[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 16 (Thursday, January 24, 2002)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 3449-3455]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-1747]


 ========================================================================
 Proposed Rules
                                                 Federal Register
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of 
 the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these 
 notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in 
 the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
 
 ========================================================================
 

  Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 16 / Thursday, January 24, 2002 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 3449]]



DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

10 CFR Part 430


Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Publication of 
the Petition for Waiver of the American Water Heater Company's Energy 
Saver Control From the DOE Water Heater Test Procedure, Denial of the 
Application for an Interim Waiver, and Request for Comments on Testing 
Water Heater Performance With Electronic Controls (Case No. WH-010)

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of 
Energy.

ACTION: Solicitation of comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This document publishes a Petition for Waiver to the 
Department of Energy (DOE or Department) water heater test procedure 
from the American Water Heater Company (American) regarding an adaptive 
thermostat control. American's Petition for Waiver requests that DOE 
lower the average tank temperature and base the water draws on equal 
energy content compared to the existing test procedure. This document 
also denies an Interim Waiver to American from the existing DOE water 
heater test procedure. The Department solicits comments, data, and 
information as to whether to grant the Petition for Waiver as well as 
comments on testing water heaters with electronic controls.

DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, and information not later than 
February 25, 2002 on American's Petition for Waiver and comments on 
testing water heaters with electronic controls.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and statements shall be sent to: Department 
of Energy, Office of Building Research and Standards, Case No. WH-010, 
Mail Stop EE-41, Room 1J-018, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence 
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121, (202) 586-9127. We welcome 
electronic comments but they must be followed by a signed letter. Send 
email comments to [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Terry Logee, U.S. Department of 
Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Mail Station 
EE-41, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, 
DC 20585-0121, (202) 586-1689, email: [email protected] or Ms. 
Francine Pinto, Esq., U.S. Department of Energy, Office of General 
Counsel, Mail Station GC-72, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence 
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0103, (202) 586-7432.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Energy Conservation Program for Consumer 
Products (other than automobiles) was established pursuant to the 
Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended, (EPCA) which requires 
DOE to prescribe standardized test procedures to measure the energy 
consumption of certain consumer products, including water heaters.
    The DOE test procedure, ``Uniform Test Method for Measuring the 
Energy Consumption of Water Heaters'' prescribes a method for 
characterizing the energy requirements of all types of water heaters 
and yields model-specific energy efficiency information that can aid 
consumers in their purchasing decisions. The test procedure is set 
forth in Title 10 CFR part 430, Subpart B, Appendix E.
    The Department amended the test procedure rules on September 26, 
1980, to provide for a waiver process by adding Section 430.27 to Title 
10 CFR part 430. 45 FR 64108. The waiver process allows the Assistant 
Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (Assistant 
Secretary) to temporarily waive test procedures for a particular basic 
model. On November 26, 1986, DOE amended the waiver process to allow 
the Assistant Secretary to grant an Interim Waiver for immediate relief 
from test procedure requirements to manufacturers that have petitioned 
DOE for a waiver of such prescribed test procedures. 51 FR 42823. The 
amendment is codified at 10 CFR 430.27(a)(2).
    Any person may submit a petition to waive the requirements of the 
applicable test procedure based on a claim that a basic model contains 
one or more design characteristics that prevent testing according to 
the prescribed test procedures, or when the prescribed test procedures 
may evaluate a basic model in a manner so unrepresentative of its true 
energy consumption as to provide materially inaccurate comparative 
data. The Department publishes the Petition for Waiver in the Federal 
Register and requests comments from interested parties during a 30-day 
comment period. The Department analyzes the petition, including all 
comments, and publishes a notice of each waiver granted or denied in 
the Federal Register. Prior to a decision, the Assistant Secretary will 
consult with the Federal Trade Commission pursuant to 10 CFR 430.27(l). 
Waivers generally remain in effect until future test procedure 
amendments become effective; resolving the problem that is the subject 
of the waiver.
    Any interested person who has submitted a Petition for Waiver may 
also file an Application for Interim Waiver to the applicable test 
procedure requirements. The Application may be filed jointly with, or 
subsequent to, the filing of a Petition for Waiver.
    Each Application for Interim Waiver must identify the basic models 
for which the interim waiver is requested, demonstrate that it meets 
the criteria in 10 CFR 430.27, and be signed by the applicant or by an 
authorized representative. In addition, each applicant for an Interim 
Waiver must notify all known manufacturers of domestically marketed 
units of the same product type of its filing and provide copies of both 
the Application for Interim Waiver and the Petition for Waiver to these 
manufacturers. These manufacturers may send comments to DOE regarding 
the Petition for an Interim Waiver. An application for an Interim 
Waiver does not allow the manufacturer to disregard DOE's test 
procedure requirements until an Interim Waiver has been granted.
    An Interim Waiver will be granted if it is determined that the 
applicant will experience economic hardship if the Application for 
Interim Waiver is denied, if it appears likely that the Petition for 
Waiver will be granted, and/or the Assistant Secretary determines that 
it would be desirable for public policy reasons to grant immediate 
relief pending a determination on the Petition for Waiver. 10 CFR 
430.27 (g). An Interim Waiver remains in effect for a

[[Page 3450]]

period of 180 days or until DOE issues its determination on the 
Petition for Waiver, whichever is sooner, and may be extended for an 
additional 180 days, if necessary.

Summary of Petition

    On April 26, 2001, American Water Heater Company filed an 
Application for Interim Waiver and a Petition for Waiver, Case No. WH-
010, concerning the tank temperature of water heaters during testing of 
water heaters with adaptive electronic controls. There was no 
confidential material deleted from American's petition. However, 
American submitted test data at DOE's request which was originally 
marked confidential. Thereafter, on December 13, 2001, American 
withdrew its designation of confidentiality for this test data (Letter 
dated December 13, 2001, from Alex Kovalenko, Manager of Product 
Development Engineering, American Water Heater Company to Terry Logee, 
U.S. Department of Energy). The test data is in the docket file. A copy 
of American's Petition for Waiver and Application for Interim Waiver is 
appended to this notice.
    Whereas the typical electric water heater control has a fixed 
temperature thermostat setpoint, American's electronic controller can 
automatically adjust the thermostat setpoint up or down according to 
actual household water usage patterns. This automatic thermostat 
adjustment is called an ``Energy Saver Cycle.'' American does not 
identify any upper or lower thermostat setpoints in its proposal.
    American's application seeks the following changes to DOE's test 
procedure for a controller with an ``Energy Saver Cycle'': (1) Add a 
qualification test; (2) Decrease the temperature of the thermostat to 
the lowest stable temperature; (3) Adjust the amount of water withdrawn 
from the tank during the simulated-use test; and (4) Modify the 
equations used to compute the energy factor. The current DOE test 
procedure requires a constant tank temperature of 135  deg.F and does 
not permit a variable thermostat setpoint. The test procedure does not 
have a controller qualification test. DOE's current test procedure also 
requires a first hour rating test to determine the amount of hot water 
that can be withdrawn from a tank of water heated to 135  deg.F.
    American's first proposed change for a qualification test for the 
``Energy Saver Cycle'' would prove that the controller could 
automatically adjust the thermostat setpoint. In its proposal, American 
prescribes a large number of water draws to allow the tank thermostat 
to reach a minimum setpoint and then to return to 135  deg.F. The 
petition calls this control process an ``Energy Saver Cycle'' if the 
controller reaches an equilibrium temperature lower than 135  deg.F 
when the water heater is subjected to the following water usage 
pattern, herein called draws. Each draw would end when the lower 
element energizes, and the subsequent draw would commence when the 
thermostat turns off the power to the lower element. The test would 
initially start with the tank at 135  deg.F. The petition states that 
the sequence will continue until the mean tank temperature reaches 
125 deg.F or less. This test shows that the control will lower the set 
point in response to small water draws. If this sequence is continued, 
the lowest ``stable'' temperature can be determined. The petition 
defines the lowest stable temperature as the point at which water draws 
of 10.7 gallons will not cause the controller to increase the 
thermostat setpoint.
    To test whether the controller will also automatically raise the 
temperature, water draws large enough to energize the upper element 
must be made until the controller has returned to the mean tank 
temperature of 135  deg.F. These tests demonstrate that the controller 
adjusts the set point up and down based on actual water usage. Since 
the ``adjusting'' process could take approximately 100 cycles for the 
American control logic, the petition seeks to run this test only once 
for each model of controller; once the controller has been qualified, 
any water heaters using that controller would qualify to use the 
``Energy Saver Cycle'' test procedure.
    American's second proposed change would lower the water heater 
thermostat set point to the lowest stable temperature. This temperature 
would be obtained through knowledge of the temperature adjustment logic 
for the ``Energy Saver Cycle''. This lowest stable temperature must be 
maintained during the six draws of 10.7 gallons or the test is invalid. 
In this case, the test would need to be repeated at a higher stable 
temperature.
    American's third proposed change is to modify the amount of water 
drawn in each of the six draws to match the energy contained in each 
draw of the current procedure. This accounts for the fact that the 
temperature of the water delivered from the water heater in American's 
proposal will be lower than that delivered in the current DOE test 
procedure. Each draw is approximately 10.7 gallons of water and the 
energy required to raise 10.7 gallons of water from its inlet 
temperature of 58  deg.F to 135  deg.F is 6836 BTU. For the Energy 
Saver Cycle, the draw would be terminated when 6836 BTU have been 
removed.
    American's fourth proposed change is to modify several calculations 
in the current test procedure. The calculations in the current DOE test 
procedure reference a nominal tank temperature of 135  deg.F and a 
nominal outlet temperature of 135  deg.F. The petition for waiver seeks 
to modify Section 6.1.6, the calculation of the adjusted daily water 
heating energy consumption from:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24JA02.001

to:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24JA02.002


[[Page 3451]]


where Tsu is the maximum tank temperature observed after the 
sixth draw of the simulated-use test.
    The petition seeks to change the calculation of Qhw,77 
in Section 6.1.6 from:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24JA02.003

to:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24JA02.004

    The last calculation that the petition for waiver seeks to modify 
is that of the energy factor in Section 6.1.7. The proposed 
modification would change the equation from:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24JA02.005

to:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24JA02.006

Discussion of American's Petition for Waiver

    The Department's waiver regulations provide that the applicant for 
Interim Waiver is required to notify in writing all known manufacturers 
of domestically marketed units of the same product type that it has 
filed an Application for Interim Waiver and a Petition for Waiver and 
provide copies of these documents to the manufacturers. The regulations 
also provide that the Assistant Secretary will receive and consider 
timely written comments on the Application for Interim Waiver. 10 CFR 
430.27(c)(2).
    The Department received comments from Rheem and Applied Energy 
Technology (AET). Rheem has indicated DOE should recognize new control 
technologies for water heaters and should pursue changes to credit 
resulting energy savings. Rheem is concerned, however, that American's 
proposed method is designed specifically for one type of control system 
and disqualifies or discounts other well-known alternative control 
schemes.
    Rheem expressed a concern that the proposed procedure assumes the 
best-case scenario for the test condition. Rheem indicates that 
potential savings would only be realized if the ``Energy Saver Cycle'' 
were selected and if a homeowner's water use patterns resulted in a 
water heater setpoint temperature below 135  deg.F. Rheem is concerned 
the proposed procedure would lead to manufacturers claiming water 
heater efficiencies not representative of those achieved in practice.
    Rheem also believes that the first hour rating would need to be 
adjusted if the tank temperature is lowered. Rheem states that the 
revised tank temperature, i.e., the lowest stable temperature, should 
be used for the first-hour rating test.
    AET commented that a comprehensive reexamination of the DOE water 
heater test procedure is needed to allow proper representation of in-
field efficiency improvements made possible by a variety of control 
approaches. While AET indicates that the proposed test method is an 
improvement over the current test procedure, AET claims that the 
proposed test method excludes other forms of controls that could be 
applied to water heaters and therefore would provide a competitive 
advantage to American.
    AET is concerned that because a lowest stable temperature is not 
specified in the proposed test procedure, the delivered water 
temperature could consequently be extremely low. AET also commented 
that the proposed test procedure's absence of a lower and upper 
setpoint temperature could be abused. A manufacturer could use a large 
on-off temperature differential on the upper thermostat so that the 
upper heating element would not energize. This could allow a lowest 
stable temperature of about 59  deg.F, resulting in nearly 100 percent 
efficiency.
    AET's final point echoes the concern of Rheem that the proposed 
test procedure would yield a best-case scenario and would not 
necessarily reflect the energy use patterns that are typical of 
consumers. AET claims that the proposed test procedure does not use 
long draws, like those seen in actual use that would force the 
controller to reach a stable temperature different from the lowest 
stable temperature.
    In response to these comments, the Department notes that a waiver 
is issued for specific basic models and that American has identified 
those models it is seeking to waive in its petition for waiver. Other 
basic models or other control schemes would have a different waiver and 
test procedure. The comments by Rheem and AET on the general test 
procedure are of use because they have identified issues related to the 
methodology of how to arrive at a test temperature representative of 
actual consumer use and how to measure the first hour rating. These 
issues would need to be discussed and resolved before a waiver could be 
issued regarding testing of water heaters with electronic controls.

Discussion of American's Application for Interim Waiver

    Pursuant to the requirements in 10 CFR 430.27(g), an Interim Waiver 
will be granted if the applicant can show that it will experience 
economic hardship if the application for Interim Waiver is denied, if 
the petition for waiver will likely be granted and/or if the Assistant 
Secretary determines for public policy reasons to grant immediate 
relief pending a determination on the petition for waiver. DOE will 
address each of these criteria separately as applied to American's 
petition for an interim waiver.
    First, DOE does not believe American has provided information in 
its application for the interim waiver to support its claim of economic 
hardship. In its application, American merely stated, ``From an 
economic point of view, American Water Heater Company has invested 
significantly in the development of this product and to not be able to 
present one of its best features would cause loss of sales and 
discourage further development.'' (Letter dated April 26, 2001 from 
Timothy J. Schellenberger, Senior Vice President--Product Engineering, 
to the Assistant Secretary, Application for Interim Waiver). American's 
mere assertion of economic hardship does not establish that it will 
experience such hardship. American did not provide any factual 
information to justify its assertion.
    Second, at this time, the Assistant Secretary does not have 
adequate information from American to determine that American's 
Petition for Waiver from the DOE test procedure will likely be granted. 
The petition is incomplete for the following reasons:
    American's proposed test protocol depends on establishing a lowest 
stable temperature for their thermostat controller. The procedure 
outlined in the petition uses a 100 draw-cycle to qualify the 
controller as having an & ldquo;Energy Saver Cycle''. However, this 
procedure only establishes that the controller will lower and raise the 
thermostat setpoint. American did not provide any test data that DOE 
could use to determine that a lower thermostat setpoint would result 
from typical household use and what that lower thermostat setpoint 
might be. For the petition for waiver to be complete, it must contain 
the test temperature for each basic model for which a waiver is 
requested. From the confidential test

[[Page 3452]]

data that was provided, DOE can only determine that the controller can 
automatically reduce or raise the thermostat setpoint.
    DOE believes that American must provide data from field tests of 
water heaters using this controller to determine an average lowest 
stable temperature for the U.S. for each basic model for which a waiver 
is requested. There are probably a number of variables that should be 
considered so that the resultant lowest stable temperature is 
representative of U.S. households including tank volumes, various inlet 
water temperatures and varying family sizes. The appropriate test time 
and the allowed variability to demonstrate a ``stable'' temperature 
would have to be determined. Furthermore, the field tests should 
contain a sample large enough to be statistically relevant at high 
confidence. The Department would like to receive comments on the 
concerns listed above.
    DOE recognizes that developing the necessary data to quantify the 
lowest stable temperature for each basic model could be a time 
consuming and costly task. Since this petition for waiver from the DOE 
test procedure for an automatic thermostat controller is the first DOE 
has received for this type of device, we are very interested in 
receiving comments that would help develop a general test method for 
automatic thermostat controllers. For instance, is it practical to 
develop a computer model that could be used to qualify any automatic 
controller? Is it possible to use existing databases such as the Energy 
Information Administration's Residential Energy Consumption Survey for 
housing and family characteristics combined with average inlet water 
temperature data from ground water temperatures to develop an algorithm 
that would yield a reasonable lowest stable temperature? Are there 
other ways to simplify and generalize the test procedure for an 
automatic thermostat controller?
    Second, American's petition for waiver does not address the first 
hour rating of the water heater. This test result is used by retailers 
and installers as an indication of what size water heater to install in 
a given home. The FTC also uses this value to determine which group of 
water heaters a given model belongs in for establishing the range of 
energy factors and yearly costs of operation. In the current DOE test 
procedure, the first hour rating test starts at a maximum temperature 
of 135  deg.oF 5  deg.F and continues until the average 
tank temperature has dropped 25  deg.F. If the water is reheated within 
the hour, the draw is initiated again and the water withdrawn is 
summed. American's proposed modification to the current 24-hour 
simulated-use test did not provide a first hour rating test which is a 
necessary component of the water heater test procedure. DOE believes it 
would be logical for the first hour rating test to be conducted at the 
same tank temperature as the test for determining the energy factor. 
However, if that temperature is much lower than the current 135  deg.F 
5  deg.F, the final water temperature could be too cool to 
be considered useful.
    Finally, the Department has determined that there are no public 
policy impacts that warrant granting immediate relief pending a 
determination on the Petition for Waiver.

Conclusions

    Following a careful consideration of all material that was 
submitted by American and based on the criteria for granting an interim 
waiver as provided in 10 CFR 430.27(g), and for the reasons stated 
above, the Department has concluded that American's Application for an 
Interim Waiver should be denied.
    At the same time, the Department solicits comments, data, and 
information as to whether to grant the Petition for Waiver, as well as 
comments on testing water heaters with electronic controls. Such 
comments will assist the Department in determining whether it can 
develop a practical test procedure for these devices.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on January 17, 2002.
David K. Garman,
Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
April 26, 2001

Assistant Secretary for Conservation and Renewable Energy
United States Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW, 
Washington, DC 20585

    To Whom It May Concern: Subject: Petition for Waiver

Specific Requirements to be Waived.

    American Water Heater Company seeks a waiver in the application of 
the ``Uniform Test Method for Measuring the Energy Consumption of Water 
Heaters'' contained in 10 CFR Part 430 Subpart B Appendix E as applied 
to electric water heater models that have adaptive electronic controls.
    Utilizing a microprocessor-based control on an electric water 
heater allows a level of intelligence to be added to the control logic 
that is not possible with the conventional electro-mechanical control 
systems used today. One use of this intelligence is to have the control 
adjust the stored water temperature based on the actual hot water usage 
pattern to determine the lowest possible temperature to store water 
that will meet the needs of the consumer. The result of this new 
control logic is a reduction in energy consumption. Such a control 
cycle will be identified as an ``Energy Saver Cycle''.
    American Water Heater plans to commercialize a microprocessor-based 
control system with an Energy Saver Cycle. However, we are unable to 
characterize and market the true efficiency benefit to the consumer 
through the ``Uniform Test Method for Measuring the Energy Consumption 
of Water Heaters'' ratings process. The test procedure does not allow 
the efficiency benefit of an Energy Saver Cycle to be demonstrated. 
These types of intelligent electronic controls are more expensive and 
without the ability to demonstrate the benefits in terms of energy 
savings, it is difficult to justify the additional cost to the 
consumer. We are specifically petitioning to allow the use of an 
alternate test procedure described below to rate and label the 
efficiency of a water heater when using the ``Energy Saver Cycle''.

Basic Models and all Manufacturers

(See attached list)

Design Characteristics

Background Information

    The predominate energy loss of a tank type electric water heater is 
the standby loss associated with storing the hot water. There are two 
methods of reducing these losses; one can increase the effectiveness of 
the insulation system, or reduce the stored water temperature. The 
``Energy Saver Cycle'' saves energy by reducing the stored water 
temperature.
    The study report ``Baseline Results and Methodology of the Consumer 
Sub-group Analysis for Residential Water Efficiency Standards'', 
submitted to the Department of Energy October 1998, shows that the 
average set point temperature of residential water heaters varies 
widely across the United States. The northern states tend to be hotter 
with average set points as high as 142  deg.F and the south as low as 
123  deg.F. This corresponds inversely with the average inlet water 
temperature in the same areas. At the time of use, the hot water is 
blended with cold water to produce the desired use temperature. This 
process of blending causes the usage quantity of hot water to change 
inversely with the stored water temperature. For example: A shower

[[Page 3453]]

lasting 10 minutes with a delivered water temperature of 105  deg.F and 
a flow rate of 2.5 gallons/minute uses 25 gallons of water. If 135 
deg.F hot water, supplied by a water heater, is blended with cold water 
at 58  deg.F, the shower will consume 9.74 gallons of cold water and 
15.26 gallons of hot water. In contrast, if the hot water supply 
temperature were reduced to 115  deg.F the usage proportions would 
change to 4.39 gallons of cold water and 20.61 gallons of hot water. 
The energy consumed and the quantity of water used in the shower is the 
same in both cases but the proportion of heated water goes up. The 
important difference is that, in the time between showers, the energy 
consumed to maintain the stored water temperature goes down by 29.85% 
when the water is stored at 115  deg.F versus 135  deg.F. The person 
taking the shower didn't know the difference except they had to use 
more hot water to get the desired temperature. As the stored water 
temperature is further lowered, eventually the water heater will not be 
able to supply the needed amount of blended hot water and the water 
temperature will have to be increased.
    The adaptive control logic continually adjusts stored water 
temperature within specified limits to get to the temperature where the 
maximum demand event can be met by the quantity and temperature of 
water stored in the heater. This ``Energy Saver Cycle'' will produce 
real energy savings in a significant number of households and thus 
deserves to have a test procedure designed to allow the efficiency 
benefits to be demonstrated. The current test procedure doesn't allow 
this because the mean tank test temperature is fixed at 135  deg.F.

Energy Saver Cycle Qualification test

    It is simple for a manufacturer to put an electronic control on a 
water heater and label a cycle as an ``Energy Saver Cycle'' without 
having an adaptive control that will adjust stored water temperature 
based on usage. Some examples of other controls that would not qualify 
for this modified test procedure could be, a conventional control with 
a fixed but lower set point which is identified as an ``Energy Saver 
Cycle'' or an off peak type control that simply adjusts the set point 
based on the time of the day. This new test is required to prove that 
the control meets the ``Energy Saver Cycle'' criteria as a qualifier to 
use the energy saver test modifications. The object of the Page 3 test 
is to confirm that the control does adapt the stored water temperature 
based on water usage.
    The following simple test would be used to prove that the control 
adapts water temperature to water usage.
    1. The unit is set up per the ``Uniform Test Method for Measuring 
the Energy Consumption of Water Heaters'', 10 CFR 430.23.
    2. The unit is run on normal cycle and the thermostat is adjusted 
until the mean tank temperature is 135  deg.F. Then the control is 
switched to the ``Energy Saver Cycle'' and a series of small draws are 
made. Each draw should be sufficient to cause the lower element to come 
on. The lower element will reheat the water until it shuts off at which 
time another draw will start. This sequence will continue until the 
mean tank temperature, at the element shutoff point, is 125  deg.F or 
less. The mean tank temperature after the first cycle should be 135 
deg.F and the last cycle will be 125  deg.F or less to show that the 
control will lower the set point in response to a low water usage 
situation.
    3. Then the draw size will be changed to be large enough that the 
control will adjust the temperature up. After each reheat the draw will 
be repeated until the control has adjusted the set point up enough to 
return the mean tank temperature back to the 135  deg.F point. At this 
point, the test would have proven that the control adjusts set point up 
and down based on actual water usage. If the control can not 
demonstrate the adaptive ability to adjust stored water temperature 
based on actual usage, it will not qualify to use the proposed modified 
procedure.
    4. This test is somewhat cumbersome in that a large number of draw 
reheat cycles would be required to complete the test. In our case, it 
would require approximately 100 cycles. The test could be automated and 
allowed to run over night to speed up the qualification process. The 
test should only have to be run once for a given manufacturer's 
control. Once the control has been qualified, any units using that 
control would qualify for the Energy Saver Cycle test sequence.

Test Procedure Changes

    Staying with the principal that the delivered hot water energy 
doesn't change as the stored water temperature changes, the following 
changes are required to allow the energy savings of an ``Energy Saver 
Cycle'' to be demonstrated and evaluated.
    1. The size of the six water draws will be adjusted such that the 
BTUs of delivered hot water (BTUs to heat the water from 58F to 
delivery temperature) is equal to BTUs for the six 10.7 gallon draws 
heated from 58F to 135F. This calculation = (Gallons  x  Lbs./gal.  x  
Specific Heat  x  (delivered temp. -58F) = (6851 BTU for 10. 7 gal. 
heated from 58F to 135F). Since the delivered water temperature is not 
a constant during a draw, this calculation could be accomplished by 
using ``Simpson's Rule'' method or another suitable numerical method to 
integrate the delivered water temperature-volume function. The water 
draw is started and the total is calculated every 5 seconds until the 
6851 BTU of delivered hot water energy is reached. The actual volume of 
each draw will vary inversely as the delivered water temperature 
varies. The Energy Saver Cycle typically draws about 90 to100 gallons 
versus the 64.2 gallons of the current test procedure. The hot water 
energy delivered in both cases is the same.
    One approach to running this modified test on a heater with an 
``Energy Saver Cycle'' would be to set up the heater as ``normal'' with 
the thermostat set to give a mean tank temperature of 135  deg.F. Then 
run the test draw sequence repeatedly until the temperature adjustment 
logic of the control lowers the temperature to the lowest stable 
temperature. At that point, a full 24 hour efficiency test would be 
conducted to determine the efficiency of the heater using Energy Saver 
Cycle. This would require over 100 draw and reheat cycles using our 
control algorithm. This approach is impractical. The practical approach 
is to run the control in normal mode and adjust the water temperature 
to the lowest stable temperature that the ``Energy Saver Cycle'' would 
reach if the above approach were used.
    2. Definition of lowest stable temperature: This is the lowest 
water temperature set point such that when the six draw sequence in 
step 1 is performed, the control will not adjust the set point higher. 
In our control logic, the set point is increased if the cold water 
rises far enough in the tank to cause the upper element to come on. 
Thus for our control logic, the lowest temperature where the draw 
sequence in step 1 doesn't cause the upper element to come on is our 
``lowest stable temperature''. Other control logic could result in 
another ``lowest stable temperature'' point. To determine this 
temperature, the tester would need to know the temperature adjustment 
logic for the Energy Saver Cycle. He would set the test water 
temperature to the lowest stable temperature based on that logic. He 
then would observe the draw quantities and temperatures during the 
efficiency test to see that a temperature adjustment condition was not 
present. If a temperature adjustment would have been made the test is 
invalid and the

[[Page 3454]]

test would need to be repeated at a higher temperature.
    3. In the current procedure, the mean tank temperature is to be 
adjusted to 135F. There are three places in the calculation of 
efficiency where the raw data is adjusted back to 135F to correct for 
variation between actual and ideal test conditions. Since the Energy 
Saver Cycle test doesn't run at 135F mean tank temperature, this 
correction needs to be changed to reflect the new test conditions. This 
means that the hard coded 135 values in the calculations must be 
changed to a variable so the actual value can reflect the current test 
conditions. The most appropriate variable is ``Tsu'' which is the 
maximum mean tank temperature observed after the sixth draw. In the 
current procedure, Tsu must be 135F  5F and is the logical 
equivalent of the 135F of the current procedure. Thus the calculation 
of Qda is changed from
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24JA02.007

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24JA02.008

Conclusion

    New technologies can foster changes that obsolete current 
practices. American Water Heater's adaptive control has created an 
energy saving control method that was not anticipated or covered by the 
current DOE test procedure. This waiver will allow the efficiency 
benefits of this improved control method to be demonstrated while the 
test procedures are modified to keep up with technology. This change in 
control method will reduce water heater energy consumption, and thus 
its adoption by the industry should be encouraged. This can best be 
done by granting this waiver and modifying the test procedure. 
Confidential test data, which demonstrates the energy efficiency 
benefit, can be made available upon your request.

    Respectfully submitted,

Timothy J. Shellenberger,
Sr. Vice President--Product Engineering.

April 26, 2001

Assistant Secretary for Conservation and Renewable Energy United 
States Department of Energy,
1000 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20585
    To Whom It May Concern: Subject: Application for Interim Waiver.
    American Water Heater Company seeks a waiver in the application 
of the ``Uniform Test Method for Measuring the Energy Consumption of 
Water Heaters'' contained in 10 CFR Part 430 Subpart B Appendix E as 
applied to electric water heater models that have adaptive 
electronic controls. We are seeking this interim waiver to allow the 
initial marketing of our new product to claim the benefits of the 
``Energy Saving Cycle'' as described in the petition for waiver.
    We feel that the interim waiver should be granted because it is 
likely that the petition for waiver will be granted. The new 
technology addressed by the petition for waiver yields a legitimate 
energy savings and improvement in the energy efficiency level of 
this category of appliance. This improvement serves the interest and 
goal of the Department of Energy and thus should be supported. 
Allowing the waiver will encourage other manufacturers to produce 
similar products creating a general improvement in energy 
conservation. As new technology is developed, test procedures need 
to be modified to accommodate the improvement and allow the benefits 
to be shown to the consumer. These are all good arguments as to why 
the waiver should be granted and thus the interim waiver be granted.
    From an economic point of view, American Water Heater Company 
has invested significantly in the development of this product and to 
not be able to present one of its best features would cause loss of 
sales and discourage further development.

      Respectfully submitted,
Timothy Shellenberger,
Sr. Vice President--Product Engineering.

TJS/meh
    I, the undersigned, on behalf of American Water Heater Company, 
hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Petition for Waiver and 
Petition for Interim Waiver, has been sent to each of the following 
known manufacturers of domestically marketed units of the same 
product type (as listed in Section 322(a) of the Act), as follows:

Rheem Water Heater Division, Rheem Manufacturing Company, 2600 
Gunter Park Drive East, Montgomery, AL 36109-1413, Attention: Scott 
D. Martin
A.0. Smith Water Products Company, Rochelle Park, Suite 200, 600 E. 
John Carpenter Freeway, Irving, TX 75062-3990, Attention: Ronald 
Massa
Bradford White Corporation, 200 Lafayette Street, Middleville, MI 
49333-9492, Attention: Eric M. Lannes
State Industries, 500 Lindahl Parkway, Ashland City, TN 37015-1234, 
Attention: John R. Lindahl, Jr.
Lochinvar Corporation, 2005 Elm Hill Pike, Nashville, TN 37210-3807, 
Attention: Mr. William L. Vallett, Jr.

    I further hereby certify that the Assistant Secretary for 
Conservation and Renewable Energy will receive and consider timely 
written comments on the Application for Interim Waiver.

    This the 26th day of April 2001.
Timothy J. Shellenberger.

                                                               DOE Waiver Model Comparison
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                               State
  AWHC wholesale       AWHC retail     AWHC wholesale      AWHC retail         RHEEM                                        Industries
 models electronic       models        models standard   models standard    (Richmond,      A.O. Smith    Bradford White    (Reliance,       Lochinvar
                       electronic                                            Rudd, GE)                                    Maytag, Sears)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EE92-40H***D***     EE2H40HD******    E92-40H***D***    E2H40HD******     81XH40D         PEST-40         M-I-40T1ODS     PS-40-20RT      STA040KK-3
                                                                          MDH40-2                         M-II-40T1ODS    9-40-2KRT
                                                                          82R40-2                                         HE20-40T
                                                                          EXR40-2                                         SSX-40-2LRT
                                                                                                                          32746

[[Page 3455]]

 
EE122-40H***D***    EE2J40HD******    E122-40H***D***   E2J40HD******     81XH40D         PEST-40         M-I-40T10DS     PX-40-20RT      STA040KK-3
                                                                          MEH40-2                         M-II-40T10DS    9-40-2KRT
                                                                                                                          HE29-40T
                                                                                                                          SSX-40-2LRT
                                                                                                                          32746
                                                                                                                          12-40-2ART
EE122-40H***D***    EE3H40HD******    E93-40H***D***    E3H40HD******     MR40245         PEHT-40         M-III-40T10DS   32049
                                                                          MP40245                                         LT-40-2LRT
EE93-40H***D***     EE3J40HD******    E123-40H***D***   EJ40HD******      MR40245         PDHT-40         M-III-40T10DS   32049
                                                                          MP40245                                         LT-40-2LRT
EE92-40R***D***     EE2H40RD******    EE92-40R***D***   E2H40RD******     RMEMKR 40-2     PES-40          M-III-40S10DS   SSX-40-2LRS
                                                                                                                          9-40-2KRS
EE122-40R***D***    EE2J40RD******    E122-40R***D***   E2J40RD******     RMEMKR 40-2     PES-40          M-II-40S10DS    SSX-40-2LRS
                                                                          PE40M9A                                         9-40-SK4S
                                                                                                                          12-40-2ARS
EE93-40R***D***     EE3H40RD******    E93-40R***D***    E3H40RD***H***    RMEMXR 40-2TI   PEC-40          ..............  HE21240S LT
                                                                          SE40M12A                                        40-2LRS
EE123-40R***D***    EE3J40RD******    E123-40R***D***   E3J40RD******     RMEMXR 40-2TI   PEC-40          ..............  HE21240S LT
                                                                          SE40M12A                                        40-2LRS
EE92-50H***D***     EE2H50HD******    E92-50H***D***    E2H50HD******     81X52 D         PEST-52         M-II-50T10DS    PX-52-20RT      STA052KK-3
                                                                          ME52-2                                          9-52-2KRT
                                                                          RMEKR 50-2                                      HE29 50T
                                                                          PE50T9A                                         32756
                                                                          82XR52-2                                        SSX-52-2LRT
                                                                          EXR52-2
EE122-50H***D***    EE2J50HD******    E122-50H***D***   E2J50HD******     RMEXR 50-2TI    ..............  M-II-50T10DS    12-52-ART
                                                                          SE50T12A                                        32059
EE93-50H***D***     EE3H50HD******    E93-50H***DC***   E3H50HD***C***    MR50245         PEH-52          M-III-50T10DS   HE212 50T
                                                                          MP50245                                         LT-52-2LRT
                                                                                                                          32151
EE123-50H***D***    EE3J50HD******    E123-50H***DC***  E3J50HD***C***    MR50245         PEH-52          M-III-50T10DS   HE212 50T
                                                                          MP50245                                         LT-52-2LRT
                                                                                                                          32151
EE92-50R***D***     EE2H50RD******    E92-50R***D***    E2H50RD******     RMEMKR 50-2     PES-52          M-II-50S10DS    PX-52-2ORS
                                                                          PE50M9A                                         SSX-52-2LRS
                                                                          82 MXR52-2                                      9-52-2KRS
                                                                          EMXR52-2                                        HE2950S
EE122-50R***D***    EE2J50RD******    E122-50R***D***   E2J50RD******     RMEMXR 50-2TI   PEC-52          ..............  12-52-2ARS
                                                                          SE50M12A                                        HE212 50S
EE93-50R***D***     EE3H50RD******    E93-50R***DC***   E3H50RD***C***    ..............  ..............  ..............  LT-52-2LRS
EE123-50R***D***    EE3J50RD******    E123-50R***DC***  E3J50RD***C***
EEZ3-50R***D***     EE3Z50RD******    EZ3-50R***DC***   E3Z50RD***C***    MSR50245
EE92-65H***D***     EE2H65HD******    E92-65H***D***    E2H65HD******     81X66D          PEC-66          M-II-65R10DS    HE29 66T        STA066KK-3
                                                                          ME66-2                                          32766
                                                                          RMEKR65-2                                       SSX-66-2LRT
                                                                          82XR66-2
                                                                          EXR66-2
                                                                          PE65T9A
E122-65H***D***     EE2J65HD******    E122-65H***D***   E2J65HD******     ..............  ..............  ..............  12-66-2ART
EE93-65H***D***     EE3H65HD******    E93-65H***DC***   E3H65HD***C***
E123-65H***D***     EE3J65HD******    E123-65H***DC***  E3J65HD***C***    RMEXR 65-2TI    PEH-66          M-III-65R10DS   32069
EE92-80H***D***     EE2H80HD******    E92-80H***D***    E2H80HD******     RMEKR80-2       PES-80          ..............  32786           STA082KK-3
                                                                          82XR80-2                                        SSX-82-2LRT
                                                                          EXR80-2
EE122-80H***D***    EE2J80HD******    E122-80H***D***   E2J80HD******     ..............  PEC-80          ..............  12-82-2ART
EE93-80H***D***     EE3H80HD******    E93-80H***DC***   E3H80HD***C***
EE123-80H***D***    EE3J80HD******    E123-80H***DC***  E3J80HD***C***    RMEXR 80-2TI    PEH-80          M-III-80R10DS   HE212 82T
                                                                          SE80T12A                                        32089 LT
                                                                          MR85245                                         82-2LRT
                                                                          MP85245
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 02-1747 Filed 1-23-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P