Doe Final Rule Cre Standards Eere-2010-Bt-std-0003-0104 20140328

5/27/2018 Doe Final Rule Cre Standards Eere-2010-Bt-std-0003-0104 20140328

http:///reader/full/doe-final-rule-cre-standards-eere-2010-bt-std-0003-0104-20140

Vol. 79 Friday,

No. 60 March 28, 2014

Part III

Department of Energy

10 CFR Part 431Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards forCommercial Refrigeration Equipment; Final Rule

VerDate Mar2010 19:39 Mar 27, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\28MRR2.SGM 28MRR2tkelley

onDSK3SPTVN1PROD

withRULES2



17726 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 60 / Friday, March 28, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

10 CFR Part 431

[Docket Number EERE2010BTSTD0003]

RIN 1904AC19

Energy Conservation Program: EnergyConservation Standards forCommercial Refrigeration Equipment

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency andRenewable Energy, Department ofEnergy.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Energy Policy andConservation Act of 1975 (EPCA), asamended, prescribes energyconservation standards for variousconsumer products and certaincommercial and industrial equipment,including commercial refrigeration

equipment (CRE). EPCA also requiresthe U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) todetermine whether more-stringentstandards would be technologicallyfeasible and economically justified, andwould save a significant amount ofenergy. In this final rule, DOE isadopting more-stringent energyconservation standards for some classesof commercial refrigeration equipment.It has determined that the amendedenergy conservation standards for theseproducts would result in significantconservation of energy, and aretechnologically feasible and

economically justified.DATES: The effective date of this rule isMay 27, 2014. Compliance with theamended standards established forcommercial refrigeration equipment intodays final rule is required on March27, 2017.

The incorporation by reference ofcertain publications listed in this finalrule were approved by the Director ofthe Office of the Federal Register on

January 9, 2009 and February 21, 2012.

ADDRESSES: The docket, which includesFederal Register notices, public meetingattendee lists and transcripts,

comments, and other supportingdocuments/materials, is available forreview at www.regulations.gov.Alldocuments in the docket are listed inthe regulations.gov index. However,some documents listed in the index,such as those containing informationthat is exempt from public disclosure,may not be publicly available.

A link to the docket Web page can befound at: http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=EERE-2010-BT=STD-0003.The regulations.gov Web page willcontain simple instructions on how to

access all documents, including publiccomments, in the docket.

For further information on how toreview the docket, contact Ms. BrendaEdwards at (202) 5862945 or by email:[email protected] FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

John Cymbalsky, U.S. Department ofEnergy, Office of Energy Efficiency

and Renewable Energy, BuildingTechnologies Program, EE2J, 1000Independence Avenue SW.,Washington, DC, 205850121.Telephone: (202 2871692. Email:[email protected].

Ms. Jennifer Tiedeman, U.S. Departmentof Energy, Office of the GeneralCounsel, GC71, 1000 IndependenceAvenue SW., Washington, DC 205850121. Telephone: (202) 2876111.Email:[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Summary of the Final Rule and Its BenefitsA. Benefits and Costs to CustomersB. Impact on ManufacturersC. National Benefits and CostsD. Conclusion

II. IntroductionA. AuthorityB. Background1. Current Standards2. History of Standards Rulemaking for

Commercial Refrigeration EquipmentIII. General Discussion

A. Test Procedures and NormalizationMetrics

1. Test Procedures

2. Normalization MetricsB. Technological Feasibility1. General2. Maximum Technologically Feasible

LevelsC. Energy Savings1. Determination of Savings2. Significance of SavingsD. Economic Justification1. Specific Criteriaa. Economic Impact on Manufacturers and

Commercial Customersb. Savings in Operating Costs Compared To

Increase in Pricec. Energy Savingsd. Lessening of Utility or Performance of

Equipment

e. Impact of Any Lessening of Competitionf. Need of the Nation To Conserve Energyg. Other Factors2. Rebuttable Presumption

IV. Methodology and Discussion ofComments

A. General Rulemaking Issues1. Trial Standard Levels2. Proposed Standard Levels3. Rulemaking Timeline4. Normalization Metrics5. Conformance With Executive Orders and

Departmental Policies6. Offset FactorsB. Market and Technology Assessment

1. Equipment Classesa. Equipment Subcategories

b. Floral Equipment2. Technology Assessmenta. Technologies Applicable to All

Equipmentb. Technologies Relevant Only to

Equipment With Doorsc. Technologies Applicable Only to

Equipment Without Doors

C. Screening AnalysisD. Engineering Analysis1. Representative Equipment for Analysisa. Representative Unit Selection

b. Baseline Models2. Design Optionsa. Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts

b. Condenser Fansc. Evaporator Fansd. Design Options Impacting Equipment

Form Factore. Vacuum Insulated Panels (VIPs)f. Variable-Speed Fan Motorsg. Improved Transparent Door Designsh. High-Performance Coil Designsi. Higher-Efficiency Fan Bladesj. ECM Fan Motors

k. Lighting Occupancy Sensors andControls

l. Night Curtains3. Refrigerants4. Cost Assessment Methodologya. Teardown Analysis

b. Cost Modelc. Manufacturer Production Costd. Cost-Efficiency Relationshipe. Manufacturer Markupf. Shipping Costsg. Manufacturer Interviews5. Energy Consumption Modela. Release of Engineering Model for Review

b. Anti-Sweat Heater Powerc. Coil Performance Modelingd. Compressor Performance Modeling

e. Insulation Modelingf. Lighting Performanceg. Transparent Door Performanceh. Validation of Engineering ResultsE. Markups AnalysisF. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period

Analysis1. Equipment Cost2. Installation Costs3. Maintenance and Repair Costs4. Annual Energy Consumption5. Energy Prices6. Energy Price Projections7. Equipment Lifetime8. Discount Rates9. Compliance Date of Standards10. Base-Case Efficiency Distributions

11. Inputs to Payback Period Analysis12. Rebuttable-Presumption Payback

PeriodG. Shipments1. Impact of Standards on ShipmentsH. National Impact AnalysisNational

Energy Savings and Net Present Value1. Forecasted Efficiency in the Base Case

and Standards Cases2. National Energy Savings3. Net Present Value of Customer BenefitI. Customer Subgroup Analysis

J. Manufacturer Impact Analysis1. Overview2. Government Regulatory Impact Model


onDSK3SPTVN1PROD

withRULES2
http://www.regulations.gov/http://www.regulations.gov/http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=EERE-2010-BT=STD-0003http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=EERE-2010-BT=STD-0003http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=EERE-2010-BT=STD-0003http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=EERE-2010-BT=STD-0003mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.regulations.gov/mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=EERE-2010-BT=STD-0003http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=EERE-2010-BT=STD-0003http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=EERE-2010-BT=STD-0003



1772Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 60 / Friday, March 28, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

1For editorial reasons, upon codification in theU.S. Code, Part C was redesignated Part A1.

2All references to EPCA in this document referto the statute as amended through the American

Energy Manufacturing Technical Corrections Act(AEMTCA), Public Law 112210 (Dec. 18, 2012).

a. Government Regulatory Impact ModelKey Inputs

b. Government Regulatory Impact ModelScenarios

3. Discussion of Commentsa. Volume Purchasing of Components

b. Refrigerantsc. Redesign Issuesd. LED Material Costse. GRIM

f. Cumulative Regulatory Burdeng. Certification Costsh. Small ManufacturersK. Emissions AnalysisL. Monetizing Carbon Dioxide and Other

Emissions Impacts1. Social Cost of Carbona. Monetizing Carbon Dioxide Emissions

b. Social Cost of Carbon Values Used inPast Regulatory Analyses

c. Current Approach and Key Assumptions2. Valuation of Other Emissions

ReductionsM. Utility Impact AnalysisN. Employment Impact Analysis

V. Analytical ResultsA. Trial Standard Levels

1. Trial Standard Level FormulationProcess and Criteria2. Trial Standard Level EquationsB. Economic Justification and Energy

Savings1. Economic Impacts on Commercial

Customersa. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period

b. Customer Subgroup Analysisc. Rebuttable Presumption Payback2. Economic Impacts on Manufacturersa. Industry Cash-Flow Analysis Results

b. Impacts on Direct Employmentc. Impacts on Manufacturing Capacityd. Impacts on Subgroups of Manufacturerse. Cumulative Regulatory Burden3. National Impact Analysis

a. Energy Savings

b. Net Present Value of Customer Costs andBenefits

c. Employment Impacts4. Impact on Utility or Performance of

Equipment5. Impact of Any Lessening of Competition6. Need of the Nation To Conserve Energy7. Summary of National Economic Impact8. Other FactorsC. Conclusions

1. Benefits and Burdens of Trial StandardLevels Considered for CommercialRefrigeration Equipment

2. Summary of Benefits and Costs(Annualized) of the Standards

VI. Procedural Issues and Regulatory ReviewA. Review Under Executive Orders 12866

and 13563B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility

Act1. Description and Estimated Number of

Small Entities Regulated2. Description and Estimate of Compliance

Requirements3. Duplication, Overlap, and Conflict with

Other Rules and Regulations4. Significant Alternatives to the Rule

C. Review Under the Paperwork ReductionActD. Review Under the National

Environmental Policy Act of 1969E. Review Under Executive Order 13132F. Review Under Executive Order 12988G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act of 1995H. Review Under the Treasury and General

Government Appropriations Act, 1999I. Review Under Executive Order 12630

J. Review Under the Treasury and GeneralGovernment Appropriations Act, 2001

K. Review Under Executive Order 13211L. Review Under the Information Quality

Bulletin for Peer ReviewM. Congressional Notification

VII. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

I. Summary of the Final Rule and ItsBenefits

Title III, Part C 1 of the Energy Policyand Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA orthe Act), Public Law 94163 (42 U.S.C.62916309, as codified), added byPublic Law 95619, Title IV, section441(a), established the Energy

Conservation Program for CertainIndustrial Equipment.2 Pursuant toEPCA, any new or amended energyconservation standard that DOEprescribes for certain products, such ascommercial refrigeration equipment,shall be designed to achieve themaximum improvement in energyefficiency that DOE determines is bothtechnologically feasible andeconomically justified. (42 U.S.C.6295(o)(2)(A)) Furthermore, the new oramended standard must result insignificant conservation of energy. (42

U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(B) and 6316(e)(1)) Inaccordance with these and otherstatutory provisions discussed in thisdocument, DOE is adopting amendedenergy conservation standards forcommercial refrigeration equipment.The amended standards, which consistof maximum daily energy consumption(MDEC) values as a function of eitherrefrigerated volume or total display are(TDA), are shown in Table I.1. Theseamended standards apply to allequipment listed in Table I.1 andmanufactured in, or imported into, theUnited States on or after March 27,

2017.TABLE I.1ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS FOR COMMERCIAL REFRIGERATION EQUIPMENT

[Compliance required starting March 27, 2017]

Equipment class* Standard level** Equipment class* Standard level** VOP.RC.M ..................................... 0.64 TDA + 4.07 VOP.RC.I ...................................... 2.79 TDA + 8.7VOP.RC.L ...................................... 2.2 TDA + 6.85 SVO.RC.L ..................................... 2.2 TDA + 6.85VOP.SC.M ..................................... 1.69 TDA + 4.71 SVO.RC.I ...................................... 2.79 TDA + 8.7VCT.RC.M ...................................... 0.15 TDA + 1.95 HZO.RC.I ...................................... 0.7 TDA + 8.74VCT.RC.L ....................................... 0.49 TDA + 2.61 VOP.SC.L ..................................... 4.25 TDA + 11.82VCT.SC.M ...................................... 0.1 V + 0.86 VOP.SC.I ...................................... 5.4 TDA + 15.02VCT.SC.L ....................................... 0.29 V + 2.95 SVO.SC.L ..................................... 4.26 TDA + 11.51VCT.SC.I ........................................ 0.62 TDA + 3.29 SVO.SC.I ...................................... 5.41 TDA + 14.63VCS.SC.M ...................................... 0.05 V + 1.36 HZO.SC.I ...................................... 2.42 TDA + 9VCS.SC.L ....................................... 0.22 V + 1.38 SOC.RC.L ..................................... 0.93 TDA + 0.22

VCS.SC.I ........................................ 0.34 V + 0.88 SOC.RC.I ...................................... 1.09 TDA + 0.26SVO.RC.M ..................................... 0.66 TDA + 3.18 SOC.SC.I ...................................... 1.53 TDA + 0.36SVO.SC.M ..................................... 1.7 TDA + 4.59 VCT.RC.I ...................................... 0.58 TDA + 3.05SOC.RC.M ..................................... 0.44 TDA + 0.11 HCT.RC.M .................................... 0.16 TDA + 0.13SOC.SC.M ..................................... 0.52 TDA + 1 HCT.RC.L ..................................... 0.34 TDA + 0.26HZO.RC.M ..................................... 0.35 TDA + 2.88 HCT.RC.I ...................................... 0.4 TDA + 0.31HZO.RC.L ...................................... 0.55 TDA + 6.88 VCS.RC.M .................................... 0.1 V + 0.26HZO.SC.M ..................................... 0.72 TDA + 5.55 VCS.RC.L ..................................... 0.21 V + 0.54HZO.SC.L ...................................... 1.9 TDA + 7.08 VCS.RC.I ...................................... 0.25 V + 0.63HCT.SC.M ...................................... 0.06 V + 0.37 HCS.SC.I ...................................... 0.34 V + 0.88HCT.SC.L ....................................... 0.08 V + 1.23 HCS.RC.M .................................... 0.1 V + 0.26HCT.SC.I ........................................ 0.56 TDA + 0.43 HCS.RC.L ..................................... 0.21 V + 0.54


onDSK3SPTVN1PROD

withRULES2




3Life-cycle cost of commercial refrigerationequipment is the cost to customers of owning andoperating the equipment over the entire life of theequipment. Life-cycle cost savings are thereductions in the life-cycle costs due to amendedenergy conservation standards when compared tothe life-cycle costs of the equipment in the absenceof amended energy conservation standards.

4Payback period refers to the amount of time (inyears) it takes customers to recover the increasedinstalled cost of equipment associated with new oramended standards through savings in operatingcost. Further discussion can be found in chapter 8of the final rule TSD.

5All monetary values in this notice are expressedin 2012 dollars.

6Based on U.S. Department of Energy, EnergyInformation Administration, Annual EnergyOutlook 2013 (AEO 2013) data.

7All present value results reflect discounted tobeginning of 2014.

8A metric ton is equivalent to 1.1 short tons.Results for NOX and Hg are presented in short ton

TABLE I.1ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS FOR COMMERCIAL REFRIGERATION EQUIPMENTContinued[Compliance required starting March 27, 2017]

Equipment class* Standard level** Equipment class* Standard level** HCS.SC.M ..................................... 0.05 V + 0.91 HCS.RC.I ...................................... 0.25 V + 0.63HCS.SC.L ...................................... 0.06 V + 1.12 SOC.SC.L ..................................... 1.1 TDA + 2.1PD.SC.M ........................................ 0.11 V + 0.81 .............. ................ ............... .....

* Equipment class designations consist of a combination (in sequential order separated by periods) of: (1) An equipment family code (VOPvertical open, SVO = semivertical open, HZO = horizontal open, VCT = vertical closed with transparent doors, VCS = vertical closed with soldoors, HCT = horizontal closed with transparent doors, HCS = horizontal closed with solid doors, SOC = service over counter, or PD = pudown); (2) an operating mode code (RC = remote condensing or SC = self-contained); and (3) a rating temperature code (M = medium temperature (382 F), L = low temperature (02 F), or I = ice-cream temperature (152 F)). For example, VOP.RC.M refers to the vertical operemote condensing, medium temperature equipment class. See discussion in chapter 3 of the final rule technical support document (TSD) formore detailed explanation of the equipment class terminology.

** TDA is the total display area of the case, as measured in the Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) Standard 12002010, appendix D.

V is the volume of the case, as measured in American National Standards Institute (ANSI)/Association of Home Appliance Manufacture(AHAM) Standard HRF12004.

A. Benefits and Costs to Customers

Table I.2 presents DOEs evaluation ofthe economic impacts of todaysstandards on customers of commercialrefrigeration equipment, as measured by

the average life-cycle cost (LCC)savings 3 and the median paybackperiod (PBP).4 The average LCC savingsare positive for all equipment classes forwhich customers are impacted by theamended standards.

TABLE I.2IMPACTS OF TODAYSSTANDARDS ON CUSTOMERS OFCOMMERCIAL REFRIGERATIONEQUIPMENT

Equipmentclass*

AverageLCC sav-

ings2012$

Median PBPyears

VOP.RC.M ........ 922 5.7VOP.RC.L ......... 53 6.1VOP.SC.M ........ .................... ....................VCT.RC.M ........ 542 2.1VCT.RC.L ......... 526 2.7VCT.SC.M ......... 226 5.3VCT.SC.L .......... 5001 1.1VCT.SC.I ........... 18 7.2VCS.SC.M ........ 363 1.4VCS.SC.L ......... 507 2.5VCS.SC.I .......... 113 5.0SVO.RC.M ........ 564 6.2SVO.SC.M ........ .................... ....................SOC.RC.M ........ .................... ....................SOC.SC.M ........ .................... ....................HZO.RC.M ........ .................... ....................

HZO.RC.L ......... .................... ....................

TABLE I.2IMPACTS OF TODAYSSTANDARDS ON CUSTOMERS OFCOMMERCIAL REFRIGERATIONEQUIPMENTContinued

Equipmentclass*

AverageLCC sav-

ings2012$

Median PBPyears

HZO.SC.M ........ 55 6.9HZO.SC.L ......... .................... ....................HCT.SC.M ........ 101 5.8HCT.SC.L ......... 293 2.5HCT.SC.I .......... .................... ....................HCS.SC.M ........ 15 5.5HCS.SC.L ......... 64 2.5PD.SC.M ........... 165 5.6

* Values have been shown only for primaryequipment classes, which are equipmentclasses that have significant volume of ship-ments and, therefore, were directly analyzed.

See chapter 5 of the final rule TSD, Engineer-ing Analysis, for a detailed discussion of pri-mary and secondary equipment classes.

* For equipment classes VOP.SC.M,SVO.SC.M, SOC. RC.M, SOC. SC.M,HZO.RC.M, HZO.RC.L, HZO.SC.L, andHCT.SC.I, no efficiency levels above the base-line were found to be economically justifiable.Therefore, the standard levels contained in to-days document for these equipment classesare the same as those set in the 2009 finalrule. As a result, LCC savings and PBP valuesfor these equipment classes are not relevant.

Note: Equipment lifetimes are between 10and 15 years for all equipment classes.

B. Impact on Manufacturers

The industry net present value (INPV)

is the sum of the discounted cash flowsto the industry from the base year (2013)through the end of the analysis period(2046). Using a real discount rate of 10.0percent, DOE estimates that the INPVfor manufacturers of commercialrefrigeration equipment is $2,660.0million in 2012$.5 Under todaysstandards, DOE expects the industry netpresent value to decrease by 3.53percent to 6.60 percent. Total industry

conversion costs are expected to total$184.0 million. Additionally, based onDOEs interviews with themanufacturers of commercialrefrigeration equipment, DOE does not

expect significant loss of domesticemployment.

C. National Benefits and Costs

DOEs analyses indicate that todaysstandards would save a significantamount of energy. The lifetime savingsfor commercial refrigeration equipmenpurchased in the 30-year period that

begins in the year of compliance withamended standards (20172046) amounto 2.89 quadrillion British thermal unit(quads). The annualized energy savings(0.10 quads) are equivalent to 0.5percent of total U.S. commercial

primary energy consumption in 2014.6

The cumulative net present value(NPV) of total consumer costs andsavings of todays standards forcommercial refrigeration equipmentranges from $4.93 billion (at a 7-percendiscount rate) to $11.74 billion (at a 3-percent discount rate).7 This NPVexpresses the estimated total value offuture operating cost savings minus theestimated increased product costs forproducts purchased in 20162047.

In addition, todays standards areexpected to have significant

environmental benefits. The energysavings would result in cumulativeemission reductions of approximately142 million metric tons (Mt) 8 of carbondioxide (CO2), 762 thousand tons ofmethane, 207 thousand tons of sulfurdioxide (SO2), 94 tons of nitrogen oxide


onDSK3SPTVN1PROD

withRULES2




9DOE calculated emissions reductions relative tothe AEO 2013 Reference case, which generallyrepresents current legislation and environmentalregulations for which implementing regulationswere available as of December 31, 2012.

10Technical Update of the Social Cost of Carbonfor Regulatory Impact Analysis Under ExecutiveOrder 12866. Interagency Working Group on SocialCost of Carbon, United States Government. May2013; revised November 2013. http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/

inforeg/technical-update-social-cost-of-carbon-for-regulator-impact-analysis.pdf.

11DOE is investigating the valuation of avoidedHg and SO2 emissions.

12DOE used a two-step calculation process toconvert the time-series of costs and benefits intoannualized values. First, DOE calculated a presentvalue in 2013, the year used for discounting theNPV of total customer costs and savings, for thetime-series of costs and benefits, using discountrates of three and seven percent for all costs and

benefits except for the value of CO2 reductions. Fothe latter, DOE used a range of discount rates, asshown in Table I.3. From the present value, DOEthen calculated the fixed annual payment over a 3year period (2017 through 2046) that yields thesame present value. The fixed annual payment isthe annualized value. Although DOE calculatedannualized values, this does not imply that thetime-series of cost and benefits from which theannualized values were determined is a steadystream of payments.

(NOX) and 0.25 tons of mercury (Hg).9Through 2030, the estimated energysavings would result in cumulativeemissions reductions of 48 Mt of CO2.

The value of the CO2 reductions iscalculated using a range of values permetric ton of CO2 (otherwise known asthe Social Cost of Carbon, or SCC)developed by a recent Federal

interagency process.10 The derivation ofthe SCC values is discussed in sectionIV.M. Using discount rates appropriatefor each set of SCC values, DOEestimates that the net present monetaryvalue of the CO2 emissions reductions is

between $1.0 billion and $14.0 billion.DOE also estimates that the net present

monetary value of the NOX emissionsreductions is $33 million at a 7-percentdiscount rate, and $104 million at a 3-percent discount rate.11

Table I.3 summarizes the nationaleconomic costs and benefits expected tresult from todays standards forcommercial refrigeration equipment.

TABLE I.3SUMMARY OF NATIONAL ECONOMIC BENEFITS AND COSTS OF AMENDED COMMERCIAL REFRIGERATIONEQUIPMENT ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS*

CategoryPresent value

Billion2012$

Discount rate(percent)

Benefits

Operating Cost Savings ................................................................................................................................... 7.7016.63

CO2 Reduction Monetized Value ($11.8/t case)** .......................................................................................... 1.01 CO2 Reduction Monetized Value ($39.7/t case)** .......................................................................................... 4.55 CO2 Reduction Monetized Value ($61.2/t case)** .......................................................................................... 7.20 2CO2 Reduction Monetized Value ($117/t case)** ........................................................................................... 14.05 NOX Reduction Monetized Value (at $2,591/ton )** ....................................................................................... 0.03

0.10

Total Benefits .......................................................................................................................................... 12.28 21.28

Costs

Incremental Installed Costs ............................................................................................................................. 2.77 4.89

Net Benefits

Including CO2 and NOX Reduction Monetized Value .................................................................................. 9.5116.40

* This table presents the costs and benefits associated with commercial refrigeration equipment shipped in 20172046. These results includbenefits to customers which accrue after 2046 from the equipment purchased in 20172046. The results account for the incremental variable anfixed costs incurred by manufacturers due to the amended standard, some of which may be incurred in preparation for this final rule.

** The CO2 values represent global monetized values of the SCC, in 2012$, in 2015 under several scenarios of the updated SCC values. Thfirst three cases use the averages of SCC distributions calculated using 5%, 3%, and 2.5% discount rates, respectively. The fourth case represents the 95th percentile of the SCC distribution calculated using a 3% discount rate. The SCC time series used by DOE incorporates an escalation factor. The value for NOX is the average of the low and high values used in DOEs analysis.

Total Benefits for both the 3% and 7% cases are derived using the series corresponding to average SCC with 3-percent discount rate.

The benefits and costs of todaysstandards, for equipment sold in 20172046, can also be expressed in terms ofannualized values. The annualizedmonetary values are the sum of (1) theannualized national economic value ofthe benefits from operating the product(consisting primarily of operating costsavings from using less energy, minus

increases in equipment purchase andinstallation costs, which is another wayof representing consumer NPV, plus (2)

the annualized monetary value of thebenefits of emission reductions,including CO2 emission reductions.12

Although adding the value ofconsumer savings to the values ofemission reductions provides a valuableperspective, two issues should beconsidered. First, the national operatingcost savings are domestic U.S. consumermonetary savings that occur as a resultof market transactions, while the valueof CO2 reductions is based on a global

value. Second, the assessments ofoperating cost savings and CO2 savingsare performed with different methodsthat use different time frames foranalysis. The national operating costsavings is measured for the lifetime ofcommercial refrigeration equipmentshipped in 20172046. The SCC valueson the other hand, reflect the present

value of all future climate-relatedimpacts resulting from the emission ofone metric ton of carbon dioxide in eac


onDSK3SPTVN1PROD

withRULES2
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/inforeg/technical-update-social-cost-of-carbon-for-regulator-impact-analysis.pdfhttp://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/inforeg/technical-update-social-cost-of-carbon-for-regulator-impact-analysis.pdfhttp://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/inforeg/technical-update-social-cost-of-carbon-for-regulator-impact-analysis.pdfhttp://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/inforeg/technical-update-social-cost-of-carbon-for-regulator-impact-analysis.pdfhttp://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/inforeg/technical-update-social-cost-of-carbon-for-regulator-impact-analysis.pdfhttp://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/inforeg/technical-update-social-cost-of-carbon-for-regulator-impact-analysis.pdfhttp://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/inforeg/technical-update-social-cost-of-carbon-for-regulator-impact-analysis.pdfhttp://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/inforeg/technical-update-social-cost-of-carbon-for-regulator-impact-analysis.pdfhttp://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/inforeg/technical-update-social-cost-of-carbon-for-regulator-impact-analysis.pdf




year. These impacts continue wellbeyond 2100.

Estimates of annualized benefits andcosts of todays standards are shown inTable I.4. The results under the primaryestimate are as follows. Using a 7-percent discount rate for benefits andcosts other than CO2 reduction, forwhich DOE used a 3-percent discount

rate along with the average SCC seriesthat uses a 3-percent discount rate, the

cost of the amended standards intodays rule is $256 million per year inincreased equipment costs, while the

benefits are $710 million per year inreduced equipment operating costs,$246 million in CO2 reductions, and$3.01 million in reduced NOXemissions. In this case, the net benefitamounts to $704 million per year. Using

a 3-percent discount rate for all benefitsand costs and the average SCC series,

the cost of the standards in todays ruleis $264 million per year in increasedequipment costs, while the benefits are$900 million per year in reducedoperating costs, $246 million in CO2reductions, and $5.64 million inreduced NOX emissions. In this case, thnet benefit amounts to $888 million pe

year.

TABLE I.4ANNUALIZED BENEFITS AND COSTS OF AMENDED STANDARDS FOR COMMERCIAL REFRIGERATION EQUIPMENT

Discount ratemillion 2012$/year

Primary estimate* Low net benefits estimate* High net benefits estimat

Benefits

Operating Cost Savings .... 7% ..................................... 710 .................................... 688 .................................... 744.3% ..................................... 900 .................................... 865 .................................... 947.

CO2 Reduction at ($11.8/tcase)**.

5% ..................................... 73 ...................................... 73 ...................................... 73.


3% ..................................... 246 .................................... 246 .................................... 246.


2.5% .................................. 361 .................................... 361 .................................... 361.


3% ..................................... 760 .................................... 760 .................................... 760.

NOX Reduction at ($2,591/ton)**.

7% ..................................... 3.01 ................................... 3.01 ................................... 3.01.

3% ..................................... 5.64 ................................... 5.64 ................................... 5.64.Total Benefits ........... 7% plus CO2 range ........... 786 to 1,474 ...................... 764 to 1,451 ...................... 820 to 1,508.

7% ..................................... 960 .................................... 937 .................................... 994.3% plus CO2 range ........... 978 to 1,666 ...................... 943 to 1,631 ...................... 1,026 to 1,713.3% ..................................... 1,152 ................................. 1,117 ................................. 1,200.

Costs

Incremental EquipmentCosts.

7% ..................................... 256 .................................... 250 .................................... 261.

3% ..................................... 264 .................................... 258 .................................... 271.

Net Benefits

Total ......................... 7% plus CO2 range ........... 530 to 1,218 ...................... 513 to 1,201 ...................... 559 to 1,246.7% ..................................... 704 .................................... 687 .................................... 733.3% plus CO2 range ........... 714 to 1,402 ...................... 685 to 1,373 ...................... 755 to 1,442.3% ..................................... 888 .................................... 859 .................................... 929.

* This table presents the annualized costs and benefits associated with commercial refrigeration equipment shipped in 20172046. These rsults include benefits to customers which accrue after 2046 from the products purchased in 20172046. The results account for the incrementavariable and fixed costs incurred by manufacturers due to the amended standard, some of which may be incurred in preparation for the final ruleThe primary, low, and high estimates utilize projections of energy prices from the AEO 2013 Reference case, Low Estimate, and High Estimatrespectively. In addition, incremental equipment costs reflect a medium decline rate for projected product price trends in the Primary Estimate, low decline rate for projected product price trends in the Low Benefits Estimate, and a high decline rate for projected product price trends in thHigh Benefits Estimate. The method used to derive projected price trends are explained in section IV.H.

** The CO2 values represent global monetized values of the SCC, in 2012$, in 2015 under several scenarios of the updated SCC values. Thfirst three cases use the averages of SCC distributions calculated using 5%, 3%, and 2.5% discount rates, respectively. The fourth case represents the 95th percentile of the SCC distribution calculated using a 3% discount rate. The SCC time series used by DOE incorporate an escalation factor. The value for NOX is the average of the low and high values used in DOEs analysis.

Total Benefits for both the 3-percent and 7-percent cases are derived using the series corresponding to average SCC with 3-percent discourate. In the rows labeled 7% plus CO2 range and 3% plus CO2 range, the operating cost and NOX benefits are calculated using the labelediscount rate, and those values are added to the full range of CO2 values.

D. Conclusion

Based on the analyses culminating inthis final rule, DOE found the benefitsto the nation of the amended standards(energy savings, consumer LCC savings,positive NPV of consumer benefit, andemission reductions) outweigh the

burdens (loss of INPV and LCC

increases for some users of thisequipment). DOE has concluded that thestandards in todays final rule representthe maximum improvement in energyefficiency that is both technologicallyfeasible and economically justified, andwould result in significant conservationof energy. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o), 6316(e))

II. Introduction

The following section brieflydiscusses the statutory authorityunderlying todays final rule, as well assome of the relevant historical

background related to the establishmenof amended standards for commercialrefrigeration equipment.


onDSK3SPTVN1PROD

withRULES2




13For editorial reasons, upon codification in theU.S. Code, Part C was re-designated Part A1.

14All references to EPCA in this document referto the statute as amended through the AmericanEnergy Manufacturing Technical Corrections Act(AEMTCA), Public Law 112210 (Dec. 18, 2012).

A. Authority

Title III, Part C of EPCA, Public Law94163 (42 U.S.C. 63116317, ascodified), added by Public Law 95619,Title IV, section 441(a), established theEnergy Conservation Program forCertain Industrial Equipment, a programcovering certain industrial equipment,

which includes the commercialrefrigeration equipment that is the focusof this document.13 14 EPCA prescribesenergy conservation standards forcommercial refrigeration equipment (42U.S.C. 6313(c)(2)(4)), and directs DOEto conduct rulemakings to establish newand amended standards for commercialrefrigeration equipment. (42 U.S.C.6313(c)(4)(6)) (DOE notes that under 42U.S.C. 6295(m) and 6316(e)(1) theagency must periodically review itsalready established energy conservationstandards for covered equipment. Underthis requirement, the next review that

DOE would need to conduct must occurno later than 6 years from the issuanceof a final rule establishing or amendinga standard for covered equipment.)

Pursuant to EPCA, DOEs energyconservation program for coveredequipment generally consists of fourparts: (1) Testing; (2) labeling; (3) theestablishment of Federal energyconservation standards; and (4)certification and enforcementprocedures. For commercialrefrigeration equipment, DOE isresponsible for the entirety of thisprogram. Subject to certain criteria and

conditions, DOE is required to developtest procedures to measure the energyefficiency, energy use, or estimatedannual operating cost of each type orclass of covered equipment. (42 U.S.C.6314) Manufacturers of coveredequipment must use the prescribed DOEtest procedure as the basis for certifyingto DOE that their equipment complieswith the applicable energy conservationstandards adopted under EPCA andwhen making representations to thepublic regarding the energy use orefficiency of that equipment. (42 U.S.C.6315(b), 6295(s), and 6316(e)(1))Similarly, DOE must use these testprocedures to determine whether thatequipment complies with standardsadopted pursuant to EPCA. The DOEtest procedure for commercialrefrigeration equipment currentlyappears at title 10 of the Code of FederalRegulations (CFR) part 431, subpart C.

DOE must follow specific statutorycriteria for prescribing amendedstandards for covered equipment. Asindicated above, any amended standardfor covered equipment must be designedto achieve the maximum improvementin energy efficiency that istechnologically feasible andeconomically justified. (42 U.S.C.

6295(o)(2)(A) and 6316(e)(1))Furthermore, DOE may not adopt anystandard that would not result in thesignificant conservation of energy. (42U.S.C. 6295(o)(3) and 6316(e)(1)) DOEalso may not prescribe a standard: (1)For certain equipment, includingcommercial refrigeration equipment, ifno test procedure has been establishedfor the product; or (2) if DOE determines

by rule that the proposed standard is nottechnologically feasible or economicallyjustified. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(A)(B)and 6316(e)(1)) In deciding whether aproposed standard is economically

justified, DOE must determine whetherthe benefits of the standard exceed its

burdens. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i) and6316(e)(1)) DOE must make thisdetermination after receiving commentson the proposed standard, and byconsidering, to the greatest extentpracticable, the following seven factors:

1. The economic impact of thestandard on manufacturers andconsumers of the equipment subject tothe standard;

2. The savings in operating coststhroughout the estimated average life ofthe covered equipment in the type (or

class) compared to any increase in theprice, initial charges, or maintenanceexpenses for the covered equipment thatare likely to result from the impositionof the standard;

3. The total projected amount ofenergy, or as applicable, water, savingslikely to result directly from theimposition of the standard;

4. Any lessening of the utility or theperformance of the covered equipmentlikely to result from the imposition ofthe standard;

5. The impact of any lessening ofcompetition, as determined in writing

by the U.S. Attorney General (Attorney

General), that is likely to result from theimposition of the standard;

6. The need for national energy andwater conservation; and

7. Other factors the Secretaryconsiders relevant.

(42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(I)(VII) and6316(e)(1))

EPCA, as codified, also contains whatis known as an anti-backslidingprovision, which prevents the Secretaryfrom prescribing any amended standardthat either increases the maximum

allowable energy use or decreases theminimum required energy efficiency ofcovered equipment. (42 U.S.C.6295(o)(1) and 6316(e)(1)) Also, theSecretary may not prescribe an amendeor new standard if interested personshave established by a preponderance othe evidence that the standard is likelyto result in the unavailability in the

United States of any covered producttype (or class) of performancecharacteristics (including reliability),features, sizes, capacities, and volumesthat are substantially the same as thosegenerally available in the United States(42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(4) and 6316(e)(1))

Further, EPCA, as codified,establishes a rebuttable presumptionthat a standard is economically justifieif the Secretary finds that the additionacost to the consumer of purchasing aproduct complying with an energyconservation standard level will be lessthan three times the value of the energy

savings during the first year that theconsumer will receive as a result of thestandard, as calculated under theapplicable test procedure. (See 42 U.S.C6295(o)(2)(B)(iii) and 6316(e)(1)) SectioIII.D.2 presents additional discussionabout the rebuttable presumptionpayback period.

Additionally, 42 U.S.C. 6295(q)(1) an6316(e)(1) specify requirements whenpromulgating a standard for a type orclass of covered equipment that has twor more subcategories that may justifydifferent standard levels. DOE mustspecify a different standard level than

that which applies generally to suchtype or class of equipment for any grouof covered products that has the samefunction or intended use if DOEdetermines that products within suchgroup (A) consume a different kind ofenergy from that consumed by othercovered equipment within such type (oclass); or (B) have a capacity or otherperformance-related feature that otherequipment within such type (or class)do not have and such feature justifies ahigher or lower standard. (42 U.S.C.6295(q)(1) and 6316(e)(1)) Indetermining whether a performance-

related feature justifies a differentstandard for a group of equipment, DOEmust consider such factors as the utilityto the consumer of the feature and othefactors DOE deems appropriate. Id. Anyrule prescribing such a standard mustinclude an explanation of the basis onwhich such higher or lower level wasestablished. (42 U.S.C. 6295(q)(2) and6316(e)(1))

Federal energy conservationrequirements generally supersede Statelaws or regulations concerning energyconservation testing, labeling, and


onDSK3SPTVN1PROD

withRULES2




standards. (42 U.S.C. 6297(a)(c) and6316(e))

B. Background

1. Current Standards

The current energy conservationstandards for commercial refrigerationequipment were established by two

different legislative actions and oneDOE final rule. EPCA, as amended bythe Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPACT2005), established standards for self-contained commercial refrigerators andfreezer with solid or transparent doors,self-contained commercial refrigerator-freezers with solid doors, and self-contained commercial refrigeratorsdesigned for pull-down applications.(42 U.S.C. 6313(c)(2)(3)) On January 9,2009, DOE published a final rule(January 2009 final rule) prescribingstandards for commercial refrigerationequipment. 74 FR at 1092. Specifically,

this final rule completed the firststandards rulemaking for commercialrefrigeration equipment by establishingstandards for equipment types specifiedin 42 U.S.C. 6313(c)(5), and for whichEPCA did not prescribe standards in 42U.S.C. 6313(c)(2)(3). These typesconsisted of commercial ice-creamfreezers; self-contained commercial

refrigerators, commercial freezers, andcommercial refrigerator-freezers withoutdoors; and remote condensingcommercial refrigerators, commercialfreezers, and commercial refrigerator-freezers. More recently, the AmericanEnergy Manufacturing TechnicalCorrections Act (AEMTCA), Public Law112210 (December 18, 2012), amendedsection 342(c) of EPCA to establish anew standard for self-contained serviceover counter medium temperaturecommercial refrigerators (this class isknown as SOC.SC.M per DOEsequipment class nomenclature). (42

U.S.C. 6313(c)(4)) As a result, DOEscurrent energy conservation standardsfor commercial refrigeration equipmeninclude the following: Standardsestablished by EPCA for commercialrefrigeration equipment manufacturedon or after January 1, 2010; standardsestablished in the January 2009 finalrule for commercial refrigerationequipment manufactured on or after

January 1, 2012; and standardsestablished by AEMTCA for SOC.SC.Mequipment manufactured on or after

January 1, 2012.

Table II.1 and Table II.2 presentDOEs current energy conservationstandards for commercial refrigerationequipment set by EPCA and the Januar2009 final rule, respectively. TheAEMTCA standard for SOC.SC.Mequipment manufactured on or after

January 1, 2012 is prescribed as 0.6 TDA + 1.0. (42 U.S.C. 6313(c)(4))

TABLE II.1COMMERCIAL REFRIGERATION EQUIPMENT STANDARDS PRESCRIBED BY EPCACOMPLIANCE REQUIREDBEGINNING ON JANUARY 1, 2010

Category Maximum daily energy consumptionkWh/day*

Refrigerators with solid doors .............................................................................................................. 0.10 V** + 2.04.Refrigerators with transparent doors ................................................................................................... 0.12 V + 3.34.Freezers with solid doors .................................................................................................................... 0.40 V + 1.38.Freezers with transparent doors .......................................................................................................... 0.75 V + 4.10.Refrigerators/freezers with solid doors ................................................................................................ the greater of 0.27 AV0.71 or 0.70.Self-contained refrigerators with transparent doors designed for pull-down temperature applica-

tions.0.126V + 3.51.

* kilowatt-hours per day.** Where V means the chilled or frozen compartment volume in cubic feet as defined in the Association of Home Appliance Manufacture

Standard HRF11979. 10 CFR 431.66.

Where AV means that adjusted volume in cubic feet measured in accordance with the Association of Home Appliance ManufactureStandard HRF11979. 10 CFR 431.66.

TABLE II.2COMMERCIAL REFRIGERA-TION EQUIPMENT STANDARDS ES-TABLISHED IN THE JANUARY 2009FINAL RULECOMPLIANCE RE-QUIRED BEGINNING ON JANUARY 1,2012

Equipment class * Standard level **kWh/day

VOP.RC.M ................ 0.82 TDA + 4.07SVO.RC.M ................ 0.83 TDA + 3.18HZO.RC.M ................ 0.35 TDA + 2.88VOP.RC.L ................. 2.27 TDA + 6.85HZO.RC.L ................. 0.57 TDA + 6.88VCT.RC.M ................. 0.22 TDA + 1.95VCT.RC.L .................. 0.56 TDA + 2.61SOC.RC.M ................ 0.51 TDA + 0.11VOP.SC.M ................. 1.74 TDA + 4.71SVO.SC.M ................. 1.73 TDA + 4.59HZO.SC.M ................. 0.77 TDA + 5.55HZO.SC.L .................. 1.92 TDA + 7.08VCT.SC.I ................... 0.67 TDA + 3.29VCS.SC.I ................... 0.38 V + 0.88HCT.SC.I ................... 0.56 TDA + 0.43SVO.RC.L ................. 2.27 TDA + 6.85VOP.RC.I .................. 2.89 TDA + 8.7SVO.RC.I .................. 2.89 TDA + 8.7

TABLE II.2COMMERCIAL REFRIGERA-TION EQUIPMENT STANDARDS ES-TABLISHED IN THE JANUARY 2009FINAL RULECOMPLIANCE RE-QUIRED BEGINNING ON JANUARY 1,2012Continued

Equipment class * Standard level **kWh/day

HZO.RC.I .................. 0.72 TDA + 8.74VCT.RC.I ................... 0.66 TDA + 3.05HCT.RC.M ................. 0.16 TDA + 0.13HCT.RC.L .................. 0.34 TDA + 0.26HCT.RC.I ................... 0.4 TDA + 0.31VCS.RC.M ................. 0.11 V + 0.26VCS.RC.L .................. 0.23 V + 0.54VCS.RC.I ................... 0.27 V + 0.63HCS.RC.M ................ 0.11 V + 0.26HCS.RC.L ................. 0.23 V + 0.54HCS.RC.I .................. 0.27 V + 0.63SOC.RC.L ................. 1.08 TDA + 0.22SOC.RC.I .................. 1.26 TDA + 0.26VOP.SC.L .................. 4.37 TDA + 11.82VOP.SC.I ................... 5.55 TDA + 15.02SVO.SC.L .................. 4.34 TDA + 11.51SVO.SC.I ................... 5.52 TDA + 14.63HZO.SC.I ................... 2.44 TDA + 9.

TABLE II.2COMMERCIAL REFRIGERTION EQUIPMENT STANDARDS ESTABLISHED IN THE JANUARY 200FINAL RULECOMPLIANCE RQUIRED BEGINNING ON JANUARY2012Continued

Equipment class *Standard level **

kWh/day

SOC.SC.I .................. 1.76 TDA + 0.36HCS.SC.I ................... 0.38 V + 0.88

* Equipment class designations consist ofcombination (in sequential order separated bperiods) of: (1) An equipment family cod(VOP = vertical open, SVO = semiverticopen, HZO = horizontal open, VCT = verticclosed with transparent doors, VCS = verticclosed with solid doors, HCT = horizontclosed with transparent doors, HCS = hozontal closed with solid doors, or SOC = serice over counter); (2) an operating mode cod(RC = remote condensing or SC = self-cotained); and (3) a rating temperature code (= medium temperature (38 F), L = low temperature (0 F), or I = ice-cream temperatu(15 F)). For example, VOP.RC.M refeto the vertical open, remote condensing, mdium temperature equipment class.


onDSK3SPTVN1PROD

withRULES2




15EPCA defines the term holding temperatureapplication as a use of commercial refrigerationequipment other than a pull-down temperatureapplication, except a blast chiller or freezer. (42U.S.C. 6311(9)(B))

16EPCA defines the term pull-down temperatureapplication as a commercial refrigerator withdoors that, when fully loaded with 12 ouncebeverage cans at 90F, can cool those beverages toan average stable temperature of 38 F in 12 hoursor less. (42 U.S.C. 6311(9)(D))

17Baseline units consist of units possessingfeatures and levels of efficiency consistent with the

least-efficient equipment currently available andwidely sold on the market.

** TDA is the total display area of the case,as measured in ANSI/Air-Conditioning and Re-frigeration Institute (ARI) Standard 12002006,appendix D. V is the volume of the case, asmeasured in AHAM Standard HRF12004.

In December 2012, AEMTCAamended EPCA by establishing newstandards for SOC.SC.M equipmentwith a compliance date of January 1,

2012. (42 U.S.C. 6313(c)(4)) TheSOC.SC.M equipment had previouslybeen classified under the category self-contained commercial refrigerators withtransparent doors, for which standardswere established by EPACT 2005. (42U.S.C. 6313(c)(2)) The standardestablished by AEMTCA for SOC.SC.Mequipment reduces the stringency of thestandard applicable to this equipment.

AEMTCA also directs DOE todetermine, within three years ofenactment of the new SOC.SC.Mstandard, whether this standard should

be amended. (42 U.S.C. 6313(c)(4)(B)(i))If DOE determines that the standardshould be amended, then DOE mustissue a final rule establishing anamended standard within this samethree-year period. (42 U.S.C.6313(c)(4)(B)(ii))

2. History of Standards Rulemaking forCommercial Refrigeration Equipment

EPCA, as amended by EPACT 2005,prescribes energy conservationstandards for certain self-containedcommercial refrigeration equipmentdesigned for holding temperatures 15(i.e., commercial refrigerators, freezers,and refrigerator-freezers with

transparent and solid doors designed forholding temperature applications) andself-contained commercial refrigeratorswith transparent doors designed forpull-down temperature applications.16Compliance with these standards wasrequired as of January 1, 2010. (42U.S.C. 6313(c)(2)(3)) DOE published atechnical amendment final rule onOctober 18, 2005 codifying thesestandards into subpart C of part 431under title 10 of the Code of FederalRegulations (CFR). 70 FR at 60407.

In addition, EPCA requires DOE to setstandards for additional commercial

refrigeration equipment that is notcovered by 42 U.S.C. 6313(c)(2)(3),namely commercial ice-cream freezers;self-contained commercial refrigerators,

freezers, and refrigerator-freezerswithout doors; and remote condensingcommercial refrigerators, freezers, andrefrigerator-freezers. (42 U.S.C.6313(c)(5)) DOE published a final ruleestablishing these standards on January9, 2009 (74 FR 1092), and manufacturersmust comply with these standardsstarting on January 1, 2012. (42 U.S.C.

6313(c)(5)(A))EPCA requires DOE to conduct a

subsequent rulemaking to determinewhether to amend the standardsestablished under 42 U.S.C. 6313(c),which includes both the standardsprescribed by EPACT 2005 and thoseprescribed by DOE in the January 2009final rule. (42 U.S.C. 6313(c)(6)) If DOEdecides as part of this ongoingrulemaking to amend the currentstandards, DOE must publish a finalrule establishing any such amendedstandards by January 1, 2013. Id.

To satisfy this requirement, DOE

initiated the current rulemaking onApril 30, 2010 by publishing on its Website its Rulemaking Framework forCommercial Refrigeration Equipment.(The Framework document is availableat: www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/commercial/pdfs/cre_framework_04-30-10.pdf.)DOE alsopublished a document in the FederalRegister announcing the availability ofthe Framework document, as well as apublic meeting to discuss the document.The document also solicited commenton the matters raised in the document.75 FR 24824 (May 6, 2010). TheFramework document described theprocedural and analytical approachesthat DOE anticipated using to evaluateenergy conservation standards forcommercial refrigeration equipment,and identified various issues to beresolved in the rulemaking.

DOE held the Framework publicmeeting on May 18, 2010, at which it:(1) Presented the contents of theFramework document; (2) described theanalyses it planned to conduct duringthe rulemaking; (3) sought commentsfrom interested parties on thesesubjects; and (4) in general, sought toinform interested parties about, and

facilitate their involvement in, therulemaking. Major issues discussed atthe public meeting included: (1) Thescope of coverage for the rulemaking; (2)potential updates to the test procedureand appropriate test metrics (beingaddressed in a concurrent rulemaking);(3) manufacturer and marketinformation, including distributionchannels; (4) equipment classes,

baseline units,17 and design options to

improve efficiency; (5) life-cycle costs tcustomer, including installation,maintenance, and repair costs; and (6)any customer subgroups DOE shouldconsider. At the meeting and during thcomment period on the Frameworkdocument, DOE received manycomments that helped it identify andresolve issues pertaining to commercia

refrigeration equipment relevant to thisrulemaking. These are discussed insubsequent sections of this document.

DOE then gathered additionalinformation and performed preliminaryanalyses to help review energyconservation standards for thisequipment. This process culminated inDOEs notice of a public meeting todiscuss and receive comments regardinthe tools and methods DOE used inperforming its preliminary analysis, aswell as the analyses results. 76 FR17573 (March 30, 2011) (the March 201notice). DOE also invited written

comments on these subjects andannounced the availability on its Website of a preliminary analysis technicalsupport document (preliminary analysiTSD). Id. (The preliminary analysis TSis available at: www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EERE-2010-BT-STD-0003-0030.)

The preliminary analysis TSDprovided an overview of DOEs reviewof the standards for commercialrefrigeration equipment, discussed thecomments DOE received in response tothe Framework document, andaddressed issues including the scope ocoverage of the rulemaking. Thedocument also described the analyticalframework that DOE used (andcontinues to use) in consideringamended standards for commercialrefrigeration equipment, including adescription of the methodology, theanalytical tools, and the relationships

between the various analyses that arepart of this rulemaking. Additionally,the preliminary analysis TSD presentedin detail each analysis that DOE hadperformed for this equipment up to thapoint, including descriptions of inputssources, methodologies, and results.These analyses were as follows:

A market and technologyassessment addressed the scope of thisrulemaking, identified existing andpotential new equipment classes forcommercial refrigeration equipment,characterized the markets for thisequipment, and reviewed techniquesand approaches for improving itsefficiency;

A screening analysis reviewedtechnology options to improve the


onDSK3SPTVN1PROD

withRULES2
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/commercial/pdfs/cre_framework_04-30-10.pdfhttp://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/commercial/pdfs/cre_framework_04-30-10.pdfhttp://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/commercial/pdfs/cre_framework_04-30-10.pdfhttp://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/commercial/pdfs/cre_framework_04-30-10.pdfhttp://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/commercial/pdfs/cre_framework_04-30-10.pdfhttp://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/commercial/pdfs/cre_framework_04-30-10.pdfhttp://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/commercial/pdfs/cre_framework_04-30-10.pdfhttp://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/commercial/pdfs/cre_framework_04-30-10.pdfhttp://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/commercial/pdfs/cre_framework_04-30-10.pdfhttp://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/commercial/pdfs/cre_framework_04-30-10.pdfhttp://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EERE-2010-BT-STD-0003-0030http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EERE-2010-BT-STD-0003-0030http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EERE-2010-BT-STD-0003-0030http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EERE-2010-BT-STD-0003-0030http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EERE-2010-BT-STD-0003-0030http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EERE-2010-BT-STD-0003-0030http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EERE-2010-BT-STD-0003-0030http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/commercial/pdfs/cre_framework_04-30-10.pdfhttp://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/commercial/pdfs/cre_framework_04-30-10.pdfhttp://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/commercial/pdfs/cre_framework_04-30-10.pdf




efficiency of commercial refrigerationequipment, and weighed these optionsagainst DOEs four prescribed screeningcriteria;

An engineering analysis estimatedthe manufacturer selling prices (MSPs)associated with more energy efficientcommercial refrigeration equipment;

An energy use analysis estimatedthe annual energy use of commercialrefrigeration equipment;

A markups analysis convertedestimated MSPs derived from theengineering analysis to customerpurchase prices;

A life-cycle cost analysis calculated,for individual customers, thediscounted savings in operating coststhroughout the estimated average life ofcommercial refrigeration equipment,compared to any increase in installedcosts likely to result directly from theimposition of a given standard;

Apayback period analysisestimated the amount of time it wouldtake customers to recover the higherpurchase price of more energy efficientequipment through lower operatingcosts;

A shipments analysis estimatedshipments of commercial refrigeration

equipment over the time periodexamined in the analysis;

A national impact analysis (NIA)assessed the national energy savings(NES), and the national NPV of totalcustomer costs and savings, expected toresult from specific, potential energyconservation standards for commercial

refrigeration equipment; and Apreliminary manufacturer impactanalysis (MIA) took the initial steps inevaluating the potential effects onmanufacturers of amended efficiencystandards.

The public meeting announced in theMarch 2011 notice took place on April19, 2011 (April 2011 preliminaryanalysis public meeting). At the April2011 preliminary analysis publicmeeting, DOE presented themethodologies and results of theanalyses set forth in the preliminaryanalysis TSD. Interested parties

provided comments on the followingissues: (1) Equipment classes; (2)technology options; (3) energymodeling; (4) installation, maintenance,and repair costs; (5) markups anddistributions chains; (6) commercialrefrigeration equipment shipments; and(7) test procedures.

On September 11, 2013, DOEpublished a notice of proposedrulemaking (NOPR) in this proceeding(September 2013 NOPR). 78 FR 55890.In the September 2013 NOPR, DOEaddressed, in detail, the commentsreceived in earlier stages of rulemakingand proposed amended energyconservation standards for commercial

refrigeration equipment. In conjunctionwith the September 2013 NOPR, DOEalso published on its Web site thecomplete technical support document(TSD) for the proposed rule, whichincorporated the analyses DOEconducted and technical documentatiofor each analysis. Also published onDOEs Web site were the engineeringanalysis spreadsheets, the LCCspreadsheet, and the national impactanalysis standard spreadsheet. Thesematerials are available at http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/rulemaking.aspx

ruleid/27.The standards which DOE proposed

for commercial refrigeration equipmenat the NOPR stage of this rulemaking arshown in Table II.3. They are providedsolely for background informationalpurposes and differ from the amendedstandards set forth in this final rule.

TABLE II.3PROPOSED ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS FOR COMMERCIAL REFRIGERATION EQUIPMENT[For compliance in 2017]

Equipment class* Proposed level ** Equipment class * Proposed standard level **VCT.RC.L ...................................... 0.43 TDA + 2.03 VOP.RC.I ...................................... 2.68 TDA + 8.08VOP.RC.M ..................................... 0.61 TDA + 3.03 SVO.RC.L ..................................... 2.11 TDA + 6.36

SVO.RC.M ..................................... 0.63 TDA + 2.41 SVO.RC.I ...................................... 2.68 TDA + 8.08HZO.RC.L ...................................... 0.57 TDA + 6.88 HZO.RC.I ...................................... 0.72 TDA + 8.74HZO.RC.M ..................................... 0.35 TDA + 2.88 VOP.SC.L ..................................... 3.79 TDA + 10.26VCT.RC.M ..................................... 0.08 TDA + 0.72 VOP.SC.I ...................................... 4.81 TDA + 13.03VOP.RC.L ...................................... 2.11 TDA + 6.36 SVO.SC.L ..................................... 3.77 TDA + 10.01SOC.RC.M ..................................... 0.39 TDA + 0.08 SVO.SC.I ...................................... 4.79 TDA + 12.72VOP.SC.M ..................................... 1.51 TDA + 4.09 HZO.SC.I ...................................... 2.44 TDA + 9.0SVO.SC.M ..................................... 1.5 TDA + 3.99 SOC.RC.L ..................................... 0.83 TDA + 0.18HZO.SC.L ...................................... 1.92 TDA + 7.08 SOC.RC.I ...................................... 0.97 TDA + 0.21HZO.SC.M ..................................... 0.75 TDA + 5.44 SOC.SC.I ...................................... 1.35 TDA + 0.29HCT.SC.I ....................................... 0.49 TDA + 0.37 VCT.RC.I ...................................... 0.51 TDA + 2.37VCT.SC.I ....................................... 0.52 TDA + 2.56 HCT.RC.M .................................... 0.14 TDA + 0.11VCS.SC.I ....................................... 0.35 V + 0.81 HCT.RC.L ..................................... 0.3 TDA + 0.23VCT.SC.M ..................................... 0.04 V + 1.07 HCT.RC.I ...................................... 0.35 TDA + 0.27VCT.SC.L ...................................... 0.22 V + 1.21 VCS.RC.M .................................... 0.1 V + 0.24VCS.SC.M ..................................... 0.03 V + 0.53 VCS.RC.L ..................................... 0.21 V + 0.5VCS.SC.L ...................................... 0.13 V + 0.43 VCS.RC.I ...................................... 0.25 V + 0.58HCT.SC.M ..................................... 0.02 V + 0.51 HCS.SC.I ...................................... 0.35 V + 0.81HCT.SC.L ...................................... 0.11 V + 0.6 HCS.RC.M .................................... 0.1 V + 0.24

HCS.SC.M ..................................... 0.02 V + 0.37 HCS.RC.L ..................................... 0.21 V + 0.5HCS.SC.L ...................................... 0.12 V + 0.42 HCS.RC.I ...................................... 0.25 V + 0.58PD.SC.M ........................................ 0.03 V + 0.83 SOC.SC.L ..................................... 0.67 TDA + 1.12SOC.SC.M ..................................... 0.32 TDA + 0.53

* Equipment class designations consist of a combination (in sequential order separated by periods) of: (1) An equipment family code (VOP = vertical open, SV= semivertical open, HZO = horizontal open, VCT = vertical closed with transparent doors, VCS = vertical closed with solid doors, HCT = horizontal closed witransparent doors, HCS = horizontal closed with solid doors, SOC = service over counter, or PD = pull-down); (2) an operating mode code (RC = remote condensing or SC = self-contained); and (3) a rating temperature code (M = medium temperature (382 F), L = low temperature (02 F), or I = ice-cream temperture (152 F)). For example, VOP.RC.M refers to the vertical open, remote condensing, medium temperature equipment class. See discussion in chapter of the final rule technical support document (TSD) for a more detailed explanation of the equipment class terminology.

** TDA is the total display area of the case, as measured in the Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) Standard 12002010, appendix V is the volume of the case, as measured in American National Standards Institute (ANSI)/Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM) StandaHRF12004.

In the September 2013 NOPR, DOEidentified seven issues on which it was

particularly interested in receivingcomments and views of interested

parties: light-emitting diode (LED) pricprojections, base case efficiency trends


onDSK3SPTVN1PROD

withRULES2
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/rulemaking.aspx/ruleid/27http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/rulemaking.aspx/ruleid/27http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/rulemaking.aspx/ruleid/27http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/rulemaking.aspx/ruleid/27http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/rulemaking.aspx/ruleid/27http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/rulemaking.aspx/ruleid/27http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/rulemaking.aspx/ruleid/27http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/rulemaking.aspx/ruleid/27http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/rulemaking.aspx/ruleid/27http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/rulemaking.aspx/ruleid/27




18Night curtains are devices made of aninsulating material, typically insulated aluminumfabric, designed to be pulled down over the openfront of the case to decrease infiltration and heattransfer into the case when the merchandizingestablishment is closed.

19The NSF was founded in 1944 as the NationalSanitation Foundation, and is now referred tosimply as NSF.

operating temperature ranges, offsetfactors for smaller equipment, extensionof standards developed for the 25primary classes to the remaining 24secondary classes, standards for hybridcases and wedges, and standard levels.78 FR 55987 (September 11, 2013) Afterthe publication of the September 2013NOPR, DOE received written comments

on these and other issues. DOE also helda public meeting in Washington, DC, onOctober 3, 2013, to hear oral commentson and solicit information relevant tothe proposed rule. These comments areaddressed in todays document.

III. General Discussion

A. Test Procedures and NormalizationMetrics

1. Test Procedures

On December 8, 2006, DOE publisheda final rule in which it adoptedAmerican National Standards Institute

(ANSI)/Air-Conditioning andRefrigeration Institute (ARI) Standard12002006, Performance Rating ofCommercial Refrigerated DisplayMerchandisers and Storage Cabinets,as the DOE test procedure for thisequipment. 71 FR at 71340, 7136970.ANSI/ARI Standard 12002006 requiresperformance tests to be conductedaccording to the American Society ofHeating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE)Standard 722005, Method of TestingCommercial Refrigerators and Freezers.The standard also contains rating

temperature specifications of 38 F (+/2 F) for commercial refrigerators andrefrigerator compartments, 0 F (+/2 F) for commercial freezers andfreezer compartments, and 5 F (+/2 F) for commercial ice-creamfreezers. During the 2006 test procedurerulemaking, DOE determined thattesting at a 15 F (2 F) ratingtemperature was more representative ofthe actual energy consumption ofcommercial freezers specificallydesigned for ice-cream application. 71FR at 71357 (December 8, 2006).Therefore, in the test procedure final

rule, DOE adopted a

15 F (2 F)rating temperature for commercial ice-cream freezers, rather than the 5 F(2 F) prescribed in the ANSI/ARIStandard 12002006. In addition, DOEadopted ANSI/Association of HomeAppliance Manufacturers (AHAM)Standard HRF12004, Energy,Performance, and Capacity ofHousehold Refrigerators, Refrigerator-Freezers, and Freezers, for determiningcompartment volumes for thisequipment. 71 FR at 7136970(December 8, 2006).

On February 21, 2012, DOE publisheda test procedure final rule (2012 testprocedure final rule) in which itadopted several amendments to the DOEtest procedure. This included anamendment to incorporate by referenceANSI/Air-Conditioning, Heating, andRefrigeration Institute (AHRI) Standard12002010, Performance Rating of

Commercial Refrigerated DisplayMerchandisers and Storage Cabinets,as the DOE test procedure for thisequipment. 77 FR 10292, 10314(February 21, 2012). The 2012 testprocedure final rule also included anamendment to incorporate by referencethe updated ANSI/AHAM StandardHRF12008, Energy, Performance,and Capacity of HouseholdRefrigerators, Refrigerator-Freezers, andFreezers, for determining compartmentvolumes for this equipment.

In addition, the 2012 test procedurefinal rule included several amendments

designed to address certain energyefficiency features that were notaccounted for by the previous DOE testprocedure, including provisions formeasuring the impact of nightcurtains 18 and lighting occupancysensors and scheduled controls. 77 FRat 1029698 (February 21, 2012). In the2012 test procedure final rule, DOE alsoadopted amendments to allow testing ofcommercial refrigeration equipment attemperatures other than one of the threerating temperatures previously specifiedin the test procedure. Specifically, the2012 test procedure final rule allows

testing of commercial refrigerationequipment at its lowest applicationproduct temperature, for equipment thatcannot be tested at the prescribed ratingtemperature. The 2012 test procedurefinal rule also allows manufacturers totest and certify equipment at the more-stringent temperatures and ambientconditions required by NSF for foodsafety testing.19 77 FR at 10305(February 21, 2012).

The test procedure amendmentsestablished in the 2012 test procedurefinal rule are required to be used inconjunction with the amendedstandards promulgated in this energy

conservation standards final rule. Assuch, use of the amended test procedureto show compliance with DOE energyconservation standards or makerepresentations with respect to energy

consumption of commercialrefrigeration equipment is required onthe compliance date of the revisedenergy conservation standardsestablished by todays document. 77 FRat 10308 (February 21, 2012).

DOE has initiated a test procedurerulemaking for commercial refrigeratioequipment to revise and reorganize its

test procedure for commercialrefrigeration equipment in order toclarify certain terms, procedures, andcompliance dates. A NOPR for thisrulemaking was published on October28, 2013. 78 FR 64206 (October 28.2013). In the NOPR, DOE addressed:

Several inquiries received frominterested parties regarding theapplicability of DOEs test procedureand current Federal energy conservatiostandards;

The definitions of certain termspertinent to commercial refrigerationequipment;

The proper configuration and use ocertain components and features ofcommercial refrigeration equipmentwhen testing according to the DOE testprocedure;

The proper application of certaintest procedure provisions;

The compliance date of certainprovisions specified in the DOE testprocedure final rule published onFebruary 21, 2012; and

A number of test procedureclarifications which arose as a result ofthe negotiated rulemaking process forcertification of commercial heating,ventilation, air conditioning,

refrigeration, and water heatingequipment.

DOE also held a public meeting inWashington, DC, on December 5, 2013,to hear oral comments on and solicitinformation relevant to the proposedrule.

2. Normalization Metrics

Both the January 2009 final rule andEPACT 2005 contain energyconservation standards for respectivecovered types of commercialrefrigeration equipment, expressed inthe form of equations developed as a

function of unit size. This use ofnormalization metrics allows for asingle standard-level equationdeveloped for an equipment class toapply to a broad range of equipmentsizes offered within that class bymanufacturers. In the aforementionedcommercial refrigeration equipmentstandards, the two normalizationmetrics used are refrigeratedcompartment volume, as determinedusing AHAM HRF12004, and TDA, adetermined using ANSI/ARI 1200200In particular, the EPACT 2005 standard


onDSK3SPTVN1PROD

withRULES2




20DOE also presents a sensitivity analysis thatconsiders impacts for products shipped in a 9-yeaperiod.

21 In the past, DOE presented energy savingsresults for only the 30-year period that begins in thyear of compliance. In the calculation of economicimpacts, however, DOE considered operating costsavings measured over the entire lifetime ofproducts purchased during the 30-year period. DOhas chosen to modify its presentation of nationalenergy savings to be consistent with the approachused for its national economic analysis.

utilize volume as the normalizationmetric for all equipment types, with theexception of refrigerator-freezers withsolid doors, for which the standardspecifies adjusted volume. (42 U.S.C.6313(c)(2)) The January 2009 final rule,meanwhile, utilizes TDA as thenormalization metric for all equipmentwith display capacity while specifying

volume as the metric for solid-door(VCS and HCS) equipment. 74 FR at1093 (January 9, 2009).

At the May 2010 Framework publicmeeting, interested parties raisedseveral questions regarding the potentialnormalization metrics that could beused in amended standards. DOE alsoreceived stakeholder feedbackpertaining to this issue following thepublication of the Frameworkdocument. In the preliminary analysis,DOE suggested that it would considerretaining the normalization metrics inthis rulemaking for the respective

classes to which they were applied inEPCA (42 U.S.C. 6313(c)(2)(3)) and the

January 2009 final rule. 74 FR at 1093(January 9, 2009). In chapter 2 of thepreliminary analysis TSD, DOEpresented its rationale for the continueduse of TDA for equipment with displayareas addressed in the January 2009final rule and the continued use ofvolume as the metric for solid-doorremote condensing equipment and ice-cream freezers, as well as for theequipment covered by EPACT 2005standards. DOE maintained this stancein the NOPR document and TSD. DOE

did not receive any significantinformation or data while conductingthe final rule analyses that would alterthis position, and thus DOE includescontinued use of the existingnormalization metrics in todaysdocument.

B. Technological Feasibility

1. General

In each standards rulemaking, DOEconducts a screening analysis, which is

based on information that theDepartment has gathered on all currenttechnology options and prototype

designs that could improve theefficiency of the products or equipmentthat are the subject of the rulemaking.As the first step in such analysis, DOEdevelops a list of design options forconsideration, in consultation withmanufacturers, design engineers, andother interested parties. DOE thendetermines which of these options forimproving efficiency are technologicallyfeasible. DOE considers a design optionto be technologically feasible if it isused by the relevant industry or if aworking prototype has been developed.

Technologies incorporated incommercially available equipment or inworking prototypes will be consideredtechnologically feasible. 10 CFR part430, subpart C, appendix A, section4(a)(4)(i) Although DOE considerstechnologies that are proprietary, it willnot consider efficiency levels that canonly be reached through the use of

proprietary technologies (i.e., a uniquepathway), which could allow a singlemanufacturer to monopolize the market.

Once DOE has determined thatparticular design options aretechnologically feasible, it furtherevaluates each of these design optionsin light of the following additionalscreening criteria: (1) Practicability tomanufacture, install, or service; (2)adverse impacts on product utility oravailability; and (3) adverse impacts onhealth or safety. 10 CFR part 430,subpart C, appendix A, section4(a)(4)(ii)(iv) Chapter 4 of the final rule

TSD discusses the results of thescreening analyses for commercialrefrigeration equipment. Specifically, itpresents the designs DOE considered,those it screened out, and those that arethe bases for the TSLs considered in thisrulemaking.

2. Maximum Technologically FeasibleLevels

When DOE adopts (or does not adopt)an amended or new energy conservationstandard for a type or class of coveredequipment such as commercialrefrigeration equipment, it determinesthe maximum improvement in energy

efficiency that is technologicallyfeasible for such equipment. (See 42U.S.C. 6295(p)(1) and 6316(e)(1))Accordingly, DOE determined themaximum technologically feasible(max-tech) improvements in energyefficiency for commercial refrigerationequipment in the engineering analysisusing the design parameters that passedthe screening analysis.

As indicated previously, whetherefficiency levels exist or can beachieved in commonly used equipmentis not relevant to whether they areconsidered max-tech levels. DOE

considers technologies to betechnologically feasible if they areincorporated in any currently availableequipment or working prototypes.Hence, a max-tech level results from thecombination of design options predictedto result in the highest efficiency levelpossible for an equipment class, withsuch design options consisting oftechnologies already incorporated incommercial equipment or workingprototypes. DOE notes that itreevaluated the efficiency levels,including the max-tech levels, when it

updated its results for this final rule.See chapter 5 of the TSD for the resultsof the analyses and a list of technologieincluded in max-tech equipment. TableIII.1 shows the max-tech levelsdetermined in the engineering analysisfor commercial refrigeration equipmen

TABLE III.1MAX-TECH LEVELS FO

COMMERCIAL REFRIGERATIOEQUIPMENT PRIMARY CLASSES

Equipment classMax-Tech

levelkWh/day

VCT.RC.L ............................. 33.04VOP.RC.M ............................ 35.65SVO.RC.M ............................ 27.70HZO.RC.L ............................. 31.07HZO.RC.M ............................ 14.VCT.RC.M ............................ 10.98VOP.RC.L ... ... .. ... .. ... ... .. ... .. ... 100.00SOC.RC.M ............................ 21.56VOP.SC.M ............................ 29.7SVO.SC.M ............................ 25.40

HZO.SC.L ............................. 29.92HZO.SC.M ............................ 13.74HCT.SC.I .............................. 2.32VCT.SC.I ............................... 18.10VCS.SC.I .............................. 16.04VCT.SC.M ............................. 5.14VCT.SC.L .............................. 16.04VCS.SC.M ............................ 3.02VCS.SC.L ............................. 11.13HCT.SC.M ............................ 0.6HCT.SC.L ............................. 1.3HCS.SC.M ............................ 0.98HCS.SC.L ............................. 0.7PD.SC.M ............................... 3.40SOC.SC.M ............................ 26.1

C. Energy Savings

1. Determination of Savings

For each TSL, DOE projected energysavings from the products that are thesubjects of this rulemaking purchasedduring a 30-year period that begins inthe year of compliance with amendedstandards (20172046).20 The savingsare measured over the entire lifetime ofproducts purchased in the 30-yearperiod.21 DOE used the NIA model toestimate the NES for equipmentpurchased over the period 20172046.The model forecasts total energy useover the analysis period for each

representative equipment class atefficiency levels set by each of theconsidered TSLs. DOE then compares


onDSK3SPTVN1PROD

withRULES2




22 Review of Site (Point-of-Use) and Full-Fuel-Cycle Measurement Approaches to DOE/EEREBuilding Appliance Energy- Efficiency Standards,(Academy report) was completed in May 2009 andincluded five recommendations. A copy of thestudy can be downloaded at: http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12670.

the energy use at each TSL to the base-case energy use to obtain the NES. TheNIA model is described in section IV.Hof this document and in chapter 10 ofthe final rule TSD.

DOE used its NIA spreadsheet modelto estimate energy savings fromamended standards for the equipmentthat is the subject of this rulemaking.

The NIA spreadsheet model (describedin section IV.H of this document)calculates energy savings in site energy,which is the energy directly consumed

by products at the locations where theyare used. For electricity, DOE reportsnational en

Documents

Doe Final Rule Cre Standards Eere-2010-Bt-std-0003-0104 20140328