# Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Test Procedure for Residential Central Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A05-15601 ## Record - **Collection:** Federal Register - **Document type:** Rule - **Published:** October 11, 2005 - **Citation:** 70 FR 59122 ## Text DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy 10 CFR Part 430 [Docket No. EE-RM/TP-97-440] RIN 1904-AA46 Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Test Procedure for Residential Central Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Department of Energy (DOE, or the Department) amends its test procedures for residential central air conditioners and heat pumps. This final rule adds new sections and revises several sections of the test procedure to bring it up-to-date by eliminating the need for several test procedure waivers and making it more complete. The Department also re-organized the test procedure to be more chronological in its progression. The revisions to the test procedure do not alter the minimum energy conservation standards currently in effect for central air conditioners and heat pumps. DATES: This rule is effective April 10, 2006. The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of April 10, 2006. ADDRESSES: You may review copies of all materials related to this rulemaking at the U.S. Department of Energy, Forrestal Building, Room 1J-018 (Resource Room of the Building Technologies Program), 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC, (202) 586-9127, between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Please call Ms. Brenda Edwards-Jones at the above telephone number for additional information regarding visiting the Resource Room. Please note: The Department's Freedom of Information Reading Room (formerly Room 1E-190 at the Forrestal Building) is no longer housing rulemaking materials. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael G. Raymond, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, EE-2J, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121, (202) 586-9611, e-mail: michael.raymond@ee.doe.gov ; or Thomas B. DePriest, Esq., U.S. Department of Energy, Office of General Counsel, GC-72, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121, (202) 586-9507, e-mail: thomas.depriest@hq.doe.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The final rule incorporates, by reference, into Subpart B of Part 430 seven test-method standards published by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. (ASHRAE), as follows: • Standard 23-1993, “Methods of Testing for Rating Positive Displacement Refrigerant Compressors and Condensing Units;” • Standard 37-1988, “Methods of Testing for Rating Unitary Air-Conditioning and Heat Pump Equipment;” • Standard 41.1-1986 (Reaffirmed 2001), “Standard Method for Temperature Measurement;” • Standard 41.2-1987 (Reaffirmed 1992), “Standard Methods for Laboratory Airflow Measurement;” • Standard 41.6-1994 (Reaffirmed 2001), “Standard Method for Measurement of Moist Air Properties;” • Standard 41.9-2000, “Calorimeter Test Methods for Mass Flow Measurements of Volatile Refrigerants;” and • Standard 116-1995, “Methods of Testing for Rating for Seasonal Efficiency of Unitary Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps.” The following joint test-method standard of ASHRAE and the Air Movement and Control Association International, Inc. (ASHRAE/AMCA) is incorporated by reference into subpart B of Part 430: • Standard 51-1999/210-1999, “Laboratory Methods of Testing Fans for Aerodynamic Performance Rating.” The following test-and-rating standard of the Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute (ARI) is incorporated by reference into Subpart B of Part 430: • Standard 210/240-2003, “Unitary Air-Conditioning and Air-Source Heat Pump Equipment.” Copies of these standards are available for public review at the Department of Energy's Building Technologies Program Resource Room described above. Copies of the ASHRAE, ASHRAE/AMCA and ARI Standards are available from the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc., 1971 Tullie Circle, NE., Atlanta, GA 30329, http://www.ashrae.org ; the Air Movement and Control Association International, Inc., 30 West University Drive, Arlington Heights, IL 60004-1893, http://www.amca.org ; and the Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute, 4100 North Fairfax Drive, Suite 200, Arlington, VA 22203-1629, http://www.ari.org. I. Introduction A. Authority B. Background II. Discussion of Comments A. General Discussion 1. Adopting References Updated Since Public Hearing 2. Small-Duct, High-Velocity (SDHV) Systems 3. Non-Defrost Heat Pumps 4. Two-Capacity, Northern Heat Pumps 5. Heat Pumps Having a Heat Comfort Controller B. Definitions C. Testing Conditions 1. Section 2.2.4 Wet-Bulb Temperature Requirements for Air Entering the Indoor and Outdoor Coils 2. Section 2.2.5 Additional Refrigerant Charging Requirements D. Testing Procedures 1. Section 3.1.4 Airflow Through the Indoor Coil: Systems Having a Variable-Speed, Constant Airflow Blower 2. Sections 3.1.4.2, 3.1.4.5, 3.3, 3.5.1, 3.7, and 3.9.1. Testing a Two-Capacity Compressor System: Coil-Only Units Tested at Low Capacity and Differences in High/Low Cycling III. Summary of Other Additions and Changes to the DOE Residential Central Air Conditioner and Heat Pump Test Procedure A. Update and Add References for ASHRAE and ARI Standards B. Air Volume Rates C. Cyclic Testing D. Fanless (Coil-Only) Units E. Frost Accumulation Test F. Test Tolerance Tables G. Pretest Intervals 1. Wet Coil Tests 2. Dry Coil Steady-State Test 3. Dry Coil Cyclic Test 4. Maximum and High Temperature Heating Mode Tests 5. Heating Mode Cyclic Test 6. Frost Accumulation Test 7. Low Temperature Test H. Multi-Capacity Systems 1. Two-Capacity Heat Pumps That Lock Out Low Capacity at Higher Outdoor Temperatures 2. Systems Having a Single-Speed Compressor and a Variable-Speed Indoor Fan Where Fan Speed or Air Volume Rate Depends on Outdoor Temperature I. Triple-Split Systems J. Time-Adaptive Defrost Control Systems K. Test Unit Installation L. Test Apparatus and Measurement/Sampling Frequency 1. Inlet Plenum for Blower Coils 2. Manifolded Static Pressure Taps 3. Temperature Measurement Intervals 4. Temperature Measurement Accuracies 5. Grid of Individual Temperature Sensors Within the Indoor-Side Outlet Plenum 6. Duct Loss Correction 7. Water Vapor Measurements Using a Dew-Point Hygrometer, a Relative Humidity Meter, or Any Other Alternative Instrument 8. Voltmeter Accuracy 9. Electrical Power Measurement M. Different Compressor Speeds and Indoor Fan Capacities Between Cooling and Heating N. Secondary Test Requirements O. Calculations P. Effect of Test Procedure Revisions on SEER and HSPF IV. Procedural Requirements A. Review Under Executive Order 12866 B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act E. Review Under Executive Order 13132 F. Review Under Executive Order 12988 G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 H. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act of 1999 I. Review Under Executive Order 12630 J. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act of 2001 K. Review Under Executive Order 13211 L. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974 M. Congressional Notification N. Approval of the Office of the Secretary I. Introduction A. Authority Part B of Title III of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA or Act) (42 U.S.C. 6291 et seq. ), established the Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products Other Than Automobiles (Program). The products currently subject to this Program (“covered products”) include central air conditioners and heat pumps, the subject of today's final rule. Under the Act, the Program consists of three parts: Testing, labeling, and the Federal energy conservation standards. The Department, in consultation with the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), is authorized to establish or amend test procedures as appropriate for each of the covered products. (42 U.S.C. 6293) The purpose of the test procedures is to measure energy efficiency, energy use, or estimated annual operating cost of a covered product during a representative, average use cycle or period of use. The test procedure must not be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) If a test procedure is amended, DOE is required to determine to what extent, if any, the proposed new test procedure would alter the measured energy efficiency of any covered product as determined under the existing test procedure. (42 U.S.C. 6293(e)(1)) If DOE determines that an amended test procedure would alter the measured energy efficiency of a covered product, DOE is required to amend the applicable energy conservation standard with respect to such test procedure. In determining any such amended energy conservation standard, DOE is required to measure the energy efficiency or energy use of a representative sample of covered products that minimally comply with the existing standard. The average efficiency or energy use of these representative samples, tested using the amended test procedure, constitutes the amended standard. (42 U.S.C. 6293(e)(2)) The Department has determined that today's amended test procedure does not alter the measured efficiency or measured energy use of central air conditioners and heat pumps. Beginning 180 days after a test procedure for a covered product is prescribed, no manufacturer, distributor, retailer, or private labeler may make representations with respect to the energy use, efficiency, or cost of energy consumed by such product, except as reflected in tests conducted according to the DOE procedure. (42 U.S.C. 6293(c)(2)) B. Background On January 22, 2001, the Department published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (hereafter referred to as the January 22, 2001, proposed rule) that proposed a revised test procedure for central air conditioners and heat pumps. (66 FR 6768) As summarized in the January 22, 2001, proposed rule, the Department initiated several interactions, including a DOE workshop, phone conferences, and the release of multiple drafts for review and comment between DOE and stakeholders prior to preparing the revised test procedure. Most of the existing test procedure dates back to its original publication in the Federal Register on December 27, 1979. (44 FR 76700) The Department modified the test procedure on March 14, 1988, to cover variable-speed air conditioners and heat pumps, to address testing of split-type non-ducted units, and to change the method used for crediting heat pumps that provide a demand defrost capability. (53 FR 8304) The January 22, 2001, proposed rule specified dates for holding a public hearing and for submitting written comments. At the request of ARI, the Department changed these specified dates. (66 FR 15203, March 16, 2001) Prior to the public hearing and at the invitation of ARI, a NIST representative attended a meeting of the ARI Unitary Small Equipment Engineering Committee on February 27, 2001, at ARI headquarters. The public hearing was held on March 29, 2001, at DOE headquarters. 1 At the public hearing, the participants spent the majority of the time discussing the list of items from the proposed rulemaking for which the Department solicited stakeholder comment. One manufacturer, the Carrier Corporation, presented a prepared oral statement. On May 1, 2001, DOE and NIST personnel met with representatives of the Carrier Corporation at DOE headquarters. 1 The Department held a public workshop on issues that would not be considered for the current revision to the test procedure ( i.e. , alternative rating method for untested combinations, promoting devices that compensate for installation problems, metrification of the DOE test procedure) on the day immediately following the close of the public hearing. During the comment period, stakeholders, DOE, and NIST held several phone and e-mail discussions about issues associated with the proposed test procedure (a revision of 10 CFR part 430, Subpart B, Appendix M) and about rating untested split-system combinations (a separate test procedure issue not covered in Appendix M, but in 10 CFR 430.24(m)). The issue of rating untested split-system combinations is not part of this rulemaking and will be the subject of a future rulemaking. II. Discussion of Comments A. General Discussion Nine different stakeholders submitted a total of fourteen comments on the January 22, 2001, proposed rule. Concurrent with this rulemaking, the Department also conducted a rulemaking to issue new energy conservation standards for central air conditioners and heat pumps. Both rulemakings covered, among other consumer products, small-duct, high-velocity (SDHV) systems. In the standards rulemaking (66 FR 7197), DOE stated that concerns for SDHV systems had been addressed by modifying the test procedure for SDHV products. This test procedure modification would have given SDHV systems a higher tested value of the Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ratio (SEER). (DOE later rejected this test procedure modification for reasons discussed in section II.A.2 of this preamble). As a result, the Department considered comments received on October 18, 2001, from SDHV manufacturers SpacePak and Unico, Inc. (Unico) as part of the energy conservation standards rulemaking in today's final rule on the test procedure. (SpacePak, No. 21, Unico, No. 22) 2 The Department also considered during this rulemaking amended comments from ARI, dated October 30, 2001, that addressed the SDHV issue. (ARI, No. 20) A discussion of the comments and the actions taken in response to them follows. 2 These comments were received in the course of the standards rulemaking, Docket Number EE-RM-98-440, but are relevant to this test procedure rulemaking. SpacePak's comments are item 267 in that docket; Unico's comments are item 251. 1. Adopting References Updated Since Public Hearing The January 22, 2001, proposed rule referenced seven ASHRAE standards, as well as ASHRAE Standard 51-99/AMCA Standard 210-99, and ARI standard 210/240. Since the publication of the proposed rule, however, two of these standards have been reaffirmed and two have been revised. The two reaffirmed standards are ASHRAE Standard 41.1-1986 (Reaffirmed 2001) and ASHRAE Standard 41.6-1994 (Reaffirmed 2001). When a standard is reaffirmed within ASHRAE, no substantive changes are permitted to the document. In the ASHRAE Project Committee Manual of Procedures, substantive change is defined as a change that involves an important (has value, weight or consequences), fundamental (is the foundation, without which it would collapse), or essential (belongs to the very nature of a thing) part or changes the meaning of the material or that directly and materially affects the use of the standard. Following are example changes that may be found substantive when examined in context; • “shall” to “should” or “should” to “shall;' • addition, deletion or revision of mandatory requirements, regardless of the number of changes; • or addition of mandatory compliance with referenced standards. Thus, today's final rule references ASHRAE Standards 41.1-1986 (Reaffirmed 2001) and 41.6-1994 (Reaffirmed 2001), whereas the January 22, 2001, proposed rule had referenced ASHRAE Standards 41.1-1986 (Reaffirmed 1991) and 41.6-1994. These changes have no effect on the test procedure itself nor on the reported energy efficiency ratings of the tested equipment. The two revised standards are ASHRAE Standard 41.9-2000 and ARI Standard 210/240-2003. A revision of ASHRAE Standard 41.9, “Calorimeter Test Methods for Mass Flow Measurements of Volatile Refrigerants,” was published in 2000. The previous version, Standard 41.9-1988, was referenced in the proposed rulemaking. This particular standard is only referenced in section 3.11.2 of the test procedure. Section 3.11.2 pertains to one of three allowed secondary test methods, the Compressor Calibration Method. These secondary test methods do not affect the reported performance ratings. Instead, these secondary test methods are used to provide a check of the primary method, i.e. , the Indoor Air Enthalpy Method. Specifically, the cooling or heating capacity determined using the approved primary method and the user selected secondary test method must agree within six percent to constitute a valid test set-up. The revised version of ASHRAE Standard 41.9 is referenced in today's test procedure both because it does not affect the reported ratings and because it provides the most current methods for making refrigerant calorimeter measurements. The other revised standard is ARI Standard 210/240-2003. The main impetus behind the 2003 revision of ARI Standard 210/240 was a desire to narrow the scope of the equipment covered by the standard. Whereas the 1994 version of Standard 210/240 covered equipment up to 135,000 Btu/h, the 2003 version is limited to equipment having rated capacities less than 65,000 Btu/h. With regard to the DOE test procedure, the January 22, 2001, proposed rule referenced four sections within ARI Standard 210/240-1994. In the 2003 version of the standard, no substantive changes were made to these four sections. The numbering/lettering of the sections, however, did change slightly. For example, section 5.1.3.5 in the 1994 document became section 6.1.3.5 in the 2003 document. Today's test procedure maintains the approach taken in the proposed rule of only referencing the four particular sections of 210/240. Because of this consistency, the DOE test procedure is unaffected by referencing ARI Standard 210/240-2003 rather than Standard 210/240-1994. The reported energy efficiency ratings of the tested equipment are unaffected as well. 2. Small-Duct, High-Velocity (SDHV) Systems As discussed in the January 22, 2001, proposed rule, Unico, a manufacturer of SDHV systems, argued for creating a separate SDHV product class that was subject to a lower future energy conservation standard than the level established for conventional units. (66 FR 6768) However, in the energy standards rulemaking, a majority of industry members opposed the separate-product-class option. DOE did not include a separate SDHV class in the January 22, 2001, proposed rule. Instead, DOE proposed testing SDHV systems as coil-only units. Testing as coil-only units would give SDHV units an immediate SEER and Heating Seasonal Performance Factor (HSPF) boost, as long as the default fan power was less than the actual blower wattage. The SEER and HSPF boost eliminated the need for a separate product class. Both Unico and ARI at first endorsed this approach. (Unico, No. 10; ARI, No. 19 at p. 3) But SpacePak, Trane, and ultimately ARI, disagreed with the coil-only testing approach. (SpacePak, No. 15; Trane, No. 12 at p. 1, ARI, No. 20) These comments noted that SDHV systems would be tested in a manner that would never occur in real applications and, as a result, give energy efficiency and cost-of-operation results that are not representative of the unit's true energy performance. Furthermore, SDHV manufacturers would have no incentive to use high-efficiency blowers if systems were tested without the indoor blower. Finally, there is no technical basis for setting the default fan-power level. For these reasons, DOE has determined that its proposal to test SDHV systems as coil-only units is unacceptable. As a result, today's final rule does not amend the test procedures to test SDHV systems as coil-only units. DOE considered another alternative for SDHV systems which it also ultimately rejected. This alternative was to make no changes at all. In other words, test SDHV systems as they are currently tested and require them to meet the same future energy conservation standards as conventional units. The Department rejected this option because it risked the continued existence of SDHV systems. The Department explained its position at the public hearing on March 29, 2001: The Department cannot set standards in a way that removes from the market a product which offers special utility. (Public Hearing Tr., p. 44) Because today's final rule does not amend the test procedures for SDHV units, DOE recognizes, as it did in the January 22, 2001, energy standards final rule, that SDHV units will have difficulty in meeting the 13 SEER standard. In the May 23, 2002, final rule on central air conditioner and heat pump standards, DOE further discussed how the special characteristics of SDHV systems would make it unlikely such systems could even meet the 12 SEER/7.4 HSPF standard established for space constrained products. (67 FR 36396) However, because of the ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in January, 2004, 355 F.3d 179 (2d Cir. 2004), that bars DOE from adopting a standard of less than 13 SEER for SDHV systems, the 13 SEER standard applies to SDHV systems, despite DOE's later conclusion that it is unlikely such systems can meet that standard or even the lower 12 SEER standard for space constrained systems. (69 FR 50997) Nonetheless, the inability of SDHV systems to meet the applicable energy efficiency standards is not a new problem created by the amendments to the test procedure in today's rulemaking. Instead, these products were unable to meet the standard under the old test procedures. As a result, DOE need not amend the applicable test procedure or standard to mitigate this noncompliance. DOE has advised the two manufacturers of these systems of the procedure available to affected persons under section 504 of the Department of Energy Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 7194), which allows them to request relief from hardship or inequity caused by a regulation issued under EPCA. 3. Non-Defrost Heat Pumps The January 22, 2001, proposed rule included steps for calculating the HSPF of a non-defrost heat pump. This proposal addressed the test procedure waiver granted to Enviromaster International (EMI). In 1992, the Department granted EMI a waiver for its line of non-defrost, multi-split heat pumps. Under the waiver, the Department did not require EMI to report an HSPF and instead required EMI to include in its printed materials for the product the following sentence, “No HSPF value has been measured since the heat pump cannot be operated at temperatures below 35°F.” EMI finally applied to the Department's Office of Hearing and Appeals (OHA) on January 23, 2003, for exception relief from the HSPF efficiency standards. OHA granted the exception relief on April 1, 2003. Thus, EMI has never calculated HSPF because of its waiver, and will not do so in the future because of OHA exception relief. Since there are no manufacturers of products on the market which would actually use the proposed procedure for calculating the HSPF of a non-defrost heat pump, the Department has removed from the test procedure all references to non-defrost heat pumps and the special caveats for calculating an HSPF for such units. 4. Two-Capacity, Northern Heat Pumps The January 22, 2001, proposed rule applied to a two-capacity heat pump configured to use only low capacity when cooling, while using both low and high capacities when heating. (66 FR 6768) The proposed test procedure identified such units as “two-capacity heat pumps that lock out high capacity when cooling.” At the March 29, 2001, public hearing, York expressed concern regarding the use of the term “lockout.” (Public Hearing Tr., p. 54) York felt the term was too restrictive, since it could be interpreted to mean that the lockout feature must be hard-wired, whereas DOE intended the meaning to include factory or field-selectable lockout. At the March 29, 2001, public hearing, ARI commented that such units would typically have two different indoor coil identifiers and, as a result, two different sets of ratings. (Public Hearing Tr., p. 53) The ARI comment was supported by many of the other participants at the public hearing. ARI and York submitted written comments that supported the consensus reached at the public hearing. (ARI, No. 19 at p. 2; York, No. 9 at p. 2) The Department chose to adopt the public comment consensus and now defines these types of systems as “two-capacity, northern heat pumps.” The Department included a requirement in the definition of “two-capacity, northern heat pump” that the manufacturer must clearly state that the feature is factory or field-selectable and that manufacturers must publish two sets of ratings. Finally, the definition indicates that the lockout feature is to remain enabled for all tests. The northern heat pump is allowed to operate at high capacity during its defrost cycle, an issue that arose at the public hearing. (Public Hearing Tr., p. 55) 5. Heat Pumps Having a Heat Comfort Controller The January 22, 2001, proposed rule included an algorithm for calculating the HSPF for most single-speed heat pumps having a heat comfort controller. (66 FR 6768) At the March 29, 2001, public hearing, Trane commented that the wording in the test procedure on the calculation of the energy consumed for resistive heating by a heat comfort controller needed clarification. Trane suggested that one use the higher of: (1) The resistive heating based on meeting the heat comfort controller's temperature setting; or (2) the resistive heating based on meeting the building load deficit (when operating below the balance point). (Public Hearing Tr., p. 30) Later, Trane submitted written comments that the algorithm, as interpreted, would overstate the HSPF at heat-comfort-controller set points beginning around 90°F and get progressively worse as the set point was reduced. (Trane, No. 12) Battelle offered three general recommendations. The first recommendation was to emphasize that comfort controllers operate both above and below the normal balance point temperature. The second recommendation was to account for the fact that conventional heat pumps and, to a lesser extent, heat pumps with comfort controllers, will cycle below the system balance point. The third recommendation was that DOE perform a parametric calculation to determine “HSPF deficits” due to the operation of a comfort controller. (Battelle, No. 11) The end product could potentially be a table listing the reduction in HSPF that results from operating the comfort controller at different temperature settings. The American Gas Association (AGA) comments paralleled those from Battelle. Both AGA and Battelle recommended that the definition of HSPF specify that for heat pumps with heat comfort controllers, HSPF accounts for resistive heating contributed when operating either above or below the balance point as a result of maintaining a minimum supply temperature. Both also recommended that the equation for the heating load factor in section 4.2.1 be changed to the following: ER11OC05.000 where, X(T j ) = the heating mode load factor for temperature bin j, dimensionless BL(T j ) = the building space conditioning load corresponding to an outdoor temperature of T j Q h (T j ) = the space heating capacity of the heat pump when operating at outdoor temperature T j , Btu/h RH b = the size of each resistance heat bank n = the number of banks needed to exceed the building load at each bin temperature. Finally, in a slight variation from Battelle, AGA recommended that “DOE provide direction in the test procedure for evaluating performance of heat pumps retrofitted with heat comfort controllers in the field, including a parametric table of HSPF by DOE region for various delivered air temperatures.” (AGA, No. 18, Battelle, No. 11) Given the general support for covering those heat pumps having heat comfort controllers, today's test procedure covers all heat pumps having heat comfort controllers, except when a heat comfort controller is used with a heat pump having a variable-speed compressor. Test procedure section 4.2.5.4 is reserved for a variable-speed heat pump having a heat comfort controller. The algorithm for calculating the HSPF of a heat pump having a heat comfort controller is covered in sections 4.2.5.1 to 4.2.5.3 of today's final rule. The algorithm captures the fact that the balance point temperature ( i.e. , where the compressor first runs continuously) for a heat pump with a heat comfort controller will be less than, or equal to, the balance point temperature of that same heat pump without the heat comfort controller. In response to Trane's comments (Public Hearing Tr., p. 30; Trane, No. 12), today's test procedure includes editorial additions that alert the user to evaluate Equation 4.2.1-2 for all temperature bins. The test procedure then accounts for the resistive heating needed to satisfy the minimum air delivery temperature of the heat comfort controller and the (additional) resistive heating needed to give an overall heating capacity that matches the building load. 3 3 When calculating the HSPF for a conventional heat pump, the section 4.2 variable E h (T j ) and Q h (T j ) represent the electrical power and heating capacity provided exclusively by the heat pump, while the variable RH(T j ) applies exclusively to any resistive heating contribution. When calculating the HSPF of a heat pump having a heat comfort controller, by comparison, the variables E h (T j ) and Q h (T j ) represent the electrical power and heating capacity provided by the heat pump and any supplemental resistive heating needed to provide the comfort-controller-set-point air delivery temperature. The variable RH(T j ), in this case, reflects any additional resistive heating if the combined capacity of heat pump and the resistive heating associated with achieving the set-point air delivery temperature is nonetheless insufficient to meet the building load. Electrical resistive heating for a heat pump having a heat comfort controller is thus allocated among two variables (E h (T j ) and RH(T j )) rather than one (RH(T j )). This redefining allows the calculation procedure to capture the reduced heat pump contribution, the shift to a lower balance point, and the negative impact on HSPF. In considering AGA and Battelle's recommended definition change, the key point is to emphasize the downward shift in the balance point and the associated lower contribution by the heat pump. The Department doesn't believe that a single sentence referenced to heat comfort controllers within the HSPF definition, even when modified as recommended, is sufficient. Therefore, the definition of “Heat pumps having a heat comfort controller,” emphasizes the downward shift in the balance point and the associated lower contribution by the heat pump. The Department is amending the definition of HSPF by moving the following language from the definition text in the proposed rule to the main text of the test procedure, specifically, to the end of Section 4.2, “Heating Seasonal Performance Factor (HSPF) Calculations.” For all heat pumps, HSPF accounts for the heating delivered and the energy consumed by auxiliary resistive elements when operating below the balance point. This condition occurs when the building load exceeds the space heating capacity of the heat pump condenser. For heat pumps with heat comfort controllers (see Definition 1.26), in addition, HSPF also accounts for resistive heating contributed when operating above the balance point as a result of maintaining a minimum supply temperature. This moved text includes the one sentence from the HSPF definition in the proposed rule that specifically addressed heat comfort controllers. This sentence is the same one that both AGA and Battelle recommended changing. Coupled with the additional paragraph in Section 4.2.5, “Heat pumps having a heat comfort controller,” the Department believes the revisions more accurately convey the operating changes caused by adding a heat comfort controller. The Department did not adopt AGA and Battelle's recommendation for changing the calculation of the heating-mode-load factor. (AGA, No. 18, Battelle, No. 11) The Department agrees with AGA and Battelle that resistive heating initiated as the result of a second stage call of the indoor thermostat can, under the right conditions, cause a conventional heat pump to cycle below its balance point. Even though a conventional heat pump terminates resistive heating once the second stage setpoint is met, the concentrated burst of resistive heating coupled with the capacity of the continuously operating heat pump may cause the first stage of the thermostat to be met shortly after the second stage is met. An overshoot occurs and the heat pump cycles off. The overshoot is more likely to occur near the balance point where only a small amount of resistive heating is needed. The existing test procedure makes the implicit assumption that an overshoot never occurs. AGA and Battelle's proposed change assumes that an overshoot always occurs. The frequency of this overshoot is unknown. Until data become available showing that overshoot occurs more often than the case where the heat pump runs continuously and the resistive elements cycle on and off at the second stage, the Department will leave the heating-load-factor calculation unchanged. The AGA and Battelle recommendation would be more appropriate if resistive heating, once initiated as the result of a second-stage call, stayed on until the first stage setpoint was met. The Department is not aware of conventional heat pumps that use this strategy, so it did not change the calculation of the heating-mode-load factor. Heat pumps with heat comfort controllers operate differently from conventional heat pumps following a second-stage-thermostat call for resistive heating. When the second-stage setpoint is satisfied, heat comfort controllers reduce the resistive heating rather than cycling it off. In this manner, the heat comfort controller attempts to modulate the resistive heating so that additional second-stage calls are reduced while also avoiding satisfying the first-stage setpoint. The goal is for the heat pump to operate continuously below the balance point while having the resistive heating regulated to provide a more uniform delivery temperature than that provided by a conventional heat pump. The heat comfort controller's operation when responding to a second-stage-thermostat call is believed to provide a more comfortable environment for the homeowner, while not causing an energy penalty. The one field study cited by both AGA and Battelle 4 supports this assertion. Therefore, as was decided for conventional heat pumps, the Department did not adopt the AGA and Battelle recommended heating-load-factor equation within the section 4.2.5 calculations that only apply to heat pumps having a heat comfort controller. 4 “Improving Occupant Comfort Without an Energy Penalty in Homes Heated by Electric Heat Pumps,” Yuill, G.K., and Musser, A., ASHRAE Paper 4162, ASHRAE Transactions 1998 V. 104, Pt. 1. Finally, with regard to the Battelle and AGA recommendations that the test procedure contain information on the impact of heat comfort controllers for different temperature setpoints and/or quantify the impact from an after-market retro-fit installation of a heat comfort controller, the Department agrees that such information is probably warranted but judges it inappropriate for inclusion in the test procedure. The scope of the test procedure is to test and rate new, factory-supplied equipment. Addressing the impact of after-market products on the performance of covered products is not within the purview of EPCA. However, as pointed out at the March 29, 2001, pubic hearing, the test procedure may provide a framework for building code officials' consideration when deciding how to handle the after-market sale of heat comfort controllers. (Public Hearing Tr., p. 32) B. Definitions In addition to the amendments to the definitions discussed above in section II.A.1 of this preamble, today's final rule modifies definitions and references as described below. An editorial correction was made to the citation for ASHRAE Standard 51-99/AMCA Standard 210-99. In the proposed rule the words “AMCA Standard” were wrongly omitted. The definitions of “heating seasonal performance factor (HSPF),” and “seasonal energy efficiency ratio (SEER)” have been modified to move some text to later sections of the test procedure. The moved text provided complementary information that was better placed in the main text of the test procedure rather than in a definition. Sentences from the definition of HSPF were moved to Section 4.2, “Heating Seasonal Performance Factor (HSPF) Calculations.” Similarly, one sentence from the definition of SEER became the first sentence in Section 4.1, “Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ratio (SEER) Calculations.” C. Testing Conditions 1. Section 2.2.4 Wet-Bulb Temperature Requirements for Air Entering the Indoor and Outdoor Coils The January 22, 2001, proposed rule included a requirement that applied to wet-coil cooling tests of single-packaged units where all or part of the indoor section is located in the outdoor test room. The requirement was that the average dew point temperature of the air entering the outdoor coil must be within ±3.0°F of the average dew point temperature of the air entering the indoor coil. This requirement was added to address concerns about equipment leakage affecting capacity measurements. The water vapor content of the outdoor air could affect the repeatability of the measurements. Similarly, leakage could present a problem when using the Outdoor Air Enthalpy test method for testing a single-packaged heat pump where all or part of its outdoor section is located in the indoor test room. In comments made at the March 29, 2001, public hearing and in written comments received thereafter, York and ARI agreed with the proposed requirements. ( Public Hearing Tr., p. 79; York, No. 9 at p. 4; ARI, No. 19 at p. 2) The Department has adopted the proposed test requirement in today's final rule without alteration. 2. Section 2.2.5 Additional Refrigerant Charging Requirements Existing testing procedures require that the unit be installed in accordance with the manufacturer's installation instructions. The ARI, as part of its certification program, occasionally makes decisions on what is and is not within the spirit of the requirement. Thus, a policy has evolved wherein ARI certification testing allows procedures such as break-in times for compressors and washing the oil residue from the coils prior to testing. ARI does not allow disconnecting an electrical component, such as a crankcase heater. For the most part, the Department chose to defer to ARI to maintain consistency in the test set-ups. However, the Department proposed additional limits on the specific issue of the refrigerant-charging procedure. In the section 2.2.5 of the January 22, 2001, proposed rule, the Department proposed two additional requirements. First, the Department sought to avoid a gray area of defining when an independent test laboratory should consult with the manufacturer on how to charge a unit. The proposed section included the sentence: “For third party testing, for example, do not consult the manufacturer about how to charge the unit.” This requirement was thought to place extra responsibility on the manufacturer to publish accurate and clear charging instructions. The second requirement was to promote the ideal of testing the unit in a manner that is similar to its actual installation in the field. The Department proposed amendments to section 2.2.5 to include the following sentence: “Where the manufacturer's installation instructions contain two sets of refrigerant charging criteria, one for field installations and one for lab testing, use the field installation criteria.” At the March 29, 2001, public hearing, ARI, ITS, and ACEEE spoke in favor of allowing the independent test laboratory to contact the manufacturer if it had any charging questions. (Public Hearing Tr., pages 101 to 112) This discussion noted the value of feedback in assisting the manufacturer to identify mistakes or incompleteness in its published instructions. Such feedback, if acted upon by the manufacturer, could benefit the eventual field installer. At the public hearing, attendees also came to the realization that the attempt to prevent special lab-only charging criteria could likely be circumvented by having a single criteria that listed wide ranges for such charging parameters as the targeted superheat or subcooling level(s). The Department considered deleting the proposed section 2.2.5. However, today's final rule contains a revised version of the January 22, 2001, proposed rule language. (66 FR 6792) In the proposed rule, for third-party testing, the test laboratory was not to consult with the manufacturer about how to charge a unit. Based on the public hearing comments discussed above, today's final rule has modified this requirement. The test laboratory may consult with the manufacturer about the refrigerant-charging procedure and make changes that do not contradict the published installation instructions. The manufacturer may specify an alternative charging criteria to the third-party laboratory if the manufacturer then revises the published installation instructions accordingly. DOE decided to keep the section in an effort to convey the side benefit of the allowed feedback mechanism and to emphasize that the goal is a lab set-up as consistent as possible with a field installation. D. Testing Procedures 1. Section 3.1.4 Airflow Through the Indoor Coil: Systems Having a Variable-Speed, Constant Airflow Blower The January 22, 2001, proposed rule included additions to the test procedure for systems having a variable-speed, constant airflow (often called constant CFM (cubic foot per minute)) blower. These additions included: (1) Controlling the exhaust fan of the airflow measuring apparatus to obtain a specified external static pressure. DOE received no comments on this addition. (2) Specifying an additional test and algorithm to correct the fan power in cases where the specified external static pressure cannot be achieved during testing due to blower instabilities. ITS and York commented in favor of this addition. (Public Hearing Tr., ITS, p. 72-73, York, p. 73) (3) Making use of the fan laws if a unit must be tested at an air volume rate other than the (cooling or heating) Certified Air Volume Rate. DOE received no comments on this addition. (4) Allowing cyclic tests to be conducted with or without the indoor fan enabled and using a step profile for the air volume rate during cyclic tests. DOE received no comments on this addition. (5) Imposing an 8-percent tolerance for the difference between the lab-measured and manufacturer-Certified Air Volume Rates. At the March 29, 2001, public hearing, ARI, Trane, and York spoke in favor of making a change to eliminate the eight percent tolerance. (Public Hearing Tr., ARI, p. 69, Trane, p. 70, and York, p. 70) ARI and York submitted written comments to the same effect. (ARI, No. 19 at p. 2; York, No. 9 at p. 2) Opposition to the eight percent tolerance was based on the industry's not wanting another certified parameter. ARI recommended that DOE limit its focus to rated capacity and seasonal performance, SEER and HSPF, and not include parameters that affect those values. (ARI, No. 19 at p. 2) DOE proposed the tolerance to provide manufacturers with assurance that any third-party testing would employ a representative air volume rate. However, these blowers have a level of variability which may occasionally exceed the proposed eight percent tolerance. The eight-percent tolerance could cause several unnecessary stoppages in testing where the impact on rated capacity and seasonal performance would be negligible. Given the foreseeable unfavorable trade-off from imposing the tolerance, the Department has eliminated the eight-percent tolerance in today's final rule. 2. Sections 3.1.4.2, 3.1.4.5, 3.3, 3.5.1, 3.7, and 3.9.1. Testing a Two-Capacity Compressor System: Coil-Only Units Tested at Low Capacity and Differences in High/Low Cycling The proposed test procedure sections 3.1.4.2 and 3.1.4.5 specified that the air volume rate used when testing two-capacity, coil-only units at low capacity ( i.e. , at the Minimum Air Volume Rate) is the higher of: (1) The rate specified by the manufacturer, or (2) 75 percent of the air volume rate used for the high capacity tests. At both the public hearing and in its written comments, York opposed the proposed 75-percent limit. (Public Hearing Tr., pp. 81-86; York, No. 9 at p. 3) York argued that the limit was “arbitrarily derived, is unnecessary, and restrictive towards applying existing and future technologies in motor speed controls. * * *” (York, No. 9 at p. 3) Conversely, at both the public hearing and in their written comments, both Copeland Corporation and ARI supported the defining of a lower limit. Their written comments specifically endorsed assigning the limit at 75 percent. (Public Hearing Tr., pp 86-90; Copeland Corporation, No. 13 at p. 2; ARI, No. 19 at p. 2) This 75-percent value is based on the assumption that the two-capacity coil-only unit would most often be used with an existing multi-tap furnace blower. The low range offered from typical multi-tap motors can vary considerably. Nonetheless, the limited data collected by NIST and by industry supports the proposed 75-percent value, and DOE has included it in today's final rule. The proposed test procedure sections 3.3, 3.5.1, 3.7 and 3.9.1 did not differentiate between the default fan power values for high capacity and low capacity. The value of 365 watts per 1000 standard cubic feet per minute (SCFM) was used in all cases. Only York commented on this issue, and York's comment supported the proposed test procedure. (Public Hearing Tr., p. 94, York, No. 9 at p. 3) York commented that the proposed low capacity default causes a conservative prediction of fan power, with a resulting error too insignificant to warrant a change. (York, No. 9 at p. 3) Today's final rule maintains the changes on this subject incorporated into the proposed test procedure. The final two-capacity, compressor-system issue was whether there is a significant performance difference between compressors (systems) that can switch between low and high stages over a very short time interval versus those having to turn off for a short period and take longer overall to make the transition. (This issue is included because DOE received comments about it. It does not appear in the proposed rule, nor in today's final rule.) Copeland Corporation noted that it has experience manufacturing both types of compressors and that it has “observed that shutting a system down for greater than one minute has nearly the same cyclic loss impact as a typical on/off C D penalty, since the evaporator warms up almost completely.” Copeland encouraged the Department to study the issue further and stated that an appropriate action may be to conduct a test program at Intertek Testing Services (ITS). (Copeland Corporation, No. 13 at p. 1) York, on the other hand, expressed its opinion that the difference in technology was not significant enough to warrant a change in the test procedure. (York, No. 9 at p. 3) The Department has been unable to identify test procedure changes that could capture a performance difference, assuming that its overall impact significantly alters the SEER and HSPF ratings. The Department would have to make assumptions about the frequency of high/low transitions as a function of the magnitudes of the low and high stage capacities relative to each temperature bin building load. Also, data are needed to determine whether the cooling and heating mode on/off degradation coefficients could act as substitutes for the high/low transition degradation or whether a separate optional test and/or separate transition default values are warranted. In general, the Department is willing to consider future changes to the test procedure but asks that interested industry members take the lead in quantifying the impact on SEER and HSPF before making specific recommendations on how to alter the test procedure calculations. III. Summary of Other Additions and Changes to the DOE Residential Central Air Conditioner and Heat Pump Test Procedure Today's final rule contains numerous changes that were proposed in the January 22, 2001, proposed rule, for which the Department received no adverse comments. A. Update and Add References for ASHRAE and ARI Standards The current test procedure references ASHRAE Standard 37-78 and ASHRAE Standard 41.1 (no year), ARI Standard 210-79, ARI Standard 240-77, and ARI Standard 320-76. Today's final rule also includes references to ARI Standard 210/240-03, ASHRAE Standard 23-93, ASHRAE Standard 37-88, ASHRAE Standard 41.1-86 (RA 01), ASHRAE Standard 41.2-87 (RA 92), ASHRAE Standard 41.6-94 (RA 01), ASHRAE Standard 41.9-00, ASHRAE Standard 51-99/AMCA Standard 210-99, and ASHRAE Standard 116-95. The additional commercial standards are necessary to more completely inform manufacturers and testers about the multiple test options, especially for the secondary test method, and to address as many of the small details of lab testing as possible. The additional commercial standards were all included in the January 22, 2001, proposed rule. (66 FR 6768) Some of the commercial standards have been updated since the publication of the proposed rule as discussed in section II.A.1 of this preamble. B. Air Volume Rates The current test procedure references ARI Standard 240-77. Now, rather than referencing ARI Standard 210/240-03, which replaced ARI Standard 240-77, the Department has added its own sections to the test procedure. The main reason for no longer referencing ARI Standard 210/240 is that it does not cover variable-speed and constant CFM blowers. In addition, ARI Standard 210/240 does not directly address two-capacity and variable-speed systems. The Department believes it is preferable to have the overall issue of air volume rates covered in one place rather than in two. The test procedure set forth in this final rule no longer references ASHRAE Standard 37-78 (or ASHRAE Standard 37-88, its replacement) for the equation used to calculate the air volume rate of standard air, because the referenced equation is incorrect. The factor “1 +W n ” is missing from the denominator of the pertinent equation in both versions of ASHRAE Standard 37. Today's test procedure includes what DOE believes to be the correct version of the equation. Today's test procedure also adopts the approach used in the ISO Standard 5151 of conducting each test at zero external static pressure when testing a non-ducted unit. All of these “air volume rate” substantive changes were originally published in the proposed rulemaking (66 FR 6778) and are included in today's final rule. C. Cyclic Testing The Department is today adopting standard industry practice and the method described in ASHRAE Standard 116. Sections 4.1.1.2, 4.1.2, 4.2.2.2, and 5.1 of the current (1988) test procedure require measurement of the air volume rate during cyclic tests and use of this measurement in determining the total cooling (heating) delivered. Standard laboratory practice, by comparison, is to achieve and maintain the same velocity pressure or nozzle static pressure drop that was obtained during the comparable steady-state test. The total cooling (heating) delivered during a cyclic test, in addition, is calculated using the air volume rate measured during the comparable steady-state test. Changes to adopt this industry practice and become consistent with ASHRAE Standard 116 were introduced in the proposed rulemaking and are included in today's final rule in section 3.1. When testing split-type non-ducted (ductless) systems, section 4.1.1.5 of the current test procedure provides, “The integration time for capacity and power shall be from compressor cut-on time to indoor fan cutoff time.” The indoor fan is operated for three minutes prior to compressor cut-on and for three minutes after compressor cutoff during the final OFF/ON interval. In sections 3.5 and 3.5.2, today's final rule adopts industry practice and integrates power from compressor OFF to compressor OFF and subtracts the electrical energy associated with operating the indoor fan during the initial three-minute fan-only period. Space cooling capacity is integrated from compressor ON to indoor fan OFF. As with the current test procedure, fan energy for the three minutes after compressor cutoff is added to the integrated cooling capacity. The current test procedure does not contain specific information regarding the air dampers: where to install them, how well they should seal, and how quickly they should respond. Appendix D of ARI Standard 210/240-03 contains much of this information. Today's final rule incorporates the required information in sections 2.5.4.1 and 2.5.7 rather than make specific references to each pertinent section of Appendix D of the ARI Standard. For dry coil tests, today's test procedure final rule adopts, in section 3.4, the language in ARI Standard 210/240-03 Appendix D with regard to the requirements that the drain pan be plugged and completely dry. Today's final rule clarifies in section 2.8 that the requirement of making electrical energy measurements using an instrument having an accuracy of ±0.5 percent of reading applies during both the ON and OFF intervals of cyclic tests. Today's final rule deletes the current section 4.1.3.1, “The indoor and outdoor average dry-bulb temperature for the cyclic dry coil test D shall both be within 1.0 °F of the indoor and outdoor average dry bulb temperature for the steady-state dry coil test C, respectively.” This requirement is automatically met given the 0.5 °F test condition tolerance associated with each test. (Today's amended test procedure is substantially re-organized; the section 4.1.3.1 in today's final rule has no relation to the deleted section 4.1.3.1.) For units having a variable-speed indoor fan, the manufacturer will have the option of conducting the cyclic tests with the indoor fan either enabled or disabled, the latter being the default option if an attempt at testing with the fan enabled is unsuccessful. See section 3.5 of today's final rule. Specifically, if the test is performed with the indoor fan operating, and the fan automatically reverses, shuts down, or operates at an uncharacteristically high external static pressure, then the test must be repeated using a pull-thru method, with the fan disabled. Although a unit having a variable-speed indoor fan may be designed to ramp its fan speed when cycling on and/or off, a step response in air volume rate is nonetheless required during cyclic tests. See section 3.5 of today's final rule. The work associated with moving the additional air during the ramp periods is performed by the exhaust fan of the air flow measuring apparatus. The step response begins at the initiation of ramp up and ends at the termination of ramp down. The rationale for imposing the step change is mainly due to the difficulty in obtaining the ramp response and then making an accurate measurement of the space conditioning delivered. Systems having indoor fans that ramp are expected to have low cyclic degradation coefficients (C D ) regardless of whether the ramp feature is used, thus the absolute improvement in C D is expected to be minor. D. Fanless (Coil-Only) Units Section 4.1 of the current test procedure calls for corrections to capacity and power based on air flow measured in cubic feet per minute (CFM). Section 4.2 of the current test procedure calls for corrections to capacity and power based on air flow measured in cubic feet per minute under standard conditions (SCFM). To avoid confusion, the test procedure should base corrections on either CFM or SCFM, but not both. ITS, which tests for both the industry and ARI, uses SCFM in all cases. Therefore, in consideration of the above, today's test procedure adopts, in sections 3.3, 3.5.1, and 3.7, the practice of specifying all corrections in terms of SCFM. The test procedure also adopts in section 2.2 the requirement in ARI Standard 210/240-03, Appendix D, that an enclosure be constructed using one-inch ductboard for testing a coil-only unit that does not employ an enclosure. E. Frost Accumulation Test Today's final rule adopts the convention in ASHRAE Standard 116-95 and ARI 210/240-03 of specifying the outdoor wet bulb temperature (33 °F) in place of the presently specified dew point temperature (30 °F). Sections 3.6.1, 3.6.2, 3.6.3, and 3.6.4. F. Test Tolerance Tables The current test procedure contains tables covering all tests except steady-state cooling-mode tests, for which Table III in ASHRAE Standard 37-78 is referenced. Since the test procedure includes all other tables, the Department chose to add the needed parts of Table III (Table 7 of this document). The test condition tolerance for external resistance to air flow now applies only when testing non-ducted units. (See Table 7). Also, DOE has added in Table 7 a test condition tolerance for electrical supply voltage (previously, only a test operating tolerance was specified). The existing test procedure lacked a clarification that the test condition tolerance for the indoor inlet wet bulb temperature in Table III of ASHRAE Standard 37-78 does not apply for dry coil tests. Therefore, today's final rule includes a footnote to Table 7 that makes this clarification. In a similar attempt to clarify when particular tolerances apply, today's final rule also includes a footnote to tables stating that the test tolerances given for the outdoor outlet dry and wet bulb temperatures only apply when using the Outdoor Air Enthalpy Method to provide the secondary capacity measurement. For the Frost Accumulation Test, DOE modified slightly the intervals considered to be heating versus defrosting. Specifically, in the current test procedure in section 4.2.3.3, the first five minutes after a defrost termination was included in the defrost interval. In today's final rule, the time interval has been increased to ten minutes in section 3.7. This is a better approximation of the time needed for temperatures to reach equilibrium after defrost termination. Also, in making the test condition conversion of 30 °F dew point to 33 °F wet bulb, the test operating tolerance and test condition tolerance convert to wet bulb temperature tolerances of 0.6 °F and 0.3 °F, respectively. This 0.6 °F test operating tolerance on outdoor wet bulb temperature is more stringent than the value allowed for the steady-state tests. The 0.3 °F test condition tolerance is the same as required for steady-state tests. Because these tolerances should be less stringent that those required of a steady-state test, the test procedure adopts in Table 15 the values given in ASHRAE Standard 37: 1.5 °F and 0.5 °F. G. Pretest Intervals 1. Wet Coil Tests The following change makes the test conditions more specific than they are in the current test procedure: Current: “The test room reconditioning apparatus and the equipment under test shall be operated until equilibrium conditions are attained.” (Section 4.1.1.1) Today's final rule: “For the pretest interval, operate the test room reconditioning apparatus and the unit to be tested until maintaining equilibrium conditions for at least 30 minutes at the specified section 3.2 test conditions.” (Section 3.3) 2. Dry Coil Steady-State Test The following change also makes the test conditions more specific than they are in the current test procedure. The industry realized the merits of this improved wording several years ago. The added text is taken from a prescriptive methodology that appears within an appendix of ARI Standard 210/240-2003. Current: “The test room reconditioning apparatus and the equipment under test shall be operated until equilibrium conditions are attained, but not for less than one hour before data for test C are recorded.” (Section 4.1.1.2) Today's final rule: Same as proposed for section 3.3 wet coil tests with the additional requirement to “operate the unit at least one hour after achieving dry coil conditions.” (Section 3.4) 3. Dry Coil Cyclic Test The following change makes the test conditions more specific than they are in the current test procedure. The existing language is weaker because the phrase “until steadily repeating ambient conditions are again achieved” is comparatively subjective. Current: “[T]est unit shall be manually cycled ‘off’ and ‘on’* * * until steadily repeating ambient conditions are again achieved in both the indoor and outdoor test chambers, but for not less than two complete ‘off/on’ cycles.” (Section 4.1.1.2) Today's final rule: “After completing a minimum of two complete compressor OFF/ON cycles, determine the overall cooling delivered and total electrical energy consumption during any subsequent data collection interval where the test tolerances given in Table 8 are satisfied.” (Section 3.5) 4. Maximum and High Temperature Heating Mode Tests The requirement for the test apparatus and the test unit to operate for at least one hour was dropped based on industry comments that it had no bearing on the outcome of the testing—the key is to have steady operation at the specified test conditions for an interval (30 minutes) prior to starting the test. Current: “The test room apparatus and test units must be operated for at least one hour with at least one-half hour at equilibrium and at the specified test conditions prior to starting the test.” (Section 4.2.1.1) Today's final rule: “For the pretest interval, operate the test room reconditioning apparatus and the heat pump until equilibrium conditions are maintained for at least 30 minutes at the specified section 3.6 test conditions.” (Section 3.7) 5. Heating Mode Cyclic Test The new language is more definitive and easier for a test laboratory to understand and implement. The existing language is weaker because the phrase “until steadily repeating ambient conditions are again achieved” is comparatively subjective. Current: “[A]nd be cycled ‘on’ and ‘off’ as specified in 3.2.1.2 until steadily repeating ambient conditions are achieved for both the indoor and outdoor test chambers, but for not less than two complete ‘off’/‘on’ cycles.” (Section 4.2.1.2) Today's final rule: “After completing a minimum of two complete compressor OFF/ON cycles, determine the overall cooling delivered and total electrical energy consumption during any subsequent data collection interval where the test tolerances given in Table 8 are satisfied.” (Section 3.5) 6. Frost Accumulation Test The new wording is clearer about the goal of getting the test room to achieve and maintain the specified test conditions. It clarifies the 30-minute requirement as a period that starts after the test conditions are first achieved. Current: “The test room reconditioning equipment and the unit under test shall be operated for at least one-half hour prior to the start of a ‘preliminary’ test period.” (Section 4.2.1.3) Today's final rule: “Operate the test room reconditioning apparatus and the heat pump for at least 30 minutes at the specified section 3.6 test conditions before starting the ‘preliminary’ test period.” (Section 3.9) 7. Low Temperature Test The existing language can be interpreted to mean that one only needs to achieve the test conditions immediately prior to starting the test as opposed to maintaining the test conditions for at least 30 minutes prior to starting the test. The new wording is clearer. The new wording also clarifies the sequential process for having the heat pump conduct a defrost. Current: “The test room reconditioning equipment shall first be operated in a steady-state manner for at least one-half hour at equilibrium and at the specified test conditions. The unit shall then undergo a defrost, either automatic or manually induced.” (Section 4.2.1.4) Today's final rule: “For the pretest interval, operate the test room reconditioning apparatus and the heat pump until equilibrium conditions are maintained for at least 30 minutes at the specified section 3.6 test conditions.” (Section 3.7) “After satisfying the section 3.7 requirements for the pretest interval, but before beginning to collect data to determine Q h k (17) and E h k (17), conduct a defrost cycle. This defrost cycle may be manually or automatically initiated.” (Section 3.10) H. Multi-Capacity Systems 1. Two-Capacity Heat Pumps That Lock Out Low Capacity at Higher Outdoor Temperatures The current test procedure in section 2.2.2 covers two-capacity units that operate exclusively at high capacity when the building load exceeds the unit's low capacity. The Department is unaware of any two-capacity units that implement such a control strategy, and so DOE is not including coverage of them in today's final rule. However, the Department is adding coverage in section 3.2.3 to address units that lock out low capacity operation at low (heating) or high (cooling) outdoor temperatures. Today's test procedure uses the C D determined based on cycling at low capacity (or the appropriate default) in all cases. 2. Systems Having a Single-Speed Compressor and a Variable-Speed Indoor Fan Where Fan Speed or Air Volume Rate Depends on Outdoor Temperature Today's final rule requires two additional steady-state tests for the cooling mode (see section 3.2.2.1 and Table 4) and two additional steady-state tests for the heating mode (see section 3.6.2 and Table 10). The additional tests, at a different air volume rate, are required to calculate the effect of the variable-speed indoor fan. An additional frost accumulation test is optional. I. Triple-Split Systems The current DOE test procedure, in sections 4.1 and 4.2.1, refers to ASHRAE Standard 37-78 on the issue of laboratory set up procedures. Section 3.1.3 of ASHRAE Standard 37-78 requires using the calorimeter air-enthalpy method arrangement when testing units where the compressor is in the indoor section and separately ventilated. For this arrangement, an enclosure must be built around the equipment within the indoor chamber. The present requirement is burdensome, and DOE has learned no one uses it when testing triple-splits. Furthermore, the heat loss from the indoor compressor section should be reflected, if at all, in an adjusted output capacity and not by a raised entering-air temperature because the lost heat is transferred to the surrounding ambient, not dissipated within the return air duct. The surrounding ambient, in this case, may or may not be part of the conditioned space. The amount of heat dissipated to the ambient by the indoor compressor section of such units is usually minimized as a result of the insulated enclosure of the third section (mainly in an effort to reduce the operating noise). Based on the limited information currently available, DOE believes that the amount of heat lost from the indoor compressor section is on the order of two percent or less of the unit's space conditioning capacity. Today's final rule reflects the assumption that the heat loss from the indoor compressor section contributes nothing to the unit's overall delivered capacity if the compressor section is located in an unconditioned space. If the compressor section is located in the conditioned space, it still contributes only a negligible amount. Today's final rule specifies that triple-split systems are not to be tested using the calorimeter air-enthalpy method arrangement (see note in section 2.6 of the test procedure in today's final rule). The final rule does not provide for any adjustment to capacity, or any algorithm or method for assigning/determining the heat loss from the indoor compressor section. If triple-split systems become more popular and if information becomes available indicating the heat loss from the indoor compressor section exceeds two percent of the air-side capacity, then DOE will revisit the option of having a capacity adjustment. J. Time-Adaptive Defrost Control Systems When conducting a frost accumulation test on a heat pump having a time-adaptive defrost control system, repeatable frosting and defrosting intervals typically require (if obtainable at all) an excessive number of cycles. The tester must manually initiate defrosts during the “preliminary” test and the “official” test. Under today's final rule, the manufacturer must provide information as to how long the unit would optimally frost before it initiates a defrost, and on how to initiate a defrost cycle at the appropriate elapsed time. See section 2.2.1. However, the controls of the unit will still control the duration of the defrost cycle after its initiation. K. Test Unit Installation For the most part, equipment installation requirements under today's final rule will continue according to the manufacturer's field installation instructions. However, today's final rule adopts the lab and field practice of insulating the low pressure line(s) of a split system. See section 2.2. L. Test Apparatus and Measurement/Sampling Frequency 1. Inlet Plenum for Blower Coils The current DOE test procedure does not require an inlet plenum when testing blower coil units. (Lab ceiling height on vertical installation is a limitation.) In today's final rule, the manufacturer has the option to test with or without an inlet plenum installed when testing a ducted unit having an indoor fan. Space limitations within the test room may dictate that the manufacturer choose the latter option. (Section 2.4.2) 2. Manifolded Static Pressure Taps The current (1988) test procedure does not discuss methods of manifolding static pressure taps. Today's final rule allows three configurations: The triple-T configuration; the complete ring, four-to-one manifold configuration; and the broken-ring, four-to-one manifold configuration. (Section 2.4.1) A 1976 study found the triple-T configuration to be the preferred method for manifolding static pressure taps. 5 The broken-ring, four-to-one manifold configuration is generally considered to be the least accurate of the three methods. 5 “The Design of Piezometer Rings” by K. A. Blake, Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 78, 1976, part 2, pp. 415-428. 3. Temperature Measurement Intervals Today's final rule (Definition 1.15) specifies dry-bulb temperature measurements at the intervals specified in ASHRAE Standard 41.1-86 (RA01). The tester must measure wet bulb temperature, dew point temperature, or relative humidity at the minimum sampling interval specified in the definition of the term “Continuously recorded.” 4. Temperature Measurement Accuracies Today's final rule (sections 2.5.5, 2.5.6, 2.11) incorporates the accuracy and precision requirements of temperature measurement from ASHRAE Standard 41.1-86 (RA 01). 5. Grid of Individual Temperature Sensors Within the Indoor-Side Outlet Plenum Today's final rule adopts the requirements in ARI Standard 210/240-03, Appendix D, that a temperature spread of 1.5 °F or less be obtained, and that a minimum of 9 sensors compose the outlet temperature grid. (Section 2.5.5.) The January 22, 2001, proposed rule contained these DOE recommendations (66 FR 6796): DOE recommends using 16 temperature sensors within each temperature grid. DOE recommends installing redundant inlet and outlet dry bulb temperature sensors and particularly a thermopile. If using thermocouples, DOE recommends the following: (1) Use 24 gauge wire; (2) Remove approximately 1 inch of insulation from each lead when preparing to make a junction; and (3) Use no more than two bonded turns per junction. The Department believes these recommendations to be sound, but today's final rule omits them because recommendations are not appropriate in a regulatory test procedure. 6. Duct Loss Correction Today's final rule includes a correction for the heat transfer between the test room and an outlet duct sandwiched between the coil and the outlet temperature grid. (Section 3.11) This correction is already an industry practice. 7. Water Vapor Measurements Using a Dew-Point Hygrometer, a Relative Humidity Meter, or Any Other Alternative Instrument Today's final rule explicitly permits alternatives to using wet bulb temperature sensors. To ease instrumentation selection, the rule specifies required instrument accuracies for dew point hygrometers and relative humidity meters. (Section 2.5.6) 8. Voltmeter Accuracy The required accuracy of voltage measurements has been changed from ±2 percent to ±1 percent. (Section 2.7) 9. Electrical Power Measurement Adjustable-speed-driven motors, as used in a variable-speed compressor, distort the input current and, to a lesser degree, voltage waveforms. For reasons that were outlined in the preamble of the January 22, 2001, proposed rule (66 FR 6779), today's final rule (Section 2.8) eschews the use of induction type meters for measuring such non-sinusoidal power. The January 22, 2001, proposed rule included a recommendation to use a meter capable of sampling up to the 50th harmonic. Sampling up to the 50th harmonic reduces the chances for measurement errors, but the extra expense for such a piece of equipment may not be justified, so today's final rule does not require its use. M. Different Compressor Speeds and Indoor Fan Capacities Between Cooling and Heating The existing test procedure covers variable-speed systems that operate at higher speeds when heating than when cooling. Today's final rule extrapolates this allowance to coverage of two-capacity, northern heat pumps (see section 4.2). Today's rule covers any case where the heat pump uses different fan speeds or air volume rates for cooling versus when heating. (Section 3.1.4.4.2) N. Secondary Test Requirements When using the Outdoor Air Enthalpy test method, the tester must conduct a preliminary test to compensate, if necessary, for any performance impact resulting from the outdoor air-side test apparatus. (Section 3.11.1) In the existing test procedure, a preliminary test is conducted prior to all steady-state tests ( i.e. , those tests that require a secondary measurement of capacity). Today's final rule relaxes this requirement. Section 3.11.1 indicates that the number of preliminary tests can be reduced in most cases to one (for air conditioners or heating-only heat pumps) or two (for heat pumps): One for the first cooling mode steady-state test and one for the first heating mode steady-state test. The above “test apparatus and measurement/sampling frequency” substantive changes were introduced in the proposed rulemaking and are maintained in today's final rule. (Section 3.11.1) O. HSPF Calculations Today's final rule does not include the final paragraph of sections 5.2.1 and 5.2.2 of the current test procedure. The paragraph in question reads “Once the maximum and minimum HSPF and operating cost values have been obtained for each region, the HSPF and operating cost shall be determined for each standardized design heating requirement (see section 6.2.6) between the maximum and minimum design heating requirements by means of interpolation.” The number of required HSPF calculations is covered in 10 CFR Subpart B, 430.23(m)(3)(ii). In today's final rule, this section of the CFR is noted in the Definition (1.27) for HSPF. Because of the relative ease of automating the calculation process, and the nonlinearity of the HSPF-versus-design-heating-requirement relationship, today's final rule makes no reference to obtaining HSPF or operating cost via interpolation. P. Effect of Test Procedure Revisions on SEER and HSPF The most significant revisions to the test procedure in this final rule adopt industry practices and clear up gray areas with more precise instructions. No existing requirements are changed, but new requirements are added. Based on its development, review and analysis of the test procedure revisions being published today, the Department believes that these test procedure revisions will have no material impact on the measured values of SEER and HSPF, and thus it has satisfied the requirement of 42 U.S.C. 6293(e)(1): “In the case of any amended test procedure which is prescribed pursuant to this section, the Secretary shall determine, in the rulemaking carried out with respect to prescribing such procedure, to what extent, if any, the proposed test procedure would alter the measured energy efficiency, measured energy use, or measured water use of any covered product as determined under the existing test procedure.” In the January 22, 2001, proposed rule, the Department asked for comments on this issue (66 FR 6782), and received no comments contending that these revisions would impact measured values of SEER and HSPF. IV. Procedural Requirements A. Review Under Executive Order 12866 It has been determined that today's regulatory action is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866, “Regulatory Planning and Review,” 58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993). Accordingly, this action was not subject to review under the Executive Order by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) . B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires preparation of an initial regulatory flexibility analysis for any rule that by law must be proposed for public comment, unless the agency certifies that the rule, if promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. As required by Executive Order 13272, “Proper Consideration of Small Entities in Agency Rulemaking,” 67 FR 53461 (August 16, 2002), DOE published procedures and policies on February 19, 2003, to ensure that the potential impacts of its rules on small entities are properly considered during the rulemaking process. (68 FR 7990) DOE has made its procedures and policies available on the Office of General Counsel's Web site: http:// www.gc.doe.gov. DOE reviewed today's rule under the provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act and the procedures and policies published on February 19, 2003. DOE certified in the January 22, 2001, proposed rule that the proposed rule would not impose a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. (66 FR 6780) DOE received no comments on this issue, and after considering the potential small entity impact of this final rule, DOE affirms the certification that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act This rulemaking imposes no new information or record keeping requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act. (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act DOE has determined that this rule falls into a class of actions that are categorically excluded from review under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and the Department's implementing regulations at 10 CFR part 1021. This rule amends an existing rule without changing its environmental effect, and, therefore, is covered by the Categorical Exclusion in paragraph A5 to subpart D, 10 CFR part 1021. Accordingly, neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required. E. Review Under Executive Order 13132 Executive Order 13132, “Federalism,” 64 FR 43255 (August 4, 1999) imposes certain requirements on agencies formulating and implementing policies or regulations that preempt State law or that have federalism implications. The Executive Order requires agencies to examine the constitutional and statutory authority supporting any action that would limit the policymaking discretion of the States and to carefully assess the necessity for such actions. The Executive Order also requires agencies to have an accountable process to ensure meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications. On March 14, 2000, DOE published a statement of policy describing the intergovernmental consultation process it will follow in the development of such regulations. (65 FR 13735) DOE has examined today's rule and has determined that it does not preempt State law and does not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. No further action is required by Executive Order 13132. F. Review Under Executive Order 12988 With respect to the review of existing regulations and the promulgation of new regulations, section 3(a) of Executive Order 12988, “Civil Justice Reform” (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), imposes on Federal agencies the general duty to adhere to the following requirements: (1) Eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity; (2) write regulations to minimize litigation; and (3) provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct rather than a general standard and promote simplification and burden reduction. Section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988 specifically requires that Executive agencies make every reasonable effort to ensure that the regulation: (1) Clearly specifies the preemptive effect, if any; (2) clearly specifies any effect on existing Federal law or regulation; (3) provides a clear legal standard for affected conduct while promoting simplification and burden reduction; (4) specifies the retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately defines key terms; and (6) addresses other important issues affecting clarity and general draftsmanship under any guidelines issued by the Attorney General. Section 3(c) of Executive Order 12988 requires Executive agencies to review regulations in light of applicable standards in section 3(a) and section 3(b) to determine whether they are met or it is unreasonable to meet one or more of them. DOE has completed the required review and determined that, to the extent permitted by law, this rule meets the relevant standards of Executive Order 12988. G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4) (UMRA) requires each Federal agency to assess the effects of Federal regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal governments and the private sector. For a proposed regulatory action that may result in the expenditure by State, local and Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100 million or more (adjusted annually for inflation), section 202 of UMRA requires a Federal agency to publish estimates of the resulting costs, benefits, and other effects on the national economy. (2 U.S.C. 1532(a), (b)) UMRA also requires a Federal agency to develop an effective process to permit timely input by elected officers of State, local, and Tribal governments on a proposed “significant intergovernmental mandate,” and requires an agency plan for giving notice and opportunity for timely input to potentially affected small governments before establishing any requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small governments. On March 18, 1997, DOE published a statement of policy on its process for intergovernmental consultation under UMRA (62 FR 12820) (also available at http:// www.gc.doe.gov ). The rule published today contains neither an intergovernmental mandate, nor a mandate that may result in an expenditure of $100 million or more in any year, so these requirements do not apply. H. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act of 1999 Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105-277) requires Federal agencies to issue a Family Policymaking Assessment for any rule that may affect family well-being. This rule would not have any impact on the autonomy or integrity of the family as an institution. Accordingly, DOE has concluded that it is not necessary to prepare a Family Policymaking Assessment. I. Review Under Executive Order 12630 DOE has determined, under Executive Order 12630, “Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights,” 53 FR 8859 (March 18, 1988) that this regulation would not result in any takings which might require compensation under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. J. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act of 2001 The Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C. 3516, note) provides for agencies to review most disseminations of information to the public under guidelines established by each agency pursuant to general guidelines issued by OMB. OMB's guidelines were published at 67 FR 8452 (February 22, 2002), and DOE's guidelines were published at 67 FR 62446 (October 7, 2002). DOE has reviewed today's notice under the OMB and DOE guidelines and has concluded that it is consistent with applicable policies in those guidelines. K. Review Under Executive Order 13211 Executive Order 13211, “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,” 66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001) requires Federal agencies to prepare and submit to OIRA, a Statement of Energy Effects for any proposed significant energy action. A “significant energy action” is defined as any action by an agency that promulgated or is expected to lead to promulgation of a final rule, and that: (1) Is a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866, or any successor order; and (2) is likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy, or (3) is designated by the Administrator of OIRA as a significant energy action. For any proposed significant energy action, the agency must give a detailed statement of any adverse effects on energy supply, distribution, or use should the proposal be implemented, and of reasonable alternatives to the action and their expected benefits on energy supply, distribution, and use. Today's regulatory action would not have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy and, therefore, is not a significant energy action. Accordingly, DOE has not prepared a Statement of Energy Effects. L. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974 Under section 301 of the Department of Energy Organization Act (Pub. L. 95-91), the Department of Energy must comply with section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974 (FEAA), as amended by the Federal Energy Administration Authorization Act of 1977. (15 U.S.C. 788) Section 32 provides in essence that, where a proposed rule contains or involves use of commercial standards, the notice of proposed rulemaking must inform the public of the use and background of such standards. This final rule incorporates nine commercial standards as discussed in section II.A.1 of this preamble. The Department has evaluated these standards and is unable to conclude whether they fully comply with the requirements of section 32(b) of the FEAA, i.e. , that they were developed in a manner which fully provides for public participation, comment and review. As required by Section 32(c) of the FEAA, the Department has consulted with the Attorney General and the Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission concerning the impact of these two standards on competition, and neither recommended against incorporation of these standards. M. Congressional Notification As required by 5 U.S.C. 801, DOE will report to Congress on the promulgation of today's rule prior to its effective date. The report will state that it has been determined that the rule is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). N. Approval of the Office of the Secretary The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of today's rule. List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 430 Administrative practice and procedure, Energy conservation, Household appliances, Incorporation by reference. Issued in Washington, DC, on July 21, 2005. Douglas L. Faulkner, Acting Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. For the reasons set forth in the preamble, Part 430 of Chapter II of Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations is amended as set forth below. PART 430—ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAM FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS 1. The authority citation for Part 430 continues to read as follows: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291-6309; 28 U.S.C. 2461 note. 2. Section 430.22 is amended: a. In paragraph (b)(1) by adding paragraph (b)(1)8. b. In paragraph (b)(5) by removing paragraph (b)(5)2., and adding new paragraphs (b)(5)2. through (b)(5)9. c. By adding paragraph (b)(8). The additions specified above read as follows: § 430.22 Reference Sources. (b) * * * (1) * * * 8. ANSI Standard Z21.56-1994, “Gas-Fired Pool Heaters,” section 2.9. (5) * * * 2. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers Standard 23-1993, “Methods of Testing for Rating Positive Displacement Refrigerant Compressors and Condensing Units.” 3. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers Standard 37-1988, “Methods of Testing for Rating Unitary Air-Conditioning and Heat Pump Equipment.” 4. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers Standard 41.1-1986 (Reaffirmed 2001), “Standard Method for Temperature Measurement.” 5. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers Standard 41.2-1987 (Reaffirmed 1992), “Standard Methods for Laboratory Airflow Measurement.” 6. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers Standard 41.6-1994 (Reaffirmed 2001), “Standard Method for Measurement of Moist Air Properties.” 7. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers Standard 41.9-2000, “Calorimeter Test Methods for Mass Flow Measurements of Volatile Refrigerants.” 8. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers Standard 116-1995, “Methods of Testing for Rating for Seasonal Efficiency of Unitary Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps.” 9. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers/Air Movement and Control Association International, Inc. Standard 51-1999/210-1999, “Laboratory Methods of Testing Fans for Aerodynamic Performance Rating.” (8) Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute (ARI), 4100 North Fairfax Drive, Suite 200, Arlington, Virginia 22203-1629, (703) 524-8800, ARI Standard 210/240-2003, “Unitary Air-Conditioning and Air-Source Heat Pump Equipment.” 3. Section 430.23 of subpart B is amended by revising the section heading, paragraph (m) introductory heading and paragraph (m)(1), (2), and (3) to read as follows: § 430.23 Test procedure for measures of energy consumption. (m) Central air conditioners and heat pumps. (1) The estimated annual operating cost for cooling-only units and air-source heat pumps shall be one of the following: (i) For cooling-only units or the cooling portion of the estimated annual operating cost for air-source heat pumps which provide both heating and cooling, the product of: (A) The quotient of the cooling capacity, in Btu's per hour, determined from the steady-state wet-coil test (A or A 2 Test), as described in section 3.2 of appendix M to this subpart, divided by the seasonal energy efficiency ratio (SEER), in Btu's per watt-hour, determined from section 4.1 of appendix M to this subpart; (B) The representative average use cycle for cooling of 1,000 hours per year; (C) A conversion factor of 0.001 kilowatt per watt; and (D) The representative average unit cost of electricity in dollars per kilowatt-hour as provided pursuant to section 323(b)(2) of the Act, the resulting product then being rounded off to the nearest dollar per year. (ii) For air-source heat pumps which provide only heating or the heating portion of the estimated annual operating cost for air-source heat pumps which provide both heating and cooling, the product of: (A) The quotient of the standardized design heating requirement, in Btu's per hour, nearest to the heating Region IV minimum design heating requirement, determined in section 4.2 of appendix M to this subpart, divided by the heating seasonal performance factor (HSPF), in Btu's per watt-hour, calculated for heating Region IV corresponding to the above-mentioned standardized design heating requirement and determined in section 4.2 of appendix M to this subpart; (B) The representative average use cycle for heating of 2,080 hours per year; (C) The adjustment factor of 0.77 which serves to adjust the calculated design heating requirement and heating load hours to the actual load experienced by a heating system; (D) A conversion factor of 0.001 kilowatt per watt; and (E) The representative average unit cost of electricity in dollars per kilowatt-hour as provided pursuant to section 323(b)(2) of the Act, the resulting product then being rounded off to the nearest dollar per year. (iii) For air-source heat pumps which provide both heating and cooling, the estimated annual operating cost is the sum of the quantity determined in paragraph (m)(1)(i) of this section added to the quantity determined in paragraph (m)(1)(ii) of this section. (2) The estimated regional annual operating cost for cooling-only units and for air-source heat pumps shall be one of the following: (i) For cooling-only units or the cooling portion of the estimated regional annual operating cost for air-source heat pumps which provide both heating and cooling, the product of: (A) The quotient of the cooling capacity, in Btu's per hour, determined from the steady-state wet-coil test (A or A 2 Test), as described in section 3.2 of appendix M to this subpart, divided by the seasonal energy efficiency ratio (SEER), in Btu's per watt-hour, determined from section 4.1 of appendix M to this subpart; (B) The estimated number of regional cooling load hours per year determined from Figure 3 in section 4.3 of appendix M to this subpart; (C) A conversion factor of 0.001 kilowatts per watt; and (D) The representative average unit cost of electricity in dollars per kilowatt-hour as provided pursuant to section 323(b)(2) of the Act, the resulting product then being rounded off to the nearest dollar per year. (ii) For air-source heat pumps which provide only heating or the heating portion of the estimated regional annual operating cost for air-source heat pumps which provide both heating and cooling, the product of: (A) The estimated number of regional heating load hours per year determined from Figure 2 in section 4.3 of appendix M to this subpart; (B) The quotient of the standardized design heating requirement, in Btu's per hour, for the appropriate generalized climatic region of interest ( i.e. , corresponding to the regional heating load hours from “A”) and determined in section 4.2 of appendix M to this subpart, divided by the heating seasonal performance factor (HSPF), in Btu's per watt-hour, calculated for the appropriate generalized climatic region of interest and corresponding to the above-mentioned standardized design heating requirement while being determined in section 4.2 of appendix M to this subpart; (C) The adjustment factor of 0.77 which serves to adjust the calculated design heating requirement and heating load hours to the actual load experienced by a heating system; (D) A conversion factor of 0.001 kilowatts per watt; and (E) The representative average unit cost of electricity in dollars per kilowatt-hour as provided pursuant to section 323(b)(2) of the Act, the resulting product then being rounded off to the nearest dollar per year. (iii) For air-source heat pumps which provide both heating and cooling, the estimated regional annual operating cost is the sum of the quantity determined in paragraph (m)(3)(i) of this section added to the quantity determined in paragraph (m)(3)(ii) of this section. (3) The measure(s) of efficiency of performance for cooling-only units and air-source heat pumps shall be one or more of the following: (i) The cooling mode efficiency measure for cooling-only units and air-source heat pumps which provide cooling shall be the seasonal energy efficiency ratio (SEER), in Btu's per watt-hour, determined according to section 4.1 of appendix M to this subpart, rounded off to the nearest 0.05. (ii) The heating mode efficiency measure for air-source heat pumps shall be the heating seasonal performance factors (HSPF), in Btu's per watt-hour, determined according to section 4.2 of appendix M to this subpart for each applicable standardized design heating requirement within each climatic region, rounded off to the nearest 0.05. (iii) The annual efficiency measure for air-source heat pumps which provide heating and cooling, shall be the annual performance factors (APF), in Btu's per watt-hour, determined according to section 4.3 of appendix M to this subpart for each standardized design heating requirement within each climatic region, rounded off to the nearest 0.05. 4. Section 430.24 of subpart B is amended by revising the introductory text for paragraph (m)(1) to read as follows: § 430.24 Units to be tested. (m)(1) For central air conditioners and heat pumps, each condensing unit (outdoor unit) shall have a condenser-evaporator (outdoor coil-indoor coil) combination selected and a sample of sufficient size tested in accordance with applicable provisions of this subpart such that 5. Appendix M to Subpart B is revised to read as follows: Appendix M to Subpart B of Part 430—Uniform Test Method for Measuring the Energy Consumption of Central Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps 1. DEFINITIONS 2. TESTING CONDITIONS 2.1 Test room requirements. 2.2 Test unit installation requirements. 2.2.1 Defrost control settings. 2.2.2 Special requirements for units having a multiple-speed outdoor fan. 2.2.3 Special requirements for multi-split air conditioners and heat pumps, and systems composed of multiple mini-split units (outdoor units located side-by-side) that would normally operate using two or more indoor thermostats. 2.2.4 Wet-bulb temperature requirements for the air entering the indoor and outdoor coils. 2.2.4.1 Cooling mode tests. 2.2.4.2 Heating mode tests. 2.2.5 Additional refrigerant charging requirements. 2.3 Indoor air volume rates. 2.3.1 Cooling tests. 2.3.2 Heating tests. 2.4 Indoor coil inlet and outlet duct connections. 2.4.1 Outlet plenum for the indoor unit. 2.4.2 Inlet plenum for the indoor unit. 2.5 Indoor coil air property measurements and air damper box applications. 2.5.1 Test set-up on the inlet side of the indoor coil: For cases where the inlet damper box is installed. 2.5.1.1 If the section 2.4.2 inlet plenum is installed. 2.5.1.2 If the section 2.4.2 inlet plenum is not installed. 2.5.2 Test set-up on the inlet side of the indoor unit: For cases where no inlet damper box is installed. 2.5.3 Indoor coil static pressure difference measurement. 2.5.4 Test set-up on the outlet side of the indoor coil. 2.5.4.1 Outlet air damper box placement and requirements. 2.5.4.2 Procedures to minimize temperature maldistribution. 2.5.5 Dry bulb temperature measurement. 2.5.6 Water vapor content measurement. 2.5.7 Air damper box performance requirements. 2.6 Airflow measuring apparatus. 2.7 Electrical voltage supply. 2.8 Electrical power and energy measurements. 2.9 Time measurements. 2.10 Test apparatus for the secondary space conditioning capacity measurement. 2.10.1 Outdoor Air Enthalpy Method. 2.10.2 Compressor Calibration Method. 2.10.3 Refrigerant Enthalpy Method. 2.11 Measurement of test room ambient conditions. 2.12 Measurement of indoor fan speed. 2.13 Measurement of barometric pressure. 3. TESTING PROCEDURES 3.1 General Requirements. 3.1.1 Primary and secondary test methods. 3.1.2 Manufacturer-provided equipment overrides. 3.1.3 Airflow through the outdoor coil. 3.1.4 Airflow through the indoor coil. 3.1.4.1 Cooling Certified Air Volume Rate. 3.1.4.1.1 Cooling Certified Air Volume Rate for Ducted Units. 3.1.4.1.2 Cooling Certified Air Volume Rate for Non-ducted Units. 3.1.4.2 Cooling Minimum Air Volume Rate. 3.1.4.3 Cooling Intermediate Air Volume Rate. 3.1.4.4 Heating Certified Air Volume Rate. 3.1.4.4.1 Ducted heat pumps where the Heating and Cooling Certified Air Volume Rates are the same. 3.1.4.4.2 Ducted heat pumps where the Heating and Cooling Certified Air Volume Rates are different due to indoor fan operation. 3.1.4.4.3 Ducted heating-only heat pumps. 3.1.4.4.4 Non-ducted heat pumps, including non-ducted heating-only heat pumps. 3.1.4.5 Heating Minimum Air Volume Rate. 3.1.4.6 Heating Intermediate Air Volume Rate. 3.1.4.7 Heating Nominal Air Volume Rate. 3.1.5 Indoor test room requirement when the air surrounding the indoor unit is not supplied from the same source as the air entering the indoor unit. 3.1.6 Air volume rate calculations. 3.1.7 Test sequence. 3.1.8 Requirement for the air temperature distribution leaving the indoor coil. 3.1.9 Control of auxiliary resistive heating elements. 3.2 Cooling mode tests for different types of air conditioners and heat pumps. 3.2.1 Tests for a unit having a single-speed compressor that is tested with a fixed-speed indoor fan installed, with a constant-air-volume-rate indoor fan installed, or with no indoor fan installed. 3.2.2 Tests for a unit having a single-speed compressor and a variable-speed variable-air-volume-rate indoor fan installed. 3.2.2.1 Indoor fan capacity modulation that correlates with the outdoor dry bulb temperature. 3.2.2.2 Indoor fan capacity modulation based on adjusting the sensible to total (S/T) cooling capacity ratio. 3.2.3 Tests for a unit having a two-capacity compressor. 3.2.4 Tests for a unit having a variable-speed compressor. 3.3 Test procedures for steady-state wet coil cooling mode tests (the A, A 2 , A 1 , B, B 2 , B 1 , E V , and F 1 Tests). 3.4 Test procedures for the optional steady-state dry coil cooling mode tests (the C, C 1 , and G 1 Tests). 3.5 Test procedures for the optional cyclic dry coil cooling mode tests (the D, D 1 , and I 1 Tests). 3.5.1 Procedures when testing ducted systems. 3.5.2 Procedures when testing non-ducted systems. 3.5.3 Cooling mode cyclic degradation coefficient calculation. 3.6 Heating mode tests for different types of heat pumps, including heating-only heat pumps. 3.6.1 Tests for a heat pump having a single-speed compressor that is tested with a fixed speed indoor fan installed, with a constant-air-volume-rate indoor fan installed, or with no indoor fan installed. 3.6.2 Tests for a heat pump having a single-speed compressor and a variable-speed, variable-air-volume-rate indoor fan: capacity modulation correlates with outdoor dry bulb temperature. 3.6.3 Tests for a heat pump having a two-capacity compressor (see Definition 1.45), including two-capacity, northern heat pumps (see Definition 1.46). 3.6.4 Tests for a heat pump having a variable-speed compressor. 3.6.5 Additional test for a heat pump having a heat comfort controller. 3.7 Test procedures for steady-state Maximum Temperature and High Temperature heating mode tests (the H0 1 , H1, H1 2 , H1 1 , and H1 N Tests). 3.8 Test procedures for the optional cyclic heating mode tests (the H0C 1 , H1C, and H1C 1 Tests). 3.8.1 Heating mode cyclic degradation coefficient calculation. 3.9 Test procedures for Frost Accumulation heating mode tests (the H 2 , H2 2 , H2 V , and H2 1 Tests). 3.9.1 Average space heating capacity and electrical power calculations. 3.9.2 Demand defrost credit. 3.10 Test procedures for steady-state Low Temperature heating mode tests (the H 3 , H3 2 , and H3 1 Tests). 3.11 Additional requirements for the secondary test methods. 3.11.1 If using the Outdoor Air Enthalpy Method as the secondary test method. 3.11.1.1 If a preliminary test precedes the official test 3.11.1.2 If a preliminary test does not precede the official test. 3.11.1.3 Official test. 3.11.2 If using the Compressor Calibration Method as the secondary test method. 3.11.3 If using the Refrigerant Enthalpy Method as the secondary test method. 3.12 Rounding of space conditioning capacities for reporting purposes. 4. CALCULATIONS OF SEASONAL PERFORMANCE DESCRIPTORS 4.1 Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ratio (SEER) Calculations. 4.1.1 SEER calculations for an air conditioner or heat pump having a single-speed compressor that was tested with a fixed-speed indoor fan installed, a constant-air-volume-rate indoor fan installed, or with no indoor fan installed. 4.1.2 SEER calculations for an air conditioner or heat pump having a single-speed compressor and a variable-speed variable-air-volume-rate indoor fan. 4.1.2.1 Units covered by section 3.2.2.1 where indoor fan capacity modulation correlates with the outdoor dry bulb temperature. 4.1.2.2 Units covered by section 3.2.2.2 where indoor fan capacity modulation is used to adjust the sensible to total cooling capacity ratio. 4.1.3 SEER calculations for an air conditioner or heat pump having a two-capacity compressor. 4.1.3.1 Steady-state space cooling capacity at low compressor capacity is greater than or equal to the building cooling load at temperature T j , Q c k=1 (T j ) ≥ BL(T j ). 4.1.3.2 Unit alternates between high (k=2) and low (k=1) compressor capacity to satisfy the building cooling load at temperature T j , Q c k=1 (T j ) < BL(T j ) < Q c k=2 (T j ). 4.1.3.3 Unit only operates at high (k=2) compressor capacity at temperature T j and its capacity is greater than the building cooling load, BL(T j ) < Q c k=2 (T j ). 4.1.3.4 Unit must operate continuously at high (k=2) compressor capacity at temperature T j , BL(T j ) ≥ Q c k=2 (T j ). 4.1.4 SEER calculations for an air conditioner or heat pump having a variable-speed compressor. 4.1.4.1 Steady-state space cooling capacity when operating at minimum compressor speed is greater than or equal to the building cooling load at temperature T j , Q c k=1 (T j ) ≥ BL(T j ). 4.1.4.2 Unit operates at an intermediate compressor speed (k=i) in order to match the building cooling load at temperature T j , Q c k=1 (T j ) < BL(T j ) < Q c k=2 (T j ). 4.1.4.3 Unit must operate continuously at maximum (k=2) compressor speed at temperature T j , BL(T j ) ≥ Q c k=2 (T j ). 4.2 Heating Seasonal Performance Factor (HSPF) Calculations. 4.2.1 Additional steps for calculating the HSPF of a heat pump having a single-speed compressor that was tested with a fixed-speed indoor fan installed, a constant-air-volume-rate indoor fan installed, or with no indoor fan installed. 4.2.2 Additional steps for calculating the HSPF of a heat pump having a single-speed compressor and a variable-speed, variable-air-volume-rate indoor fan. 4.2.3 Additional steps for calculating the HSPF of a heat pump having a two-capacity compressor. 4.2.3.1 Steady-state space heating capacity when operating at low compressor capacity is greater than or equal to the building heating load at temperature T j , Q h k=1 (T j ) ≥ BL(T j ). 4.2.3.2 Heat pump alternates between high (k=2) and low (k=1) compressor capacity to satisfy the building heating load at a temperature T j , Q h k=1 (T j ) BL (T j ) < Q h k=2 (T j ). 4.2.3.3 Heat pump only operates at high (k=2) compressor capacity at temperature T j and its capacity is greater than the building heating load, BL(T j ) < Q h k=2 (T j ). 4.2.3.4 Heat pump must operate continuously at high (k=2) compressor capacity at temperature T j , BL(T j ) ≥ Q h k=2 (T j ). 4.2.4 Additional steps for calculating the HSPF of a heat pump having a variable-speed compressor. 4.2.4.1 Steady-state space heating capacity when operating at minimum compressor speed is greater than or equal to the building heating load at temperature T j , Q h k=1 (T j ) ≥ BL(T j ). 4.2.4.2 Heat pump operates at an intermediate compressor speed (k=i) in order to match the building heating load at a temperature T j , Q h k=1 (T j ) < BL(T j ) < Q h k=2 (T j ). 4.2.4.3 Heat pump must operate continuously at maximum (k=2) compressor speed at temperature T j , BL(T j ) ≥ Q h k=2 (T j ). 4.2.5 Heat pumps having a heat comfort controller. 4.2.5.1 Heat pump having a heat comfort controller: Additional steps for calculating the HSPF of a heat pump having a single-speed compressor that was tested with a fixed-speed indoor fan installed, a constant-air-volume-rate indoor fan installed, or with no indoor fan installed. 4.2.5.2 Heat pump having a heat comfort controller: Additional steps for calculating the HSPF of a heat pump having a single-speed compressor and a variable-speed, variable-air-volume-rate indoor fan. 4.2.5.3 Heat pumps having a heat comfort controller: Additional steps for calculating the HSPF of a heat pump having a two-capacity compressor. 4.2.5.4 Heat pumps having a heat comfort controller: Additional steps for calculating the HSPF of a heat pump having a variable-speed compressor. [Reserved] 4.3 Calculations of the Actual and Representative Regional Annual Performance Factors for Heat Pumps. 4.3.1 Calculation of actual regional annual performance factors (APF A ) for a particular location and for each standardized design heating requirement. 4.3.2 Calculation of representative regional annual performance factors (APF R ) for each generalized climatic region and for each standardized design heating requirement. 4.4 Rounding of SEER, HSPF, and APF for reporting purposes. 1. Definitions 1.1 Annual performance factor means the total heating and cooling done by a heat pump in a particular region in one year divided by the total electric energy used in one year. Paragraph (m)(3)(iii) of § 430.23 of the Code of Federal Regulations states the calculation requirements for this rating descriptor. 1.2 ARI means Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute. 1.3 ARI Standard 210/240-2003 means the test standard “Unitary Air-Conditioning and Air-Source Heat Pump Equipment” published in 2003 by ARI. 1.4 ASHRAE means the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. 1.5 ASHRAE Standard 23-93 means the test standard “Methods of Testing for Rating Positive Displacement Refrigerant Compressors and Condensing Units” published in 1993 by ASHRAE. 1.6  ASHRAE Standard 37-88 means the test standard “Methods of Testing for Rating Unitary Air-Conditioning and Heat Pump Equipment” published in 1988 by ASHRAE. 1.7 ASHRAE Standard 41.1-86 (RA 01) means the test standard “Standard Method for Temperature Measurement” published in 1986 and reaffirmed in 2001 by ASHRAE. 1.8 ASHRAE Standard 41.2-87 (RA 92) means the test standard “Standard Methods for Laboratory Airflow Measurement” published in 1987 and reaffirmed in 1992 by ASHRAE. 1.9 ASHRAE Standard 41.6-94 (RA 01) means the test standard “Method for Measurement of Moist Air Properties” published in 1994 and reaffirmed in 2001 by ASHRAE. 1.10 ASHRAE Standard 41.9-00 means the test standard “Calorimeter Test Methods for Mass Flow Measurements of Volatile Refrigerants” published in 2000 by ASHRAE. 1.11 ASHRAE Standard 51-99/AMCA Standard 210-1999 means the test standard “Laboratory Methods of Testing Fans for Aerodynamic Performance Rating” published in 1999 by ASHRAE and the Air Movement and Control Association International, Inc. 1.12 ASHRAE Standard 116-95 means the test standard “Methods of Testing for Rating for Seasonal Efficiency of Unitary Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps” published in 1995 by ASHRAE. 1.13 CFR means Code of Federal Regulations. 1.14 Constant-air-volume-rate indoor fan means a fan that varies its operating speed to provide a fixed air-volume-rate from a ducted system. 1.15 Continuously recorded, when referring to a dry bulb measurement, means that the specified temperature must be sampled at regular intervals that are equal to or less than the maximum intervals specified in section 4.3 part “a” of ASHRAE Standard 41.1-86 (RA 01). If such dry bulb temperatures are used only for test room control, it means that one samples at regular intervals equal to or less than the maximum intervals specified in section 4.3 part “b” of the same ASHRAE Standard. Regarding wet bulb temperature, dew point temperature, or relative humidity measurements, continuously recorded means that the measurements must be made at regular intervals that are equal to or less than 1 minute. 1.16 Cooling load factor (CLF) means the ratio having as its numerator the total cooling delivered during a cyclic operating interval consisting of one ON period and one OFF period. The denominator is the total cooling that would be delivered, given the same ambient conditions, had the unit operated continuously at its steady-state space cooling capacity for the same total time (ON + OFF) interval. 1.17 Coefficient of Performance (COP) means the ratio of the average rate of space heating delivered to the average rate of electrical energy consumed by the heat pump. These rate quantities must be determined from a single test or, if derived via interpolation, must be tied to a single set of operating conditions. COP is a dimensionless quantity. When determined for a ducted unit tested without an indoor fan installed, COP must include the section 3.7, 3.8, and 3.9.1 default values for the heat output and power input of a fan motor. 1.18 Cyclic Test means a test where the unit's compressor is cycled on and off for specific time intervals. A cyclic test provides half the information needed to calculate a degradation coefficient. 1.19 Damper box means a short section of duct having an air damper that meets the performance requirements of section 2.5.7. 1.20 Degradation coefficient (C D ) means a parameter used in calculating the part load factor. The degradation coefficient for cooling is denoted by C D c . The degradation coefficient for heating is denoted by C D h . 1.21 Demand-defrost control system means a system that defrosts the heat pump outdoor coil only when measuring a predetermined degradation of performance. The heat pump's controls monitor one or more parameters that always vary with the amount of frost accumulated on the outdoor coil ( e.g. , coil to air differential temperature, coil differential air pressure, outdoor fan power or current, optical sensors, etc.) at least once for every ten minutes of compressor ON-time when space heating. One acceptable alternative to the criterion given in the prior sentence is a feedback system that measures the length of the defrost period and adjusts defrost frequency accordingly. 1 In all cases, when the frost parameter(s) reaches a predetermined value, the system initiates a defrost. In a demand-defrost control system, defrosts are terminated based on monitoring a parameter(s) that indicates that frost has been eliminated from the coil. 1 Systems that vary defrost intervals according to outdoor dry-bulb temperature are not demand defrost systems. A demand-defrost control system, which otherwise meets the above requirements, may allow time-initiated defrosts if, and only if, such defrosts occur after 6 hours of compressor operating time. 1.22 Design heating requirement (DHR) predicts the space heating load of a residence when subjected to outdoor design conditions. Estimates for the minimum and maximum DHR are provided for six generalized U.S. climatic regions in section 4.2. 1.23 Dry-coil tests are cooling mode tests where the wet-bulb temperature of the air supplied to the indoor coil is maintained low enough that no condensate forms on this coil. 1.24 Ducted system means an air conditioner or heat pump that is designed to be permanently installed equipment and delivers conditioned air to the indoor space through a duct(s). The air conditioner or heat pump may be either a split system or a single-packaged unit. 1.25 Energy efficiency ratio (EER) means the ratio of the average rate of space cooling delivered to the average rate of electrical energy consumed by the air conditioner or heat pump. These rate quantities must be determined from a single test or, if derived via interpolation, must be tied to a single set of operating conditions. EER is expressed in units of ER11OC05.001 When determined for a ducted unit tested without an indoor fan installed, EER must include the section 3.3 and 3.5.1 default values for the heat output and power input of a fan motor. 1.26 Heating load factor (HLF) means the ratio having as its numerator the total heating delivered during a cyclic operating interval consisting of one ON period and one OFF period. The denominator is the total heating that would be delivered, given the same ambient conditions, if the unit operated continuously at its steady-state space heating capacity for the same total time (ON plus OFF) interval. 1.27 Heating seasonal performance factor (HSPF) means the total space heating required during the space heating season, expressed in Btu's, divided by the total electrical energy consumed by the heat pump system during the same season, expressed in watt-hours. The HSPF used to evaluate compliance with the Energy Conservation Standards (see 10 CFR 430.32(c), Subpart C) is based on Region IV, the minimum standardized design heating requirement, and the sampling plan stated in 10 CFR 430.24(m), Subpart B. 1.28 Heat pump having a heat comfort controller means equipment that regulates the operation of the electric resistance elements to assure that the air temperature leaving the indoor section does not fall below a specified temperature. This specified temperature is usually field adjustable. Heat pumps that actively regulate the rate of electric resistance heating when operating below the balance point (as the result of a second stage call from the thermostat) but do not operate to maintain a minimum delivery temperature are not considered as having a heat comfort controller. 1.29 Mini-split air conditioners and heat pumps means systems that have a single outdoor section and one or more indoor sections. The indoor sections cycle on and off in unison in response to a single indoor thermostat. 1.30 Multiple-split air conditioners and heat pumps means systems that have two or more indoor sections. The indoor sections operate independently and can be used to condition multiple zones in response to multiple indoor thermostats. 1.31 Non-ducted system means an air conditioner or heat pump that is designed to be permanently installed equipment and directly heats or cools air within the conditioned space using one or more indoor coils that are mounted on room walls and/or ceilings. The unit may be of a modular design that allows for combining multiple outdoor coils and compressors to create one overall system. Non-ducted systems covered by this test procedure are all split systems. 1.32 Part-load factor (PLF) means the ratio of the cyclic energy efficiency ratio (coefficient of performance) to the steady-state energy efficiency ratio (coefficient of performance). Evaluate both energy efficiency ratios (coefficients of performance) based on operation at the same ambient conditions. 1.33 Seasonal energy efficiency ratio (SEER) means the total heat removed from the conditioned space during the annual cooling season, expressed in Btu's, di [Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.] --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A05-15601. Public record. Not legal advice.