leted its preliminary ana

lysis, which is described in this TSD. According to the rulemaking timeline, DOE plans to issue a Final Rule in June, 2006. The effective date for any new standards for furnaces and boilers would be January, 2012.1-6

1.3.1 Issues Related to Venting of Residential Furnaces and Boilers
1.3.1.1 Background The Department recognizes that there a re potential vent system saf ety conce rns associated with increasing the minimum fuel efficiency standard for “non-condensing” f urnaces and boilers. In or der to re ceive a

nd discuss

comments r

elated to venting for res idential f

urnace s and boile

rs, DOE convened a public workshop on May 8, 2002. At this workshop, stakeholders expressed their vie ws and sha

red thei r knowle dge of

venting issues as sociate d with tra ditional ve

nt sy stems (i.e. , sin gle wal l, do uble w all Type B v ent, a nd mas onry chim neys) used on “no n-con densi ng” residential furnaces and boilers. These discussions focuse d on the potential safety issues a nd the co st of en su ri ng sa fe ty. “Non-condensing” furnac es and boilers (which operate at an ef ficiency r ange of 78–82 percen t AFUE)produce

high-te mperatu re flue gases t hat do not g enerat

e signif icant condensate in normal operation, and use a single wall or Ty pe B vent. While “non-condensing” furna ces and boilers produce some condensate in the vent, they are not designed to utilize the heat from condensing the water vapor nec essary to improve the efficiency

to about the 90 percent AFUE range. The "conde

nsing" furnaces (usually

90 percent AFUE or higher ) achieve high efficienc

y by r educing flue-g as tempe

rature s to a leve l at which most of the

water va por in the flue ga s is condensed and the latent heat associated with phase c hange of the water is harne ssed. The heat of vaporization of water in the combustion products of natural gas r epresents about 9 percent of the total energy

in the gas. Today ’s “condensing” technology demonstrates that this energy can be harnessed without concerns for corr osion and safety c ompromises and, therefore, venting issues concerning “condensing” furnaces and boilers were not a foc us of the workshop. Vent systems, such as Ty pe B vent or masonry

chimneys, discharge hot flue gases to the exterior of a building. While a breach in any vent system can a

llow toxic combustion compounds, such as carbon monoxide (CO), to mix with the interior air, fire is also a hazard that can result from a failed vent sy stem. A vent failure commonly r esults from corrosion precipitated by e

xcessive condensation inside the vent. Condensation occurs when the water vapor created in the combustion process of hy drocarbon fuels, such as natural ga s, liquified petroleum (LP) ga s, and fuel oil, cools below the dew point and becomes a liquid. As the water vapor condenses a

nd liquef ies, it com

bines with

other combustion by

products to form an

acidic solution. The resulting acid eventually corrodes and destroy s any metal vent sy stem not designed for hand ling the corrosi ve compou

nds generated

during c ondensing

operati on. While c ondensa te problems more commonly af fect vent system c omponents, the Department recognizes that the heat exchangers of furnace s and boilers can also be subject to corrosion stemming from condens ate build-up and r esult in the

aforementioned

safety hazards. How is this important in the case of furnace and boiler ene rgy efficiency

standards? The higher the eff iciency , the more likely the produ

ction of c ondensa

te. This r elationsh ip exists because lower fl ue gas tempera tures may not allow t

he vent sy

stem to dry

out during

the on-cyc le period and thus excess condensate accumulates in gr eater quantity. Mor

e-efficient furnaces andb “Turndow n ran ge” f or modulati ng fur

naces i s defi ned as th e rati o of the furna ce maximum in put rat e to th e furn ace minimum i nput rat e.
1-7 boilers produce lower-temperature f lue gases since they

better harness the heat energ y from the fuel. A sufficiently

high flue gas temperature keeps the water vapor from condensing inside the venting sys tem.
The Nat io nal Fue l Ga s C ode (NF GC) (Am eri can Nat io nal St and ard s Ins ti tu te ( ANS I) Z223.1-2202, National Fire Protection Association (NF PA) 54-2002) 4 establishes venting guidelines to help ensure safety and preclude the production of excessive condensation inside vent systems. The ANSI

Standard for Gas-fired Central Furna ces (ANSI Z 21.47-2001) 5 specifies the furnace categor

ies for the guidelines. These guidelines e stablish minimum and maximum vent capacities for furnaces whose efficiencies do not exceed 83 percent steady -state efficiency (SSE). The se guide lines are based on wet time li

mits (wet t

ime is def ined as that perio d of time when ven t wall temp eratur

e is lower than the d

ew point)and 83 pe

rcent SSE . 83 perc ent SSE is a baseli ne condit ion used to

gener ate vent ing tabl es for Ca

tegory I fa n-assiste d applian

ces and i s the generally

accepted threshold above which potentially excessive quantities of condensation are produce d. The we

t time limits f

or the ve nt connec tors are signific antly

shorter than the w et time limits for t

he verti cal vent s. There fore, if the venti ng system desig

n ensure s no conde

nsation in the vent connector, the entire venting sy stem (including the vertical vent) will operate without risk of condensation damage. Modulation technology is used f or non-condensing and condensing f urnaces. Manufac turers o f non-condensing

modulating

furnac es employ

appropr iate con trols to re gulate the flow of air outside the furnace heat e xchanger and the flow of flue g ases inside the heat exchanger to prevent the formation of excessive conde nsate during the heat

- up cycle on c old heat exchang er and ve

nt sy stem surf

aces. 6 According to the American Gas Assoc iation (AGA) handbook, if the furnace control sy stem maintains the flue flow rates in the proper proportions of the furnace input rate, the furnace will operate at SSE not higher than 83 percent (the limit used for developing the venting tables in the NF GC to safeguard aga inst excessive condensate) throu ghout the en tire d esigne d turn down r ange b and maintain the designed air flow temperature rise. To ensure safety , the manufacturers’ installation manuals specify the use of Type

B doublewall vent connectors 7 for modulating furnaces that operate at the 80–81 percent AFUE rang e. The Department believes that, because of the incorporation of effective controls and Ty pe B double-wall vent sy

stems, modu

lating f urnace s and boile

rs at this e fficien

cy level wou

ld not pose a safety concern.
1.3.1.2 Summary of Stakeholder Comme nts
For non-weathe

rized ga s furnac es, manuf acture rs commen

ted that f urnace s with efficie ncies be tween 81 percen

t and 90 pe

rcent AF UE would present s afety

and liabi lity

risks if not vented appropriately . GAMA stated that 83 percent SSE, which corresponds to an AFU E of1-8

80–82.5 percent, is recognized as the threshold above which potentially hazardous conde nsation may occur. ( GAMA, No . 25JJ at p. 162) Howeve r, ACEEE maintaine d that 83 pe rcent AF UE is techni cal ly

fea sib le witho

ut s ign ifi can t ri sk o f corro din g th e he at e xcha nge r. ( ACE EE, No. 25JJ at p. 20)
For con densing furnac es, GAMA

recomme nded that the Depa rtment consider in

its analyses re gional and local building code require ments concerning venting materials a nd practices. GAMA also mentioned the problems with less expensive plastic materials, such as high temperature plastic vents (HTPV), to vent exhaust ga ses, which resulted in a recall by the US Consumer Product Safety Commission, and cautioned DOE a bout the appropriate use of mater ials a nd app roache s to re duce co ndens ation probl ems (e .g., ve nt coa ting, vent p re-hea ting, new materials, improved vent-connectors). (GA MA, No. 25JJ at p. 174) Battelle Memorial Institute (B attelle) urged DOE to take into account the inc reased liabilities that may arise with highe r efficiency . (Battelle, No. 25JJ at p. 215) GAMA stated that DOE must consider the risks and costs associated with venting and cor rosion problems. (GAMA, No. 25JJ at p. 85) Trane stated that increasing the AFUE a bove 81 percent would place an un du e b ur de n o n m an uf ac tu re rs to pr es er ve cu st om er sa fe ty. 8 Several stakeholders commented on including in DOE’s ana lysis the cost of upgr

ading the venting syste

m due to increased efficiency . GAMA commented that costs must reflect installat ion in comp lete comp liance w ith all man

ufactur er instru ctions an d code re quireme

nts, including extra installation costs for relining or resizing non-compliant venting sy stems for orphaned water heaters. GAMA a lso said that DOE needs to consider the costs of upgrade or repair when the furnace is no long er vented using a Category I venting sy

stem. (GAMA, No. 25JJ at p. 87) York stated DOE should consider that a large percentage of replacement furnace s are installed where masonry chimneys are

used (thereby

requiring a chimney

upgrade), and another large segmen t of instal lations use

common ve

nting wit h water heaters

. 9 GAMA and the National Propane Gas Association (NPGA) commented that the new e fficiency standards for water heaters will contribute to the condensation problem bec ause many f urnaces and water heaters are commonly

vented. (GAMA, No. 25JJ at p. 174; and NPGA, No. 35 at p. 2) Controls and sensors exist that are able to prevent the development of condensation in the venting sys tem. I

n respons e to the DO E’s pres entation on contro ls and sen sors that e xist, GAMA stated that by the time a sensor or CO detector works, it is too late to prevent condensation. (GAMA, No. 25JJ at p. 171) The AGA commented that some control strategies (CO detec tors and wate r-activ ated swit

ches) w ould have

adverse safety and hea lth impact s (potent

ial CO exposure resulting from corroded vents). (AGA, N o. 25JJ at p. 177) York stated that venting sy stems for mobile housing heating equipment have their own special requirements and standards, which must be considere d when determining the impact of efficiency requirements on venting issues. (York, No. 25JJ at p. 148) The GAMA said DOE sh ou ld in ve st ig at e c or ro si on re la te d t o b oi le r e ff ic ie nc y ap ar t f

ro m f ur na ce ef fi ci en cy. 101-9

1.3.1.3 Departm ent of Ener gy Analysis Considera

tions The Depa rtment considere d the comments rec eived dur ing and after the workshop in its analysis of installation costs for fur naces and boilers, as described in Chapter 6 of this TSD. The Department recognizes the concer ns about the equipment having an SSE above 83 percent. However, DOE believes that the corrosion issue ca n be solved through the use of the proper materials for the furnace heat e xchanger and venting sy

stem. The Department addressed the safety issue in the a

nalysis by assigning a specialized venting sy stem to an appropriate fraction of installations (the specialized venting syste ms incorporate corrosion resistant materials and are applicable to furnaces and boilers having an SSE above 83 percent). This approach ca ptures the added costs associated with ensuring safe ope ration of higher-efficienc y furnac es. The Department included all costs for installations that are in complete compliance w ith manufacturer instructions and code requirements. This includes upgrade s when the furnace is no longer vente d using a Category

I system, as well as changes to common venting sy stems, including vent chang es for or

phaned w ater he aters. For furnaces at 80 perce

nt and 81 percent AFUE that utilize modulating technology , the analysis assig

ned the cost for Ty

pe B double-wall vent connectors, as re commended in the manufacturer installation manuals. The Department is unawa re of a study tha

t indicates that condens ation pro

blems exist w

ith furna ces and b oilers ha

ving modu

lating c apabiliti es for th ese efficie ncy levels. The Department applied in its analy sis the appropriate venting practices for condensing furnac es, and in

cluded the cost of

venting higher -effic iency

equipmen

t for all product c lasses, including oil equipment and boilers. The Department is analy ses did not consider controls and sensors to prevent condensation.
1.4 STRUCTURE OF THE DOCUMENT This ANOPR TSD consists of 14 chapters, 23 appendices, and an environmental assessme nt and re gulator

y imp act ana

lys is. Chapter 1 Intr

oduction: provides

an overv iew of the applianc e standa

rds prog ram and how it applies to the residential furnaces and boilers rulemaking , and outlines the structur e of the d ocument. Chapter 2 Analy

tical Fr amework : describ es the fu rnace/ boiler a naly tical pro cess. Chapter 3 Market a

nd Techn ology Assessme

nt: char acterize s the rele

vant prod uct mark ets and existing

technolo gies. Chapter 4 Screening Analysis: describes the technology options for efficiency

improvement and evaluates them against specific c riteria.1-10

Chapter 5 Markups f or Equipme

nt Price D etermina

tion: desc

ribes how manufacturing c osts are mar ked up to o

btain retail pric es. Chapter 6 Engineering Analy sis: describes the derivation of product costs, including manufacturing, installation, and maintenance costs. I t describes the calculation of energy use according to the DOE test procedur e. Chapter 7 Energ

y Consumption o f Furna

ces and B oilers: de scribes the calc ulation of field energ y us e by furnac es and bo ilers for

use in the

life-cy cle cost analy sis. Chapter 8 Life-Cy

cle Cost and Paybac

k Period Analysis: describes the effects of potential candida te standa rds on indi

vidual pur

chaser s and user

s of the a ppliance s. This analysis compare s the life-cyc le cost of appliances with possible new standards agains t no change in stand ards. Chapter 9 Shipments: d escribe s the metho dology for for ecastin g shipme nts by product c lass, in the abs ence or

presenc e of new

regula tions. Chapter 10 National Impact Analy sis: describes national forecasts of energ y use and net present value in t he absen ce or pr esence of new r egulat ions. Chapter 11 Life -cy

cle Cost Sub -group

Analysis: descr

ibes the a pproach for estimating LCC impacts on

any identifia ble gro ups or cus tomers who may be dispro portiona tely affected by

any proposed c

hange in standard levels of residential fur nace and boiler users (NOPR stage). Chapter 12 Manufacturer I mpact Analysis: descr

ibes the approach for estimating the financ ial impact of new efficiency

standards on manufacturers (NOPR stage ). Chapter 13 Utility I

mpact Analysis: descr

ibes the approach for estimating the impact of proposed standard levels on the electric utility industry due to new ef

ficiency standards (NOPR stage). Chapter 14 Employment I mpacts Analysis: describe s the approach for estimating the impact of new efficiency

standards on national employment ( NOPR stage). Environmental Assessment: describes the approach for e stimating the changes in air-borne emissions due to new efficiency standards (NOPR stage). Regulatory

Impact Analy

sis: describes the approach for estimating the impact of non-regulatory alternatives to new efficiency standards (NOPR stage).1-11

Appendix 5. 1: Detailed Data for Equipment Price Markups: provides further details on the wholesaler, builder, and contractor markups pre sented in Chapter 5, Markups for Equipment Price Determination

. Appendix 6.1: Technical Description of the Reverse Engineering Cost Estimation

Methodolo gy : describ es the te chnical aspects of the ap proach a s applied

to residential furnaces and boilers. Refer to Chapter 6 of the Technical Support Document (TSD) for more information on assumptions and context. Appendix 6. 2: Installation Cost Model: describes installation cost model called the

“Installation Model” based on RS Means, a we ll-known and respected construction cost estimation method. The model encompasses a broad arra y of produc t classes , installa

tion sizes, a

nd venting

config urations

. Appendix 6. 3: Determination of Furnace and B oiler Energy Use: describes the approach requiring the calculation of the aver age annual fuel energ

y consumption (EF ), the average annual ele ctrical energy consumption (E AE ), and the national average number of burne

r operating hours (BOH SS ) of fur naces a nd boiler s. Appendix 6. 4: Engineering Analy sis Cost and Efficiency Ta bles: contains the cost and efficiency tables described in Chapter 6, section 6.7.4 of the Furnac e/Boiler Technical Support Document (TSD). Appendix 6. 5: Engineering Analy sis Payback Results: contains tables and cha rts of the Engine ering A

naly sis Pay

back re sults. Appendix 7. 1: Reduced Set of Furnace Models Databa se: describes the Reduced Set of

Furnace Models Database that wa s developed to created to identify furnace models. The models represent units with different design cha racteristics, and expand the

Gas Appli ance Ma

nufactu rers Ass ociation

(GAMA) d

irector y da ta for eac h furnac e model by

adding informat ion provid

ed in the manufacturers' product literature. Appendix 7. 2: Decoding of Manufacturer Model Numbers: illuminates the furnace specific ations fr

om manufa

cturer model numb ers. Appendix 7. 3: Determi nation of Basic F urnace Models: de scribes

the dete rmination of basic furnac e models c

haract eristics

. Appendix 7. 4: Furnace Fan Curves: descr ibes fan curves which are g raphical representations of the pressure rise, called static pressure , compared to the airflow through the fan or blower.1-12

Appendix 7. 5: Blower Fan Curv es: describes the selection of blowe

r fan cu rves for both pressure and shaft power as functions of air flow. Appendix 7. 6: Overall Air-Movi

ng Eff iciency : describ es overa

ll air-mo ving ef

ficienc y a s a variable in the calculation of blower motor electricity consumption. The overall air-movi ng eff iciency is a ratio of the ai r power divided by

the electric power used by

the blower motor. Appendix 7. 7: Gas and Electricity Use for Modulating Furnaces: desc ribes how DOE calculated the gas consumed by the burner and electricity consumed by the circula ting air blower mo tor at the

two firin g rate s. This ca

lculation method is based on the procedure in the ASHRAE Standard 103. Appendix 8. 1: Glossary of Varia bles and T

heir Val ues Fro m EIA 's RECS97: contains RECS variabl e name a

bbrevia tions and provides d

efinition s of the va

riable v alues. Appendix 8. 2: Distribution Discount Rates: describes new installation and replacement

discount r ates. Appendix 8. 3: LCC an d PBP Resul

ts Using A

lternati ve I nstallati on Cost Sce

narios: presents LCC and PBP results using alternative installation costs for non-weatherized gas furnaces and g as boilers. These results are presented as hig h and low sensitivit y c ases. Appendix 8. 4: LCC an d PBP Resul

ts Using A

lternati ve Ener gy Price Sce narios: p resents LCC and pay

back results using alternative energ y price sc enarios from EIA’s AEO 2003. The Department based the pay back periods on the calculation methodology used in Chapte r 8: Life-Cy

cle Cost and Paybac

k Period Analysis. Appendix 8.5: Analysis of Ele ctricity Efficie ncy Design Options for Furna

ces and B oilers: describ es the pr

ocess use d to deter

mine the le

vel of el ectrici

ty e fficien

cy in particu lar desig n options f

or furna ces and b oilers. Appendix 8.6: Furnace Airflow Capacity Testing: provides a discussion of the task of testing various circulating-air blowers in a common-size furna ce to assess the applicability of using the

Air Movement and Control Association test standard 210 (AMCA 210) as a method of determining the airflow c apacity of a furnace circulating-air blower. Appendix 8. 7: Power Consumption of ECM Blower Motors: describes a series of equations

to first c alculate

the blowe

r speed a nd shaft p ower fr

om the fur

nace sta tic pressure.1-13

Appendix 8. 8: Power Con sumption of BC/ECM+ B lower Mot

ors: desc ribes eq uations to predi ct blo wer mo tor el ectri cal po wer con sump tion for th e BC/E CM+ de sign option based on this prototype. Appendix 8. 9: Air Conditioner Operating Hours: explains how DOE calculated the re duced

air conditioner operating hours for a f urnace with a more efficient blower and/or blower motor design option. Appendix 10 .1: National Energy Savings and Net Present Value Using Alterna tive Installation Costs and E

nergy Price Sce narios: presents

National Energ y Sa vings (N ES) and Net Present Value (NPV) results for alternative installation costs (for nonweatherized gas furnace s and gas boilers), and alternative ene rgy price scenar ios from A

EO 2003 for all prod

uct clas ses.1-14 REFEREN CES
1. U.S. Department of Energy -Office of Energy

Efficiency

and Renewable Energy

, Energy Conserva tion Progra m for Consum er Produc ts: Test Pr ocedure s for Furnaces/Boile

rs, Vented Home Heating Equipment, and Pool Heaters; Proposed Rule, 10 CFR Part 430 Part VIII, January 20, 1995. Washington, DC. Report No. EE-RM-93- 501.
2. U.S. Department of Energy -Office of Energy

Efficiency

and Renewable Energy

, Energy Conserva tion Progra m for Consum er Produc ts: Test Pr ocedure s for Furnaces/Boile

rs, Vented H ome Hea ting Equipm ent, and P ool Heate rs; Final R ule, 10 CFR

Part 430 Pa rt IV, May 12, 1997. Washington, DC. Report No. EE- RM-93-501.
3. Sachs, H. M., Comments on the Ene

rgy Conse

rvation Pr

ogram for Co nsumer Pr

oducts: Standards for Furnaces & Boilers, DOE Docket Number EE-RM/STD-01-350, Comment No.15, August 17, 2001, American Council for an Energ y-Effic ient Economy.
4. National Fire Protection Association, National Fuel Gas Code -2002 Edition , 2002. 1 Battery march Park, P.O. Box 9101, Quincy MA

. 5. American National Standards I nstitute, American National Standard/CSA Standard for Gas-Fire d Central F

urnaces, Novembe

r, 2001. N ew York, NY. Repor t No. ANSI Z21.47-2001, CSA 2.3-2001.
6. AGA Research, Mid-Efficiency Modulating Furnace Handbook, June, 1997, Gas Research Institute. Cleveland, Ohio. Repor t No. GRI-97/0325.
7. Carrier Coporation, 58CVA/58CVX: Installation, Start-up, Operating, and Service and Maintena nce Inst

ructions, December 2002, Carrier Coporation. Report No. Catalog No: 535-80103.
8. Kowalski, S., Comments on the Ene

rgy Conse

rvation Pr

ogram for Co nsumer Pr

oducts: Standards for Furnaces & Boilers, DOE Docket Number EE-RM/STD-01-350, Comment No.34, June 7, 2002, Trane Company.
9. Rocky, B. K., Comments on the Ene

rgy Conse

rvation Pr

ogram for Co nsumer Pr

oducts: Standards for Furnaces & Boilers, DOE Docket Number EE-RM/STD-01-350, Comment No.33, June 6, 2002, York International.
10. Kendal, M., Comments on the Ene

rgy Conse

rvation Pr

ogram for Co nsumer Pr

oducts: Standards for Furnaces & Boilers, DOE Docket Number EE-RM/STD-01-350, Comment No. 31, June 7, 2002, Gas Appliance Manufacturers Association.