Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 14 / Friday, January 23, 2009 / Notices 4169 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Public Meeting on Analysis of ASHRAE 

Standard 90.1–2007 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy (DOE). 

ACTION: Notice of public meeting. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy is 

in the process of making a 

determination as to whether ANSI/ 

ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1–2007 

would save energy in commercial 

buildings. In doing so, we are 

performing a comparative analysis of 

the 2007 edition of that standard to the 

2004 edition and seeking input on our 

considered approach to carrying out that 

analysis. 

DATES: The Department will hold a 

public meeting on Wednesday, February 

18, 2009, in Washington, DC. Please 

send requests to speak at the meeting so 

that we receive them by 4 p.m., 

Wednesday, February 11, 2009. DOE 

must receive a signed original and an 

electronic copy of statements to be given 

at the public meeting no later than 4 

p.m., Friday, February 13, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Requests to make 

statements at the public meeting and 

copies of those statements should be 

sent to Brenda Edwards-Jones at the 

following address: U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, EE–2J, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

You should identify documents as 

either, ‘‘Request to Speak,’’ or 

‘‘Statement,’’ followed by, ‘‘Public 

Meeting on Analysis of Standard 90.1– 

2007’’. 

The public meeting will begin at 9 

a.m., on Wednesday, February 18, 2009, 

in Room 1E–245 at the U.S. Department 

of Energy, Forrestal Building, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC. You can read copies of 

the transcript of the public meeting in 

the Freedom of Information Reading 

Room (Room No. 1E–090) at the U.S. 

Department of Energy, Forrestal 

Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, 

SW., Washington, DC, between the 

hours of 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

You may obtain copies of the 

reference standard ANSI/ASHRAE/ 

IESNA Standard 90.1–2007 by request 

from the American Society of Heating, 

Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning 

Engineers, Inc., 1791 Tullie Circle, NE., 

Atlanta, GA 30329, (404) 636–8400, 

http://www.ASHRAE.org. A copy of the 

‘‘Draft Methodology for a Comparative 

Analysis of ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA 

Standard 90.1–2007 and Standard 90.1– 

2004’’ may be downloaded from 

Building Energy Codes Program Web 

site at http://www.energycodes.gov/ 

implement/determinations_com.stm. 

The latest information regarding the 

public workshop is available on the 

Building Energy Codes Program Web 

site at http://www.energycodes.gov/ 

implement/determinations_com.stm. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ronald B. Majette, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, EE–2J, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121, (202) 586– 

7935, e-mail: 

Ronald.majette@ee.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Introduction 

A. Authority 

Section 304(b)(2) of title III of the 

Energy Conservation and Production 

Act (ECPA), as amended, requires the 

Secretary of Energy to determine 

whether the revisions of the American 

National Standards Institute (ANSI)/ 

American Society of Heating, 

Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning 

Engineers (ASHRAE)/Illuminating 

Engineering Society of North America 

(IESNA) Standard 90.1 will improve 

energy efficiency in commercial 

buildings. (42 U.S.C. 6833(b)(2)(A)) A 

notice of the determination is required 

to be published in the Federal Register. 

(42 U.S.C. 6833(b)(2)(A)) If the Secretary 

makes an affirmative determination, 

each State is required to certify to DOE 

within two years of the determination 

that it has reviewed and updated the 

provisions of its commercial building 

code regarding energy efficiency and 

that its State commercial building code 

meets or exceeds the revised standard. 

(42 U.S.C. 6833(2)(B)(i)). 

B. Background 

Standard 90.1 was revised by 

ASHRAE in 2007. In preparation for 

making a determination as to whether 

the recent revision would improve 

energy efficiency in commercial 

buildings, DOE is doing a comparative 

analysis between the 2004 edition and 

2007 edition of Standard 90.1. DOE’s 

determination for ANSI/ASHRAE/ 

IESNA Standard 90.1–2004 was 

conducted using the same methodology 

as the previous determination for ANSI/ 

ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1–1999. 

The analysis used in the determinations 

for both the 1999 and 2004 versions was 

discussed in detail at 67 FR 46464 (July 

15, 2002). DOE is considering modifying 

the methodology used in the 

determination associated with Standard 

90.1–2007. DOE is holding a meeting to 

obtain comment on the new approach 

prior to analyzing ANSI/ASHRAE/ 

IESNA 90.1–2007 and to identify any 

issues. This meeting is the subject of 

today’s notice. 

C. Summary of Draft Methodology for 

Comparative Analysis of ANSI/ 

ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1–2007 

and Standard 90.1–2004 

DOE is considering both a qualitative 

and quantitative comparison of the 

Standard 90.1–2004 and Standard 90.1– 

2007. The considered analysis would 

provide qualitative comparisons of the 

stringencies between the two editions of 

Standard 90.1 in the scope of the 

standard; the building envelope 

requirements; the building lighting 

requirements; the building mechanical 

equipment requirements; and the paths 

to compliance. The quantitative 

comparison of energy codes would be 

done on whole building energy 

simulations of specific building 

prototypes compliant with each 

standard. For the determination, DOE is 

considering to simulate several 

representative building types in 16 

representative U.S. climates. The 

detailed methodology for the 

quantitative comparison is presented in 

‘‘Draft Methodology for a Comparative 

Analysis of ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 

90.1–2007 and Standard 90.1–2004.’’ 

DOE is considering a new methodology 

for two reasons. First, DOE is 

considering use of the EnergyPlus 

building energy simulation software in 

place of the BLAST building energy 

simulation software used in previous 

determinations. EnergyPlus is the 

newest simulation software developed 

by DOE and most DOE buildings-related 

analysis is now being conducted with 

EnergyPlus. Second, DOE is considering 

the use of a DOE benchmark building 

for the building models. The Benchmark 

buildings are a set of prototypical 

buildings developed by DOE for 

evaluation of commercial building 

energy programs, including codes and 

standards. 

II. Discussion 

A. Draft Methodology for a Comparative 

Analysis of ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA 

Standard 90.1–2004 and Standard 90.1– 

2007 

DOE is considering both a qualitative 

and quantitative comparison of the 

Standard 90.1–2004 and Standard 90.1– 

2007. 

Qualitative Comparisons 

The draft analysis would provide 

qualitative comparisons of the 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES

4170 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 14 / Friday, January 23, 2009 / Notices 

stringencies between the two editions of 

Standard 90.1 based on examination of 

the differences between the editions in 

each of the following areas: 

Scope of the standard, 

Building envelope requirements, 

Building lighting requirements, 

Building mechanical equipment 

requirements, and 

Paths to compliance. 

The emphasis of the qualitative 

comparison would differ between the 

envelope, lighting, and mechanical 

sections. In the building envelope 

section, the comparison would focus on 

the impact of the different building 

envelope requirements on the building 

heating and cooling loads for different 

building types and climates. The 

envelope comparison would examine 

requirements for all envelope 

components, including roofs, walls, 

floors, and fenestration, as well as 

explore variations in construction types 

and in the window-to-wall ratio. 

In the lighting requirements 

comparison, the focus would be 

primarily on the impact the different 

lighting requirements have on lighting 

energy use, as well as on building loads. 

The comparison would look separately 

at the whole building and space-byspace lighting requirements in both 

standards in a variety of commercial 

building types, as well as examine the 

effect of any ‘‘additional lighting power 

allowances.’’ 

The mechanical requirements 

comparison would be divided into 

comparisons of equipment efficiency 

requirements and system design 

requirements. The system design 

requirements affect both the system 

efficiency, system load, and may have 

direct energy impacts due, for instance, 

to fan design. Tables of relative 

stringency and estimated positive or 

negative national energy impact would 

be prepared based on practical 

application of the system design 

requirements in each standard. 

Each standard has multiple ways to 

demonstrate compliance. DOE would 

enumerate the multiple paths to 

compliance, but is not considering a 

detailed comparison of the relative 

stringency of alternate paths within a 

single standard or between standards. 

The large quantity of variables among 

the alternative compliance paths would 

make such analysis prohibitive to 

undertake. Further, we know of no data 

on which to base the selection of 

representative requirements for such an 

analysis. Assignment of requirements 

would be arbitrary. Rather we would 

focus on what we believe is the most 

common approach to using the standard 

in question for particular building types. 

The qualitative comparison 

methodology proposed for the Standard 

90.1–2007 determination is identical to 

that used for the Standard 90.1–2004 

determination. 

Quantitative Comparison 

We are considering basing the 

quantitative comparison of energy codes 

on whole building energy simulations of 

buildings built to each standard. The 

simulated buildings would utilize 

EnergyPlus prototype buildings 

developed within DOE as reference 

buildings for tracking and predicting the 

energy impacts of DOE programs. (These 

prototypes are known as DOE’s 

Benchmark Buildings.) The use of 

EnergyPlus prototypes represents a 

significant change from past 

determinations where the BLAST 

simulation tool was utilized and where 

a scaling process was used to represent 

buildings of varying size within a 

specific building type. 

DOE is developing 17 building 

prototypes under its Benchmark 

buildings effort. Each benchmark 

prototype is being developed through 

support of DOE national lab staff at 

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 

(LBNL), the National Renewable Energy 

Laboratory (NREL), and Pacific 

Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), 

as well as being reviewed by members 

of ASHRAE Standing Standard Project 

Committee (SSPC) 90.1, with the 

purpose of being as representative of 

current building designs as possible. 

However, not all of these prototypes are 

expected to be completed in sufficient 

time for DOE to meet its statutory 

deadline for the 90.1–2007 

determination on December 31, 2008. 

DOE expects to have between five and 

ten prototypes completed in time for use 

in the quantitative aspect of the 

determination. DOE intends to simulate 

the available prototypes over a range of 

climate locations (16 versus 11 in 

previous determinations). 

For the 90.1–2007 determination, 

DOE plans to develop weighting factors 

by climate zone for each building 

prototype simulated based on historical 

construction data. These weighting 

factors would be based on historical 

construction square footages by building 

types assigned to each climate zone. 

DOE intends to weight simulated 

building energy use intensities (EUI) 

across the climate zones by building 

type to determine the relative change in 

efficiency by building type and will 

report these results as was done in 

previous determinations. In previous 

determinations, a national estimate of 

relative energy improvement was 

provided by weighing the resulting 

improvements across building types. If 

the available building prototypes can 

represent a sufficiently large percentage 

of the commercial building market, DOE 

intends to publish in the determination 

an estimate of relative national 

improvement in energy efficiency based 

on weighting EUIs across building 

types. If not, DOE may choose not to 

publish a national estimate of relative 

improvement, but will make relative 

weighting factors available. 

As more benchmark prototypes 

become available, DOE plans to 

complement its 90.1–2007 

determination analysis with simulation 

results from other prototypes and 

intends to make this additional data 

available on the Energy Codes Program 

Web site at the address provided above. 

The 17 benchmark building types being 

developed by DOE are: Large Office, 

Medium Office, Small Office, StandAlone Retail, Strip Mall, Primary 

School, Secondary School, Outpatient 

Health Care, Hospital, Small Hotel/ 

Motel, Large Hotel, Public Assembly, 

Fast Food Restaurant, Sit-Down 

Restaurant, Mid-Rise Apartment, HighRise Apartment, and Non-Refrigerated 

Warehouse. These buildings (minus the 

two apartment buildings) together 

account for approximately 82 percent of 

commercial building energy use, 

according to the Commercial Buildings 

Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS). 

Mid Rise and High-Rise residential 

buildings are also within the scope of 

ASHRAE 90.1, but are not represented 

in CBECS. DOE envisions that at a 

minimum that Medium Office, Large 

Office, Mid-Rise Apartment, Warehouse 

and Hospital building prototypes will be 

available for the Determination. 

The 16 climates considered for the 

analysis represent the 15 distinct 

climate zones identified in the United 

States and utilized in Standards 90.1– 

2004 and 90.1–2007. One location per 

climate zone would be included in the 

determination with the exception of 

Zone 3B, for which two climates are 

being considered. The climate locations 

selected are: Miami, Florida (Zone 1A); 

Houston, Texas (Zone 2A); Phoenix, 

Arizona (Zone 2B); Atlanta, Georgia 

(Zone 3A); Los Angeles, California 

(Zone 3B-California), Las Vegas, Nevada 

(Zone 3B-other than California); San 

Francisco, California (Zone 3C); 

Baltimore, Maryland (Zone 4A); 

Albuquerque, New Mexico (Zone 4B); 

Seattle, Washington (Zone 4C); Chicago, 

Illinois (Zone 5A); Denver, Colorado 

(Zone 5B); Minneapolis, Minnesota 

(Zone 6A); Helena, Montana (Zone 6B); 

Duluth, Minnesota (Zone 7); and 

Fairbanks, Alaska (Zone 8). 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 14 / Friday, January 23, 2009 / Notices 4171 

Note that only changes to new 

buildings would be considered in this 

quantitative analysis. The scopes of both 

Standard 90.1–2004 and 90.1–2007 also 

address additions and renovations to 

existing buildings. While this may have 

a significant energy impact, we do not 

believe the data is available to quantify 

this impact. 

The differences between the 

quantitative analysis proposed for the 

Standard 90.1–2007 determination and 

the Standard 90.1–2004 determination 

are summarized below in tabular form. 

TABLE 1—COMPARISON OF PRIOR TO CURRENT QUANTITATIVE DETERMINATION METHODOLOGY

Standard 90.1–1999 and 90.1–2004 

Determinations 

2007 Determination 

Building simulation tool BLAST EnergyPlus 

Source and Description of Building Models ....... Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL; 

GUMBY).

Building-specific Building Models from DOE 

Benchmark Building Task. 

Single generic three-story 48,000 sf slab on 

grade building model with changeable envelope characteristics (e.g. Window-WallRatio, Wall-Type) and Changeable Internal 

Plug Loads and Lighting Loads and Schedules.

Building Types Included in Comparison ............. Office ................................................................ Medium Office. 

Retail ................................................................ Large Office. 

Warehouse ....................................................... Warehouse. 

Education ......................................................... Hospital. 

Lodging ............................................................ Mid-Rise Apartment. 

Public Assembly.

Food Service.

(Multi-family Residential buildings not included).

Method of characterizing building ‘‘type’’ ........... Changing of internal loads and schedules in 

building models.

Building-specific designs based on typical 

building characteristics, including building 

design, size and shape, and schedules developed from various data sets and engineering judgment during DOE Benchmarks 

development. 

Method of characterizing building-type population characteristics.National Characteristics Data Set (CBECS99) 

used in development of weights for key 

characteristics known to vary within building 

‘‘types’’ (i.e. window-to-wall ratio, mass 

versus frame wall construction, electric resistance versus gas heat fuel source; simulations done for each of the above characteristics and weighted to final EUI.

National Characteristics Data Set (CBECS03) 

used in development of Benchmarks Building Models characteristics. 

HVAC System Type ........................................... Generic Single Zone DX equipment with Gas 

Furnaces used for all buildings by Lodging. 

Lodging category represented with PTAC 

equipment with electric resistance. More 

detailed system models not considered.

Varies depending on building types. Cooling 

Systems include Single Zone DX Systems, 

Central Chiller VAV, and Water-loop Heat 

Pumps. Heating Systems include hydronic 

boilers and furnaces and zone reheat systems in VAV models. 

HVAC Efficiencies .............................................. HVAC efficiencies improvements modeled. 

Determination ‘‘Credit’’ given for changes to 

HVAC efficiencies in Standard if not already 

in Federal Law.

Same; however, efficiencies with effective 

dates that are more than 3 years out from 

date of standard are not included. 

Ventilation Rates ................................................ Ventilation based on Standard 62–1989 ......... Ventilation based on Standard 62–2004. 

Extracted Data .................................................... Zonal Energy used for Direct Electric Loads, 

DX Cooling Energy including Fan Energy, 

Zone Heating energy and SHW energy in 

central plant.

Whole-Building Energy Use Data for Electric 

and Gas Energy Use extracted for each 

building model. 

Zonal Data used to develop representative 

EUI for building population with the simulated characteristics using core and perimeter zone area weights developed from 

CBECS Size and Form Factor Data for represented building ‘‘types’’.

Fuel Types—Cooling .......................................... Electric ............................................................. Electric. 

Fuel Types—Heating .......................................... Gas Furnace or Electric Resistance Furnace, 

with Electric Furnace weights developed 

through CBECS estimates.

Gas and Electric depending on Benchmark 

building HVAC system characteristics. 

Fuel Types—Hot Water ...................................... Gas and Electric (Electric assumed for all 

buildings with electric heat).

Electric resistance for mid-rise apartment and 

warehouse, gas for other building types. 

Climate Zones Simulated ................................... 11 Climate Locations used in 1999 development.15 climate locations, each representative of 

one of the 15 U.S. climate zones used in 

defining the requirements in Standard 90.1– 

2004 and Standard 90.1–2007. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES

4172 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 14 / Friday, January 23, 2009 / Notices 

TABLE 1—COMPARISON OF PRIOR TO CURRENT QUANTITATIVE DETERMINATION METHODOLOGY—Continued 

Standard 90.1–1999 and 90.1–2004 

Determinations 

2007 Determination 

Building simulation tool BLAST EnergyPlus 

Mapping between simulated locations to geographic regions.Specific Climate Simulations mapped to geographic census divisions using PNNL-developed weighting factors (vintage 1996).A representative climate is selected for each 

of the geographic climate zones. 

Building Construction weights ............................ Construction Weights developed based on 

EIA-NEMS estimates 10 years of future 

new construction in census division by 

building type category.

Construction weights developed based on 5 

years recent county construction data for 

building types represented by Benchmark 

Buildings (DODGE Data, including multifamily >3 stories). 

Energy Characteristics Reported ....................... EUI by Building Type and Census Division 

National EUI estimates through weighting 

across modeled building types categories.

EUI by Building Type across U.S. National 

EUI weights not proposed until more 

Benchmark building type simulations can be 

included. 

B. Public Meeting 

1. Procedures for Submitting Requests 

To Speak 

DOE invites any person who would 

like to attend the public meeting to 

notify Brenda Edwards-Jones at (202) 

586–2945. You may hand deliver 

requests to speak to the address 

indicated at the beginning of this notice 

between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays, or send them by mail. 

2. Conduct of Public Meeting 

The public meeting will be to receive 

comments representing the individual 

opinions of participating entities. It is 

not the object of the hearing to obtain 

any group position or consensus. Rather 

DOE is seeking as many comments as 

possible from all interested parties. The 

Department may use a professional 

facilitator to facilitate discussion, and a 

court reporter will be present to record 

the transcript of the meeting. We will 

present summaries of comments 

received before the public meeting, 

allow time for presentations by public 

meeting participants, and encourage all 

interested parties to share their views on 

issues affecting the draft analysis. 

Following the public meeting, we will 

provide an additional two week 

comment period, during which 

interested parties will have an 

opportunity to present further comment 

on the draft analysis. The Department 

will arrange for a transcript of the public 

meeting and will make the entire record 

of the public meeting, including the 

transcript, available for inspection in 

the Department’s Freedom of 

Information Reading Room. Any person 

may purchase a copy of the transcript 

from the transcribing reporter. 

C. Issues Requested for Comment 

The Department of Energy is 

interested in receiving comments and/or 

data concerning issues relating to the 

comparative analysis of Standard 90.1– 

2004 and Standard 90.1–2007. These 

issues are discussed in greater detail in 

the Draft Methodology for a 

Comparative Analysis of ASHRAE/ 

IESNA Standard 90.1–2004 and 

Standard 90.1–2007 that is posted on 

the web at http://www.energycodes.gov/ 

implement/determinations_com.stm. 

We are especially interested in any 

comments or data regarding: 

(1) Specific reductions in stringency 

in Standard 90.1–2007 that the 

Department should be made aware of 

and that have been identified by 

stakeholders. 

(2) Specific changes in scope between 

Standard 90.1–2004 and Standard 90.1– 

2007 and how DOE should interpret 

expansions of scope in its 

determination. 

(3) DOE’s considered approach to 

changes in referenced ventilation 

standards between Standard 90.1–2004 

and Standard 90.1–2007. 

(4) DOE’s considered approach for 

addressing future effective dates for 

mechanical equipment requirements. 

(5) The frequency of use of alternative 

paths to compliance in building 

standards (e.g. space-by-space versus 

whole building lighting power 

allowances). 

(6) New non-residential building 

construction data (including mid rise 

and high rise residential) by State or 

census division and building type. 

(7) Data to quantify the impact of 

Standard 90.1 on additions and 

renovations to existing buildings. 

(8) The relative prevalence of the 

semi-heated building envelope 

subcategory in the building types draft 

for analysis (e.g., warehouses). 

(9) The relative importance of the 

Mid- and High-rise residential sector in 

DOE’s determination and data for 

developing weighting factors for this 

sector. 

(10) Data describing the relative 

frequency of use of alternative paths to 

compliance. 

(11) The impact of using a limited 

number of building prototypes (medium 

office, large office, warehouse, hospital, 

and mid-rise apartment) in the 

quantitative portion of the 

determination. 

These data will help us to make a 

determination whether ASHRAE/IESNA 

Standard 90.1–2007 will improve 

energy efficiency in commercial 

buildings as well as provide background 

that will help DOE in future 

determinations on Standard 90.1. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on January 13, 

2009. 

John F. Mizroch, 

Acting Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency 

and Renewable Energy. 

[FR Doc. E9–1380 Filed 1–22–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Office of Science; Basic Energy 

Sciences Advisory Committee 

AGENCY: Department of Energy. 

ACTION: Notice of open meeting. 

SUMMARY: This notice announces a 

meeting of the Basic Energy Sciences 

Advisory Committee (BESAC). Federal 

Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92– 

463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that public 

notice of these meetings be announced 

in the Federal Register. 

DATES: Thursday, February 26, 2009, 

8:30 a.m.–5 p.m., and Friday, February 

27, 2009, 8:30 a.m. to 12 noon. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES