Je veux savoir à propos de…

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 44 / Tuesday, March 9, 2021 / Notices In its petition for waiver, ECR asserted that it manufactures furnace fan basic models for use in heating-only applications. DOE has further found that the subject basic models contain design characteristics which prevent testing of these basic models according to the prescribed test procedure at Appendix AA. Absent a waiver, ECR would be unable to test the specified furnace fans, and as a result, it would be unable to distribute these basic models in commerce. DOE notes if another manufacturer is distributing a product employing a technology or characteristic that results in the same need for a waiver, that manufacturer is directed to submit a petition for waiver to DOE. 10
CFR 430.27j. Upon receiving a petition for waiver from any manufacturer that manufactures furnace fans designed for heating-only applications, DOE would evaluate whether such product should be required to test according to the same alternate test procedure as prescribed for the ECR furnace fans. All manufacturers have the same opportunity to apply for a similar waiver to test heating-only fans that are unable to complete the prescribed test procedure at Appendix AA.
As noted, the CA IOUs further argued that by prescribing an ESP for testing the specified basic models that is lower than the ESP required in Appendix AA, DOE is functionally establishing a different metric contrary to 10 CFR
430.27a. DOE does not agree with the CA IOUs assertion for the reasons that follow. Section 430.27a provides, in relevant part, that in granting a waiver or interim waiver, DOE will not change the energy use or efficiency metric that the manufacturer must use to certify compliance with the applicable energy conservation standard and to make representations about the energy use or efficiency of the covered product. 10
CFR 430.27a. In support of its assertion, the CA IOUs referenced DOEs statement regarding variable-speed furnace fans in the January 2014 Final Rule that it was establishing a test procedure that specifies one reference system curve i.e., the curve characterized by an ESP value representing national average operating conditions of a residential duct system for a furnace fan operating in the maximum airflow-control setting for each installation type because DOE
cannot set standards based on multiple metrics. CA IOUs, No. 5 at p. 2, referencing 79 FR 500, 507 Jan. 3, 2014. However, the discussion that the CA IOUs reference was in response to comments encouraging DOE to establish a multiple-reference system test
VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:03 Mar 08, 2021

Jkt 253001

procedure and standards. 79 FR 500, 507 Jan. 3, 2014. As prescribed by Appendix AA and the Interim Waiver Order, testing is conducted based on a single reference system curve, with the reference curve representative of the installation environment. Both Appendix AA and the Interim Waiver Order produce measured results using the FER metric. The FER test procedure in the alternate test procedure is identical to that specified for furnace fans in appendix AA, except for the ESP
setting.
The CA IOUs recommended that because FER decreases as a function of ESP specifically a lower ESP test condition, as was specified in the interim waiver, will result in a lower i.e., better FER rating, DOE should specify an adjustment factor to provide for comparative results. Specifically, the CA IOUs suggested multiplying the tested FER rating by the ratio of the ESP
required in Appendix AA to the ESP
achieved during the test. CA IOUs, No.
5, pp. 78 As stated in the January 2014
Final Rule, the ESP value specified in Appendix AA is based on field ESP data collected in cooling airflow-control settings and is representative of field ESP in maximum airflow-control settings. 78 FR 500, 507 Jan. 3, 2014.
However, as discussed previously in this notice, the ESP required in Appendix AA is not representative of field ESP in heat-only installations because heat-only installations will not typically include an evaporator coil in the air stream. Further, ECR has demonstrated through test data that these models cannot even operate at the ESP condition in the furnace fan test procedure. A modified rating using an adjustment factor, such as the one suggested by the CA IOUs, would attempt to represent the furnace fan efficiency at the ESP condition in the Appendix AA test procedure, which, as previously discussed, has been demonstrated to be a condition that these furnace fans cannot and would not operate at in the field.
Additionally, the CA IOUs did not provide information regarding the theoretical rationale for their proposed adjustment or whether the accuracy of their proposed adjustment has been validated. Further, DOE is not aware of any conversion equation that has been validated to accurately predict the change in FER as ESP varies at a given fan setting, and also notes that validating an equation for extrapolating to FER at an ESP that is higher than that at which the unit can operate may be difficult or even not possible as the unit cannot operate at that point. As a result of these considerations regarding the
PO 00000

Frm 00015

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

13533

accuracy and representativeness of an adjustment factor, DOE has not added an adjustment factor to the test procedure in this waiver.
The CA IOUs also commented that ECRs manufacturer materials e.g., websites, marketing materials, product spec sheets, labels, nameplates include cooling capacity specifications for installation of the basic models subject to the Interim Waiver Order, which would indicate that these basic models are intended to be installed in units that provide both heating and cooling. CA
IOUs, No. 5 at pp. 46. The CA IOUs also stated that because the furnace fans in question have the same nominal horsepower and higher full-load amperage as direct drive fans that are designed for use in systems with air conditioning, the furnace fans must be designed to move the same amount of air at the same pressure. CA IOUs, No.
5, pp. 56
In response, DOE again notes that ECR
has provided test data showing that the furnace fans covered by the waiver request were unable to complete testing at the static pressures in the test procedure currently at Appendix AA.
DOE is also requiring as a condition of the waiver that ECR not make any representations in any public-facing materials that these basic models are designed to be installed in systems that provide both heating and cooling. This condition was also included in the Interim Waiver Order, and ECR has since updated their literature to comply with this requirement. DOE has added recent copies of the material on Airco and Olsens websites to this docket EERE2019BTWAV0004.
The CA IOUs also questioned ECRs assertion that absent a waiver, ECR
would be at a competitive disadvantage.
CA IOUs, No. 5. at pp 34 The issue of competitive disadvantage and economic hardship relate to evaluation of a petition for an interim waiver. DOE
will grant an interim waiver from the test procedure requirements if it appears likely that the petition for waiver will be granted and/or if DOE determines that it would be desirable for public policy reasons to grant immediate relief pending a determination on the petition for waiver. 10 CFR 430.27e2. Based on DOEs review presented in the Notice of Petition for Waiver, DOE determined that ECRs petition for waiver likely would be granted in part, and, therefore, granted the interim waiver. 85 FR
50808, 50812 August 18, 2020. ECR
asserted that substantial economic harm and competitive disadvantage would result absent a favorable determination and that the basic models at issue fulfill a unique need in the market for homes
E:FRFM09MRN1.SGM

09MRN1