Quiero saber acerca de...

37692

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 134 / Friday, July 16, 2021 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS

use of walk-in refrigeration systems.17
These run-times assume a capacity for a perfectly-sized refrigeration system at specified reference ambient temperatures of 95 F and 90 F for refrigeration systems with outdoor and indoor dedicated condensing units, respectively. 79 FR 32050, 32083 and 82
FR 31808, 31842. Nominal run-time hours for coolers and freezers were adjusted to account for equipment oversizing safety margins and capacity mismatch factors see section II.B.2. of this document. They were further adjusted to account for the change in net capacity from increased efficiency projected to occur in the standards case, and, in the case of outdoor equipment, variations in ambient temperature.18 As discussed in the prior section, singlepackage refrigeration systems, hightemperature freezers, and wine cellars may have different run-times or be subject to different assumptions regarding sizing and ambient temperatures.
Issue 5: DOE seeks input and data as to the daily run-time hours, sizing practice, and ambient conditions for the following: Single-package refrigeration systems, high-temperature freezers, and wine cellars described in sections II.A.2
through II.A.4 of this document. DOE
also requests information and data regarding any other aspects of the operation of such equipment that would influence run-time hours.
In its analysis supporting the June 2014 ECS final rule, DOE used the percent time off PTO value defined in the test procedure and engineering analysis to adjust the nominal direct electrical energy usage attributed to the anti-sweat heater in kilowatt-hours per day kWh/day. The PTO values were applied as set forth in section 4.4.22 of appendix A to subpart R of 10 CFR part 17 This methodology differs from the run-times established in DOEs test procedure, which assumes a high-load period of 8 hours corresponding to frequent door openings, equipment loading events, and other design load factors, and a low-load period for the remaining 16 hours. In the June 2014 ECS
final rule analyses, DOE concluded that these duty cycle assumptions should not be used for sizing purposes because they may not represent the average conditions for WICF refrigeration systems for all applications under all conditions. 79 FR
32050, 32083. These assumptions were maintained in the July 2017 ECS final rule. 82 FR 31808, 31842.
DOE also notes that while 16 and 18 hours were assumed for coolers and freezers, respectively, these assumptions may not be appropriate for wine cellars, for which test procedure waiver alternate test procedures were established based on an expectation that typical operating time is 50
percent. See: www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/
current-test-procedure-waiverswalk-ins for the list of all waivers to test procedures that DOE has granted for walk-in coolers and freezers.
18 See Chapter 6 of the Technical Support Document TSD for the July 2017 ECS final rule.
Docket EERE2015BTSTD00160099.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:52 Jul 15, 2021

Jkt 253001

431: 75 percent for anti-sweat heaters with timers, control systems, or other demand-based controls in cooler doors, and 50 percent for anti-sweat heaters with timers, control systems, or other demand-based controls in freezer doors.
DOE is aware that some manufacturers design and market display doors for high-humidity cooler applications.19
Issue 6: DOE seeks input and data on the appropriate PTO values for display doors that would be exposed to higher levels of humidity. Specifically, DOE
requests information on high-humidity walk-in cooler doors, including the range of typical installation conditions e.g., relative humidity throughout the year in store. DOE also requests data on the average amount of time per day or per year that anti-sweat heaters with timers, control systems, or demandbased controls 20 are operating at their full power and partial power if applicable for walk-in cooler display doors marketed for high-humidity applications.
2. Oversizing Factors In both the June 2014 ECS final rule and July 2017 ECS final rule, DOE
assumed that WICF refrigeration condensing systems and unit coolers in the field are sized to account for a worst case scenario need for refrigeration to prevent food spoilage, and as such are oversized by a safety margin. 79 FR 32050, 32083 and 82 FR
31808, 31842. DOE found that it is customary in the industry to add a 10
percent safety margin to the aggregate 24-hour load, resulting in 10 percent oversizing of the refrigeration system.
Id. Additionally, DOE recognized that an exact match for the calculated refrigeration system capacity may not be available for the refrigeration systems available in the market because most refrigeration systems are produced in discrete capacities. To account for this situation, DOE applied a capacity mismatch factor of 10 percent to capture the inability to perfectly match the calculated WICF capacity with the capacity available in the market. 79 FR
32050, 32084 and 82 FR 31808, 31842.
The combined safety margin factor and capacity mismatch factor result in a total oversizing factor of 1.2. With the oversize factor applied, the nominal run-time hours of the refrigeration 19 Product data sheets from two manufacturers that produce walk-in cooler display doors marketed for high-humidity applications can be found at www.regulations.gov, Docket No. EERE2017BT
STD00090006 and EERE2017BTSTD0009
0007.
20 For anti-sweat heaters, demand-based controls monitor humidity and temperature external to the walk-in and regulate anti-sweat heater wire use on demand.

PO 00000

Frm 00006

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

system are reduced to 13.3 hours from 16 hours per day for coolers, and to 15
hours from 18 hours per day for freezers at their respective full design point capacity. 79 FR 32050, 32083 and 82 FR
31808, 31842.
Issue 7: DOE seeks input on whether the combined safety and capacity mismatch oversizing factors for adjusting daily nominal run-time hours relied on in the June 2014 ECS final rule and the July 2017 ECS final rule are appropriate for single-package refrigeration systems, high-temperature freezers, and wine cellars as described in sections II.A.2 through II.A.4 of this document. If different factors would be appropriate for such equipment, DOE
requests data in support of alternate assumptions.
3. Base-Case Efficiency Distribution DOE measures savings of potential standards relative to a no-newstandards case that reflects conditions without new and/or amended standards.
The no-new-standards case reflects the distribution of equipment efficiency or energy use beginning at the baseline performance level. The baseline performance level in each equipment class represents the characteristics of common or typical equipment in that class. If there is an established DOE
energy conservation standard for the class, the baseline performance level coincides with the current minimum energy conservation standard and provides basic end-user utility.
However, not all models in an equipment class may be rated at the baseline performance level. DOE uses efficiency market shares to characterize the no-new-standards case equipment mix. By accounting for consumers who already purchase more-efficient equipment, DOE avoids overstating the potential benefits from potential standards.
In the July 2017 ECS final rule, DOE
assumed that 100 percent of WICF
refrigeration equipment is sold at the baseline efficiency level in the absence of new and/or amended standards.
Docket No. EERE2015BTSTD0016, Public Meeting, No. 68 at pp. 5354
These assumptions did not include medium-temperature condensing systems which were not within the scope of that rulemaking. Mediumtemperature condensing systems were included in the June 2014 ECS final rule where DOE assumed that 75 percent of shipments were baseline equipment, with the remaining 25 percent at the efficiency of the first design option above baseline. 79 FR 32050, 32087.
DOE understands that these assumptions may not reflect the current
E:FRFM16JYP1.SGM

16JYP1