[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 241 (Thursday, December 16, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 78810-78874]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-30071]
[[Page 78809]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part II
Department of Energy
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
10 CFR Part 430
Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Test Procedures for
Refrigerators, Refrigerator-Freezers, and Freezers; Final Rule and
Interim Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 75 , No. 241 / Thursday, December 16, 2010 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 78810]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 430
[Docket No. EERE-2009-BT-TP-0003]
RIN 1904-AB92
Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Test
Procedures for Refrigerators, Refrigerator-Freezers, and Freezers
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Final rule, Interim final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On May 27, 2010, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) issued a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) to amend the test procedures for
refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and freezers. That proposed
rulemaking serves as the basis for today's action. DOE is issuing a
final rule regarding Appendix A1 and Appendix B1, and an interim final
rule for Appendix A and Appendix B. The final rule amends the current
procedures, incorporating changes that will take effect 30 days after
the final rule publication date. These changes will be mandatory for
product testing to demonstrate compliance with the current energy
standards and for representations starting 180 days after publication.
These changes, which will not affect measured energy use, include test
procedures to account for refrigerator-freezers equipped with variable
anti-sweat heater controls, establishing test procedures for
refrigerator-freezers equipped with more than two compartments, making
minor adjustments to eliminate any potential ambiguity regarding how to
conduct tests, and clarifying certain reporting requirements. The
interim final rule establishes amended test procedures for
refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and freezers that would be
required for measuring energy consumption once DOE promulgates new
energy conservation standards for these products. These new standards
are currently under development in a separate rulemaking activity and
will apply to newly manufactured products starting in 2014. Today's
action also discusses the treatment of combination wine storage-freezer
products that were the subject of a recent test procedure waiver,
energy use measurement round-off, and additional topics raised by
stakeholders during the rulemaking's comment period.
While the amended test procedures will be based largely on the test
methodology used in the existing test procedures, they also include
significant revisions with respect to the measurement of compartment
temperatures and compartment volumes. These measurements will provide a
more comprehensive accounting of energy usage by these products. The
amended test procedure will modify the long-time automatic defrost test
procedure to capture all energy use associated with the defrost cycle,
establish a test procedure for products with a single compressor and
multiple evaporators with active defrost cycles, incorporate into the
energy use metric the energy use associated with icemaking for products
with automatic icemakers, and clarify requirements on temperature
control settings during testing.
DATES: The amendments to Sec. Sec. 430.2, 430.3, 430.23 and Appendix
A1 and Appendix B1 (the final rule) are effective January 18, 2011. The
additions of Appendix A and Appendix B (the interim rule) are effective
April 15, 2011.
The final rule changes will be mandatory for product testing
starting June 14, 2011. Comments on the interim final rule are due
February 14, 2011.
The incorporation by reference of ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-1979, (``HRF-1-
1979''), (Revision of ANSI B38.1-1970), American National Standard,
Household Refrigerators, Combination Refrigerator-Freezers and
Household Freezers, approved May 17, 1979, IBR approved for Appendices
A1 and B1 to Subpart B, in the final rule is approved by the Director
of the Office of the Federal Register as of January 18, 2011.
The incorporation by reference of AHAM Standard HRF-1-2008 (``HRF-
1-2008''), Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers, Energy and
Internal Volume of Refrigerating Appliances (2008), including Errata to
Energy and Internal Volume of Refrigerating Appliances, Correction
Sheet issued November 17, 2009, IBR approved for Appendices A and B to
Subpart B, in the interim rule is approved by the Director of the
Office of the Federal Register as of April 15, 2011.
ADDRESSES: The public may review copies of all materials related to
this rulemaking at the U.S. Department of Energy, Resource Room of the
Building Technologies Program, 950 L'Enfant Plaza, SW., Suite 600,
Washington, DC, (202) 586-2945, between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays. Please call Ms. Brenda Edwards
at the above telephone number for additional information regarding
visiting the Resource Room.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Subid Wagley, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building
Technologies Program, EE-2J, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington,
DC 20585-0121, 202-287-1414, e-mail: [email protected] or Mr.
Michael Kido, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General Counsel,
GC-71, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121.
Telephone: (202) 586-8145. E-mail: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final rule and interim final rule
incorporate by reference into part 430 the following industry
standards:
(1) ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-1979, (Revision of ANSI B38.1-1970), (``HRF-1-
1979''), American National Standard, Household Refrigerators,
Combination Refrigerator-Freezers and Household Freezers, approved May
17, 1979;
(2) AHAM Standard HRF-1-2008, (``HRF-1-2008''), Association of Home
Appliance Manufacturers, Energy and Internal Volume of Refrigerating
Appliances (2008), including Errata to Energy and Internal Volume of
Refrigerating Appliances, Correction Sheet issued November 17, 2009.
You can purchase copies of AHAM standards from the Association of
Home Appliance Manufacturers, 1111 19th Street, NW., Suite 402,
Washington, DC 20036, 202-872-5955, or http://www.aham.org.
You can also view copies of these standards at the U.S. Department
of Energy, Resource Room of the Building Technologies Program, 950
L'Enfant Plaza, SW., 6th Floor, Washington, DC 20024, (202) 586-2945,
between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
Table of Contents
I. Background and Authority
II. Summary of the Final Rule and Interim Final Rule
III. Discussion
A. Products Covered by the Proposed Revisions
B. Combination Wine Storage-Freezer Units
C. Establishing New Appendices A and B, and Compliance Dates for
the Amended Test Procedures
D. Amendments To Take Effect Prior to a New Energy Conservation
Standard
1. Procedures for Test Sample Preparation
2. Product Clearances to Walls During Testing
3. Alternative Compartment Temperature Sensor Locations
4. Median Temperature Settings for Electronic Control Products
and Establishment of Dual Standardized Temperatures
[[Page 78811]]
5. Test Procedures for Convertible Compartments and Special
Compartments
6. Establishing a Temperature-Averaging Procedure for Auxiliary
Compartments
7. Modified Definition for Anti-Sweat Heater
8. Applying the Anti-Sweat Heater Switch Averaging Credit to
Energy Use Calculations
9. Incorporation of Test Procedures for Products With Variable
Anti-Sweat Heating Control Waivers
10. Elimination of Part 3 of the Variable Defrost Test
11. Corrections and Other Test Procedure Language Changes
12. Including in Certification Reports Basic Information
Clarifying Energy Measurements
13. Rounding Off Energy Test Results
E. Amendments To Take Effect Simultaneously With a New Energy
Conservation Standard
1. Modification of Long-Time and Variable Defrost Test Method To
Capture Precooling and Temperature-Recovery Energy
2. Establishing Test Procedures for Multiple Defrost Cycle Types
3. Incorporating by Reference AHAM Standard HRF-1-2008 for
Measuring Energy and Internal Volume of Refrigerating Appliances
4. Establishing New Compartment Temperatures
5. Establishing New Volume Calculation Method
6. Control Settings for Refrigerators and Refrigerator-Freezers
During Testing
7. Icemakers and Icemaking
F. Other Issues
1. Electric Heaters
2. Vacuum Insulation Panel Performance
3. Metric Units
G. Compliance With Other EPCA Requirements
1. Test Burden
2. Potential Amendments To Include Standby and Off Mode Energy
Consumption
3. Addressing Changes in Measured Energy Use
IV. Procedural Requirements
A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
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, 1999
I. Review Under Executive Order 12630
J. Review Under the Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act, 2001
K. Review Under Executive Order 13211
L. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration
Act of 1974
M. Congressional Notification
V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
I. Background and Authority
Title III of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C.
6291, et seq.; ``EPCA'' or, ``the Act'') sets forth a variety of
provisions designed to improve energy efficiency. (All references to
EPCA refer to the statute as amended through the Energy Independence
and Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007), Pub. L. 110-140 (Dec. 19, 2007)).
Part B of title III (42 U.S.C. 6291-6309), which was subsequently
redesignated as Part A for editorial reasons, establishes the ``Energy
Conservation Program for Consumer Products Other Than Automobiles.''
Refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and freezers (collectively
referred to below as ``refrigeration products'') are all treated as
``covered products'' under this Part. (42 U.S.C. 6291(1)-(2) and
6292(a)(1)). Under the Act, this program consists essentially of three
parts: (1) Testing, (2) labeling, and (3) Federal energy conservation
standards. The testing requirements consist of test procedures that
manufacturers of covered products must use (1) as the basis for
certifying to DOE that their products comply with the applicable energy
conservation standards adopted under EPCA, and (2) for making
representations about the efficiency of those products. Similarly, DOE
must use these test requirements to determine whether the products
comply with any relevant standards promulgated under EPCA.
By way of background, the National Appliance Energy Conservation
Act of 1987 (NAECA), Public Law 100-12, amended EPCA by including,
among other things, performance standards for residential refrigeration
products. (42 U.S.C. 6295(b)). On November 17, 1989, DOE amended these
performance standards for products manufactured on or after January 1,
1993. 54 FR 47916. DOE subsequently published a correction to revise
these new standards for three product classes. 55 FR 42845 (October 24,
1990). DOE again updated the performance standards for refrigeration
products on April 28, 1997, for products manufactured on or after July
1, 2001. 62 FR 23102.
EISA 2007 amended EPCA to require DOE to determine by December 31,
2010, whether amending the energy conservation standards in effect for
refrigeration products would be justified. (42 U.S.C. 6295(b)(4)). To
comply with this requirement, DOE began a new rulemaking to examine the
potential adoption of new energy conservation standards for these
products. 75 FR 59470 (Sept. 27, 2010) (hereafter, ``standards NOPR'').
On September 18, 2008, DOE issued a framework document to initiate that
rulemaking. 73 FR 54089. On September 29, 2008, DOE held a public
workshop to discuss the framework document and issues related to the
rulemaking. The framework document identified several test procedure
issues, including: (1) Compartment temperature changes; (2) modified
volume calculation methods; (3) products that deactivate energy-using
features during energy testing; (4) variable anti-sweat heaters; (5)
references to the updated AHAM Standard HRF-1-2008, (``HRF-1-2008''),
Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers, Energy and Internal Volume
of Refrigerating Appliances (2008), including Errata to Energy and
Internal Volume of Refrigerating Appliances, Correction Sheet issued
November 17, 2009; (6) convertible compartments; and (7) harmonization
with international test procedures. (``Energy Conservation Standards
Rulemaking Framework Document for Residential Refrigerators,
Refrigerator-Freezers, and Freezers,'' RIN 1904-AB79, Docket No. EERE-
2008-BT-STD-0012) DOE initiated this test procedure rulemaking in part
to address these issues, and published a notice of proposed rulemaking
on May 27, 2010, hereafter referred to as ``the NOPR.'' 75 FR 29824.
In response to issue (3) mentioned above as applied to automatic
icemakers, DOE separately published a guidance document addressing
various aspects related to the icemaker, including the manner in which
to measure icemaking energy usage as well as set-up issues during
testing. (``Additional Guidance Regarding Application of Current
Procedures for Testing Energy Consumption of Refrigerator-Freezers with
Automatic Ice Makers,'' (December 18, 2009) published at 75 FR 2122
(January 14, 2010)).
General Test Procedure Rulemaking Process
Under 42 U.S.C. 6293, EPCA sets forth the criteria and procedures
DOE must follow when prescribing or amending test procedures for
covered products. EPCA provides in relevant part that ``[a]ny test
procedures prescribed or amended under this section shall be reasonably
designed to produce test results which measure energy efficiency,
energy use * * * or estimated annual operating cost of a covered
product during a representative average use cycle or period of use, as
determined by the Secretary [of Energy], and shall not be unduly
burdensome to conduct.'' (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)).
[[Page 78812]]
In addition, if DOE determines that a test procedure amendment is
warranted, it must publish proposed test procedures and offer the
public an opportunity to present oral and written comments. (42 U.S.C.
6293(b)(2)). When considering amending a test procedure, DOE must
determine ``to what extent, if any, the proposed test procedure would
alter the * * * measured energy use * * * of any covered product as
determined under the existing test procedure.'' (42 U.S.C. 6293(e)(1)).
If DOE determines that the amended test procedure would alter the
measured energy use of a covered product, DOE must also amend the
applicable energy conservation standard accordingly. (42 U.S.C.
6293(e)(2)).
With respect to today's rulemaking, DOE has determined that five of
the amendments it is adopting (compartment temperature changes
(described in section III.E.4), volume calculation method changes
(described in section III.E.5), amendments to capture precooling and
partial recovery energy use (described in section III.E.1), amendments
in the test procedures for special compartments using heat addition to
control temperature (described in section III.D.5), and new test
procedures that address products with a single compressor with multiple
evaporators with active defrost cycles (described in section III.E.2))
will change the measured energy use of refrigeration products when
compared to the current test procedure. In such situations, EPCA
requires a standards rulemaking to address such changes in measured
energy efficiency. (42 U.S.C. 6293(e)(2)). DOE is considering the
impacts of these changes as part of its standards rulemaking for
refrigeration products, noted above.
Today's rule also fulfills DOE's obligation to periodically review
its test procedures under 42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(1)(A). DOE anticipates that
its next evaluation of this test procedure will occur in a manner
consistent with the timeline set out in this provision.
Refrigerators and Refrigerator-Freezers
DOE's test procedures for refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers
are found at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix A1. DOE initially
established its test procedures for refrigerators and refrigerator-
freezers in a final rule published in the Federal Register on September
14, 1977. 42 FR 46140. Industry representatives viewed these test
procedures as too complex and eventually developed alternative test
procedures in conjunction with AHAM that were incorporated into the
1979 version of HRF-1, ``Household Refrigerators, Combination
Refrigerator-Freezers, and Household Freezers'' (HRF-1-1979). Using
this industry-created test procedure, DOE revised its test procedures
on August 10, 1982. 47 FR 34517. On August 31, 1989, DOE published a
final rule establishing test procedures for variable defrost control (a
system that varies the time intervals between defrosts based on the
defrost need), dual-compressor refrigerator-freezers, and freezers
equipped with ``quick-freeze'' (a manually-initiated feature that
bypasses the thermostat and runs the compressor continuously until
terminated). 54 FR 36238. DOE most recently amended these test
procedures in a final rule published March 7, 2003, which modified the
test period used for products equipped with long-time automatic defrost
or variable defrost. 68 FR 10957. The term ``long-time automatic
defrost'' identifies the use of an automatic defrost control in which
successive defrosts are separated by more than 14 hours of compressor
run time. The test procedures include provisions for determining the
annual energy use in kilowatt-hours (kWh) and the annual operating cost
for electricity for refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers.
Also, consistent with the regulations set out in 10 CFR part 430,
the 1989 and 2003 final rules terminated all the previous refrigerator
and refrigerator-freezer test procedure waivers that DOE had previously
granted to manufacturers before the issuance of the 2003 rule. Since
the issuance of that rule, DOE has granted 11 waivers, which fall into
two broad groupings. First, on April 24, 2007, DOE granted a waiver to
Liebherr Hausger[auml]te (Liebherr waiver), permitting testing of a
combination wine storage-freezer line of appliances using a
standardized temperature of 55 [deg]F for the wine storage compartment,
as opposed to the 45 [deg]F temperature prescribed for fresh food
compartments of refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers. 72 FR 20333,
20334.
Second, DOE has granted 10 waivers allowing manufacturers to use a
modified procedure to test refrigeration products that use ambient
condition sensors that adjust anti-sweat heater power consumption.
These variable anti-sweat heaters prevent condensation on the external
surfaces of refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers. The new control
addressed by the waivers uses sensors that detect ambient conditions to
energize the heaters only when needed. The procedure described by these
waivers provides a method for manufacturers to determine the energy
consumed by a refrigerator using this type of variable control system.
The first of these waivers was granted to the General Electric Company
(GE) on February 27, 2008. 73 FR 10425. The full set of such waivers is
summarized in Table I.1 below.
Table I.1--Variable Anti-Sweat Heater Control Waivers
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Register
Manufacturer Waiver status Case No. Date citation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GE.............................. Granted............ RF-007 2/27/2008 73 FR 10425
Whirlpool....................... Granted............ RF-008 5/5/2009 74 FR 20695
Electrolux...................... Granted............ RF-009 12/15/2009 74 FR 66338
Electrolux...................... Granted............ RF-010 3/11/2010 75 FR 11530
Samsung......................... Granted............ RF-011 3/18/2010 75 FR 13120
Electrolux...................... Granted............ RF-012 4/29/2010 75 FR 22584
Haier........................... Granted............ RF-013 6/7/2010 75 FR 32175
Samsung......................... Granted............ RF-014 8/3/2010 75 FR 45623
GE.............................. Granted............ RF-015 8/19/2010 75 FR 51262
LG.............................. Granted............ RF-016 8/19/2010 75 FR 51264
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After granting a waiver, DOE regulations generally direct the
agency to initiate a rulemaking that would amend the regulations to
eliminate the continued need for the waiver. 10 CFR 430.27(m). This
rulemaking addresses this requirement. Once today's final rule becomes
effective, any waivers it addresses will terminate.
Freezers
DOE's test procedures for freezers are found at 10 CFR part 430,
subpart B, appendix B1. DOE established its test
[[Page 78813]]
procedures for freezers in a final rule published in the Federal
Register on September 14, 1977. 42 FR 46140. As with DOE's test
procedures for refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers, industry
representatives viewed the freezer test procedures as too complex and
worked with AHAM to develop alternative test procedures, which were
incorporated into the 1979 version of HRF-1. DOE revised its test
procedures for freezers based on this AHAM standard on August 10, 1982.
47 FR 34517. The August 31, 1989, final rule mentioned above
established test procedures for freezers with variable defrost control
and freezers with the quick-freeze feature. 54 FR 36238. The test
procedures were amended on September 20, 1989, to correct the effective
date published in the August 31, 1989 rule. 54 FR 38788. The current
test procedures include provisions for determining the annual energy
use in kWh and annual electrical operating costs for freezers.
DOE has not issued any waivers from the freezer test procedures
since the promulgation of the 1989 final rule.
Current Refrigeration Product Test Procedure Rulemaking
The NOPR for this rulemaking was published on May 27, 2010. 75 FR
29824. The public meeting was held June 22, 2010. At the meeting, DOE
discussed the NOPR, detailed the proposed revisions, and solicited oral
comments from meeting participants. Numerous stakeholders attended the
meeting and/or provided written comments. These parties are identified
in Table I.2 below.
Table I.2--Stakeholders That Submitted Oral or Written Comments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oral Written
Name Acronym Type* comments comments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AcuTemp/ThermoCor.......................... ThermoCor.................... CS [bcheck]
American Council for an Energy Efficient ACEEE........................ EA [bcheck] [bcheck]
Economy.
Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers AHAM......................... IR [bcheck] [bcheck]
California Investor-Owned Utilities........ IOUs......................... U [bcheck]
Earthjustice............................... Earthjustice................. EA [bcheck] [bcheck]
Electrolux Major Appliances North America.. Electrolux................... M [bcheck] [bcheck]
Energy Solutions for California Investor- IOUs......................... U [bcheck]
Owned Utilities.
Fisher & Paykel Appliances Ltd............. Fisher & Paykel.............. M [bcheck]
General Electric Consumer and Industrial... GE........................... M [bcheck] [bcheck]
NanoPore Insulation, LLC................... NanoPore..................... CS [bcheck]
National Institute of Standards and NIST......................... TE [bcheck]
Technology.
Natural Resources Defense Council.......... NRDC......................... EA [bcheck] [bcheck]
People's Republic of China WTO/TBT National PRC.......................... FG [bcheck]
Notification & Enquiry Center.
Sanyo E&E Corporation...................... Sanyo........................ M [bcheck]
Sub Zero-Wolf, Inc......................... Sub Zero..................... M [bcheck] [bcheck]
Whirlpool Corporation...................... Whirlpool.................... M [bcheck] [bcheck]
Penfield Appliances........................ Penfield..................... I ............ [bcheck]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* IR: Industry Representative; M: Manufacturer; EA: Efficiency/Environmental Advocate; CS: Component Supplier:
TE: Technical Expert: I: Individual; U: Utility; FG: Foreign Government Agency.
II. Summary of the Final Rule and Interim Final Rule
The final rule amends the current DOE test procedures for
refrigeration products. These changes will not affect measured energy
use of these products. Instead they will primarily clarify the manner
in which to test for compliance with the current energy conservation
standards. As indicated in greater detail below, these amendments apply
to the current procedures in Appendices A1 and B1, to the definitions
set forth in 10 CFR 430.2, to the current procedures in 10 CFR 430.23.
These minor amendments will eliminate any potential ambiguity contained
in these sections of the test procedures and clarify the regulatory
text to ensure that regulated entities fully understand the long-
standing views and interpretations that the Department holds with
respect to the application and implementation of the test procedures.
The current procedures are also being amended to help account for,
among other things, the various waivers granted by DOE. The final rule
also makes a minor change to the text of 10 CFR 430.32(a) in order to
ensure consistency with the test procedure amendments.
The interim final rule establishes comprehensive changes to the
manner in which the procedures are conducted by creating new Appendices
A and B. These appendices include the modifications being adopted today
as part of the modified Appendices A1 and B1 prescribed in this
regulation. The procedures contained in the new Appendices A and B
apply only to those products that would be covered by any new standard
that DOE promulgates and are organized separately from the current test
procedures found in Appendices A1 and B1. DOE will retain current
Appendices A1 and B1 for this interim final rulemaking to cover
products manufactured before any new standards DOE is currently
considering would need to be met. However, once manufacturers are
required to comply with any new standards, those appendices will be
replaced by Appendices A and B, respectively.
The final rule amendments discussed in this notice will take effect
30 days after publication of this final rule. However, manufacturers do
not need to use the new versions of Appendices A1 and B1 for testing to
verify compliance with the energy standards until 180 days from the
final rule's publication. The interim final rule will take effect 120
days after date of publication of this final rule. Manufacturers will
not need to use the new Appendices A and B until the compliance date
for the 2014 standards that DOE is considering. The date of compliance
with those new standards has been set by Congress through EISA 2007
(i.e. January 1, 2014). See EISA 2007, sec. 311(a)(3) (42 U.S.C.
6295(b)(4)). In order to ensure that new Appendices A and B adequately
address the new energy standards currently under development, DOE is
issuing these appendices on an interim final basis and offering an
additional 60 day comment period.
The revised Appendices A1 and B1 achieve three primary goals.
First, they address certain issues raised throughout
[[Page 78814]]
the standards rulemaking. Second, they incorporate test procedures for
refrigerator-freezers with variable anti-sweat heater controls that
were the subject of test procedure waivers and interim waivers granted
to GE and other manufacturers. Finally, the amendments clarify the test
procedures for addressing special compartments and those refrigeration
products that are equipped with more than one fresh food compartment or
more than one freezer compartment.
The revisions also address areas of potential inconsistency in the
current procedure, and eliminate an optional test that DOE understands
is not used by the industry. None of these changes is expected to
result in any change in measured energy efficiency or energy use of
refrigeration products.
The additional test procedure revisions in the new Appendices A and
B would (1) include new compartment temperatures and volume adjustment
factors,\1\ (2) include new methods for measuring compartment volumes,
(3) modify the long-time automatic defrost test procedure to ensure
that the test procedure measures all energy use associated with the
defrost function, and (4) establish test procedures for products with a
single compressor and multiple evaporators with active defrost cycles.
The first two of these amendments will improve harmonization with
relevant international standards and assure test repeatability. The
compartment temperature changes will significantly impact the energy
use measured by the test for refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers.
The temperature changes will also affect the calculated adjusted
volume, which is equal to the fresh food compartment volume plus a
temperature-dependent adjustment factor multiplied by the freezer
compartment volume. The new volume calculation method will affect the
calculation for compartment volumes and adjusted volume for all
refrigeration products. Since the standards for refrigeration products
are expressed as equations that specify maximum energy use as a
function of adjusted volume, the modifications impact the allowable
energy use for all of these products. The changes also affect the
energy factor, which is equal to adjusted volume divided by daily
energy consumption.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Volume adjustment factors are used in calculation of the
adjusted volume, which is the basis for the energy conservation
standard equations for refrigeration products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The final rule also discusses the combination wine storage-freezer
products that were the subject of the Liebherr waiver. DOE expects to
propose modified product definitions to include coverage of wine
storage products in a separate future rulemaking. This final rule
treats wine coolers and other hybrid products that combine wine storage
compartments with freezer or fresh food compartments in a consistent
manner, by modifying the definition of electric refrigerator-freezer to
require compartment temperatures in the fresh food compartment that
effectively exclude combination wine storage-freezer products from
coverage.
Lastly, the interim final rule also addresses the measurement of
icemaking energy use. This measurement adds a fixed value to account
for the energy used to produce ice in refrigeration products that are
equipped with automatic icemakers. However, DOE intends to support
development in 2011 of a test procedure for measurement of icemaker
energy use and to initiate in 2012 a test procedure rulemaking to
incorporate the new measurement into the refrigeration product test
procedure. The icemaker energy use addition, which is included only in
the new Appendices A and B, will improve the consistency of the
measurement with the representative use cycle for such products.
III. Discussion
Table III.1 below summarizes the subsections of this section and
indicates where the amendments would appear in the CFR. Seven of the
subsections address changes in the CFR other than in appendices A1, B1,
A, or B, and six of the subsections have no test procedure changes
associated with them. Section E addresses the amendments that are part
of the interim final rule. In addition, two of the interim final rule
amendments are addressed in parts of section III.D (in sections III.D.2
and III.D.5). The remaining sections address the amendments that are
part of the final rule.
Table III.1--Section III Subsections
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendices
Section Title Affected CFR -----------------------------------
sections A1 B1 A B
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A................................ Products Covered by 430.2.............. NA
the Proposed
Revisions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B................................ Combination Wine 430.2.............. NA
Storage-Freezer
Units.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C................................ Establishing New Subpt. B........... [bcheck [bcheck [bcheck [bcheck
Appendices A and B, ] ] ] ]
and Compliance
Dates for the
Amended Test
Procedures.
D.1.............................. Procedures for Test 430.23, Subpt. B... [bcheck [bcheck [bcheck [bcheck
Sample Preparation. ] ] ] ]
D.2.............................. Product Clearance Subpt. B........... [bcheck [bcheck [bcheck [bcheck
Distances to Walls ] ] ] ]
During Testing.
D.3.............................. Alternative New pt. 429*, [bcheck [bcheck [bcheck [bcheck
Compartment Subpt. B. ] ] ] ]
Temperature Sensor
Locations.
D.4.............................. Median Temperature Subpt. B........... [bcheck [bcheck [bcheck [bcheck
Settings for ] ] ] ]
Electronic Control
Products and
Establishment of
Dual Standardized
Temperatures.
D.5.............................. Test Procedures for Subpt. B........... [bcheck [bcheck [bcheck [bcheck
Convertible ] ] ] ]
Compartments and
Special
Compartments.
D.6.............................. Establishing a Subpt. B........... [bcheck [bcheck [bcheck [bcheck
Temperature- ] ] ] ]
Averaging Procedure
for Auxiliary
Compartments.
[[Page 78815]]
D.7.............................. Modified Definition Subpt. B........... [bcheck [bcheck [bcheck [bcheck
for Anti-Sweat ] ] ] ]
Heater.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D.8.............................. Applying the Anti- 430.23............. NA
Sweat Heater Switch
Averaging Credit to
Energy Use
Calculations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D.9.............................. Incorporation of Subpt. B........... [bcheck [bcheck [bcheck [bcheck
Test Procedures for ] ] ] ]
Products with
Variable Anti-Sweat
Heating Control
Waivers.
D.10............................. Elimination of Part Subpt. B........... [bcheck [bcheck [bcheck [bcheck
3 of the Variable ] ] ] ]
Defrost Test.
D.11............................. Simplification of Subpt. B........... [bcheck [bcheck [bcheck [bcheck
Energy Use Equation ] ] ] ]
for Products with
Variable Defrost
Control.
Energy Testing and Subpt. B........... [bcheck [bcheck
Energy Use Equation ] ]
for Products with
Dual Automatic
Defrost.
Freezer Variable Subpt. B........... [bcheck [bcheck
Defrost. ] ]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D.12............................. Including in New pt. 429*....... NA
Certification
Reports Basic
Information
Clarifying Energy
Measurements.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D.13............................. Rounding Off Energy 430.23, 430.32(a).. NA
Test Results.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E.1.............................. Modification of Long- Subpt. B........... [bcheck [bcheck
Time and Variable ] ]
Defrost Test Method
to Capture
Precooling and
Temperature-
Recovery Energy.
E.2.............................. Establishing Test Subpt. B........... [bcheck
Procedures for ]
Multiple Defrost
Cycle Types.
E.3.............................. Incorporating by Subpt. B........... [bcheck [bcheck
Reference AHAM ] ]
Standard HRF-1-2008
for Measuring
Energy and Internal
Volume of
Refrigerating
Appliances.
E.4.............................. Establishing New Subpt. B........... [bcheck [bcheck
Compartment ] ]
Temperatures.
E.5.............................. Establishing New Subpt. B........... [bcheck [bcheck
Volume Calculation ] ]
Method.
E.6.............................. Control Settings for Subpt. B........... [bcheck [bcheck
Refrigerators and ] ]
Refrigerator-
Freezers During
Testing.
E.7.............................. Icemakers and Subpt. B........... [bcheck [bcheck
Icemaking. ] ]
F.1.............................. Electric Heaters.... No changes to the regulatory language are associated
with these sections of the Final Rule
F.2.............................. Vacuum Insulation
Panel Performance.
F.3.............................. Metric Units
G.1.............................. Test Burden
G.2.............................. Potential Amendments
to Include Standby
and Off Mode Energy
Consumption.
G.3.............................. Addressing Changes
in Measured Energy
Use.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* See the Certification, Compliance, and Enforcement (CCE) NOPR, 75 FR 56796 (September 16, 2010). The changes
discussed in section III.D.12 are discussed here but not included in this final rule--they will instead be
implemented in the CCE rulemaking.
A. Products Covered by the Proposed Revisions
The NOPR solicited comments regarding certain definitions related
to refrigeration products. In particular, DOE sought comment regarding
a proposed modification to the electric refrigerator-freezer definition
that would clarify that the fresh food compartments of these products
are designed for the refrigerated storage of food at temperatures above
32 [deg]F and below 39 [deg]F. DOE proposed this change to address the
coverage of combination wine storage-freezer products (i.e. to exclude
them from coverage as electric refrigerator-freezers), and to improve
consistency with the current definition for electric refrigerators. 75
FR 29828-29829.
Additionally, while DOE did not propose specific changes to the
electric refrigerator definition, the agency solicited comments on
possible improvements to enhance the definition's clarity. Most of
these comments addressed concerns about the 32 [deg]F to 39 [deg]F
temperature range, already part of the electric refrigerator
definition, that DOE proposed in the NOPR to apply also to the electric
refrigerator-freezer definition. These comments, applicable to both
definitions, are discussed in section III.B below.
AHAM also recommended that any changes to the definition for
``electric refrigerator'' and/or ``electric refrigerator-freezer''
should also be made in the related Federal Trade Commission (FTC)
Energy Guide labeling rules in order to ensure consistency across all
government agencies. (AHAM, No. 16.1 at p. 4) DOE notes that to achieve
[[Page 78816]]
consistency, the FTC would need to update the definitions of ``electric
refrigerator'' and ``electric refrigerator-freezer'' in 16 CFR part
305.2. DOE will work with FTC to ensure that consistency is maintained
between the two sets of regulations.
With respect to freezers, DOE notes that its regulations currently
define a freezer as ``a cabinet designed as a unit for the freezing and
storage of food at temperatures of 0 [deg]F or below, and having a
source of refrigeration requiring single phase, alternating current
electric energy input only.'' 10 CFR 430.2. DOE did not propose
altering this definition.
Earthjustice commented that all products that can store frozen food
should be covered as freezers, even if they cannot maintain temperature
as low as 0 [deg]F. The comment pointed to walk-in freezers as an
example, which are statutorily defined as commercial equipment that
maintain a temperature at or below 32 [deg]F. (Earthjustice, No. 22.1
at p. 2) See EISA 2007, sec. 312(a)(3) (codified at 42 U.S.C. 6311(20))
and 10 CFR 431.302. DOE could define freezers in a similar manner, and
may consider doing so in a future rulemaking. However, several reasons
militate against such an approach at this time.
Although Earthjustice raised the possibility that refrigeration
products with compartment temperatures between 0 [deg]F and 32 [deg]F
are being sold as freezers, they provided no information regarding how
prevalent such sales might be, which would provide justification for
immediate action. DOE is reluctant to apply the current energy
standards for freezers to products that provide substandard performance
because they do not achieve the temperatures specified for freezers.
Instead, DOE would consider establishing standards with lower maximum
energy levels for new freezer product classes that provide warmer
freezing temperatures. However, such an approach would require
developing appropriate product class definitions, as well as producing
an analysis supporting the selection of appropriate energy standards.
In order to properly examine Earthjustice's proposed approach, DOE
believes that a separate rulemaking would be the appropriate means of
addressing this issue and would provide all interested parties with a
sufficient opportunity for comment. Such a process is not in the scope
of the current test procedure rulemaking or within the applicable
timeframe, but DOE may consider Earthjustice's approach when it re-
examines this procedure. DOE also notes that creating such product
classes and accompanying standards would create potential conflicts
with the Joint Comment's proposed levels that DOE is currently
considering as part of its separate standards rulemaking. (See Joint
Comment, No. 20.1 at p. 2).
B. Combination Wine Storage-Freezer Units
In its November 19, 2001, final rule, DOE amended its definition of
electric refrigerators to exclude wine storage products. 66 FR 57845.
DOE modified the definition to exclude products that do not maintain
internal temperatures below 39 [deg]F to clarify that wine coolers are
not covered by DOE's standards for refrigerators. The final rule
explained that these products ``are configured with special storage
racks for wine bottles and in general do not attain as low a storage
temperature as a standard refrigerator. These characteristics make them
unsuitable for general long-term storage of perishable foods.'' Id. at
57846. The final rule also noted the small number of sales of these
products and the likely absence of any significant impact from this
approach. Id.
When this change occurred, wine storage-freezer appliances were
unavailable as a consumer product. Subsequently, when Liebherr
Hausger[auml]te (Liebherr) introduced a line of wine storage-freezer
appliances in 2005, containing both freezer and wine storage
compartments, they could not be accurately categorized by any of the
current DOE product classes. Because of this gap, Liebherr petitioned
the agency for a test procedure waiver to address this product, which
DOE granted on April 24, 2007 (Liebherr waiver). 72 FR 20333. The
waiver specified that testing shall be conducted following the test
procedure for refrigerator-freezers, except that the standard
temperature for the wine-storage compartment shall be 55 [deg]F. Id. at
20334.
DOE believes that the arguments made in favor of excluding wine
storage products from the definition of electric refrigerators also
apply to combination appliances such as these wine storage-freezer
appliances. Consequently, in the NOPR, DOE proposed modifying the
definition of refrigerator-freezer to exclude products which combine a
freezer and a wine storage compartment. 75 FR 29829. The proposed
definition invoked the same clause used in the refrigerator definition,
``designed for the refrigerated storage of food at temperatures above
32 [deg]F and below 39 [deg]F'', which would be applied to any fresh
food compartments of refrigerator-freezers. Id.
AHAM, NRDC, Sub-Zero and Whirlpool all agreed with the principle of
excluding such products from the refrigerator-freezer definition (AHAM,
No. 16.1 at p. 10; NRDC No. 21.1 at p. 5; Sub-Zero, Public Meeting
Transcript, No. 10 at p. 32; Whirlpool No. 12.1 at p. 6). However,
ACEEE, AHAM, Sub-Zero, and Whirlpool all opposed the wording of the
temperature range clause, commenting that this change appears to
exclude all products that have the capability of temperatures warmer
than 39 [deg]F in the fresh food compartment. In their view, this
exclusion would be inappropriate. (ACEEE, No. 19.1 at p.1; AHAM, No.
16.1 at p. 4; AHAM, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 10 at p. 24;
Whirlpool, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 10 at p. 27-28; Sub-Zero,
Public Meeting Transcript, No. 10 at p. 32; Whirlpool, No. 12.1 at p.
1) Whirlpool suggested that the definition impose a 39 [deg]F maximum
when the controls are set in the coldest position. (Whirlpool, No. 10
at pp. 27-28; Whirlpool, No. 12.1 at p. 1)
As mentioned above, the clause, ``designed for the refrigerated
storage of food at temperatures above 32 [deg]F and below 39 [deg]F''
was added to the electric refrigerator definition in 2001 to clarify
that wine storage products are not refrigerators, since wine storage
products are designed for warmer temperatures, and generally cannot
achieve temperatures below 39 [deg]F with temperature controls set in
their coldest positions. 66 FR 57845.
DOE does not intend to exclude from coverage those refrigeration
products that are capable of controlling fresh food compartments at
temperatures cooler than 39 [deg]F at cold settings and warmer than 39
[deg]F at warm settings, including those currently available on the
market characterized as wine storage products. In response to these
comments and to prevent the inadvertent exclusion of products, DOE is
adjusting the definitions of both ``electric refrigerator'' and
``electric refrigerator-freezer'' to clarify that temperature control
above 39 [deg]F is not a basis for exclusion from the definition. DOE
will replace the temperature-range clause highlighted by stakeholders
with ``designed to be capable of achieving storage temperatures above
32 [deg]F and below 39 [deg]F''. The words ``designed to be capable''
are intended to clarify that (1) the product can achieve temperatures
below 39 [deg]F, but that temperatures above 39 [deg]F do not
disqualify it from the definition, and (2) that a poorly constructed
product that happens to be incapable of actually achieving the 39
[deg]F is not excluded from coverage. Also, the specification of
``storage temperatures'' clarifies that the storage areas of the
[[Page 78817]]
product are subject to the 39 [deg]F temperature requirement, rather
than, for example, the evaporator, which may be somewhat colder during
compressor operation. The storage temperature is distinct from
``compartment temperature'', which has a specific meaning as described
in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix A1, section 5.1.2. In
particular, storage temperature is not subject to the requirements for
averaging of temperature sensors within the compartment. DOE further
notes that the definition does not specify the ambient conditions for
which the storage temperature range applies. Hence, a product that
achieves the storage temperature range in a 70 [deg]F ambient but not
during a 90 [deg]F energy test is not excluded from coverage.
Stakeholders also raised a related issue. AHAM asked if DOE had a
proposal addressing combination wine storage-refrigerators, which Sanyo
confirmed as having already been commercialized. (AHAM, Public Meeting
Transcript, No. 10 at pp. 30-31; Sanyo, Public Meeting Transcript, No.
10 at pp. 33-34) DOE had been unaware of such products and had not
developed a proposal to address them. In light of potential coverage
concerns, DOE is treating these combination products as covered
products. DOE is concerned that removing such combination products from
coverage could create a potentially significant gap within its
regulatory program that could, in turn, undermine the Department's
efforts to improve the energy efficiency of consumer appliances.
Manufacturers of products that cannot meet the required testing
conditions prescribed by today's rule would, as currently required,
need to avail themselves of the waiver regulations in 10 CFR 430.27.
DOE intends, however, to address such wine storage-refrigeration
combination products further in a separate rulemaking.
In light of these comments and concerns, DOE has modified its
``electric refrigerator'' definition to read as follows:
Electric refrigerator means a cabinet designed for the refrigerated
storage of food, designed to be capable of achieving storage
temperatures above 32 [deg]F (0 [deg]C) and below 39 [deg]F (3.9
[deg]C), and having a source of refrigeration requiring single phase,
alternating current electric energy input only. An electric
refrigerator may include a compartment for the freezing and storage of
food at temperatures below 32[deg]F (0 [deg]C), but does not provide a
separate low temperature compartment designed for the freezing and
storage of food at temperatures below 8 [deg]F (-13.3 [deg]C).
DOE is also modifying its definition for ``electric refrigerator-
freezer'' in a similar fashion to read as follows:
Electric refrigerator-freezer means a cabinet which consists of two
or more compartments with at least one of the compartments designed for
the refrigerated storage of food and designed to be capable of
achieving storage temperatures above 32 [deg]F (0 [deg]C) and below 39
[deg]F (3.9 [deg]C), and with at least one of the compartments designed
for the freezing and storage of food at temperatures below 8 [deg]F (-
13.3 [deg]C) which may be adjusted by the user to a temperature of 0
[deg]F (-17.8 [deg]C) or below. The source of refrigeration requires
single phase, alternating current electric energy input only.
These definitions exclude products with wine storage or other
compartments that cannot attain temperatures suitable for fresh food
storage.
The Liebherr waiver will terminate on the effective date of this
final rule, as indicated in the waiver. 72 FR 20333 (April 24, 2007).
To the extent that the products covered by this waiver do not meet the
definition of electric refrigerator and electric refrigerator-freezer,
DOE plans to address these wine storage and related refrigeration
products in a separate rulemaking.
Finally, the Department clarifies that this final rule excludes
most wine storage products because they are designed to be incapable of
attaining temperatures suitable for fresh food storage (i.e., those
temperatures below 39 [deg]F) and not because they store beverages
rather than solid food. Although EPCA does not define the term
``food,'' a number of other federal statutes define ``food'' to include
beverages. See 21 U.S.C. 321(f) (defining ``food'' in the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act to include ``articles used for food or drink for
man or other animals''; 15 U.S.C. 55(b) (using same definition in the
false advertising context); 42 U.S.C. 1791(b)(4) (defining ``food'' in
the Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act as ``any raw, cooked,
processed, or prepared edible substance, ice, beverage, or ingredient
used or intended for use in whole or in part for human consumption.'')
DOE believes that including beverages--such as milk, juice, wine and
beer--within the meaning of the term ``food'' is likewise appropriate
in the context of defining refrigeration products for purposes of the
Federal energy conservation standards. Thus, those beverage storage
products, including wine chillers, beer refrigerators, or other
beverage refrigeration products, that are designed to be capable
operating with storage temperatures below 39 [deg]F are, and would
continue to be treated as, refrigerators and would continue to remain
subject to the current test procedures and energy conservation
standards of 10 CFR part 430.
C. Establishing New Appendices A and B, and Compliance Dates for the
Amended Test Procedures
DOE proposed to establish new Appendices A and B. In addition, DOE
has now separated the amendments into two sets. The first set consists
of amendments that must be in effect before the compliance date for the
2014 residential refrigeration products energy conservation standards.
The second set consists of amendments that must go into effect starting
on the compliance date for the 2014 standards. The majority of the
first set of amendments will be implemented as part of the currently
existing Appendices A1 and B1. (The remaining amendments in the first
set include changes to other related sections of the CFR, such as 10
CFR 430.2 and 430.23.) The second set of amendments appears only in new
Appendices A and B and constitutes the interim final rule of this
notice. These new appendices will include all of the amendments
implemented in Appendices A1 and B1.
As indicated earlier, while the effective date for the final rule
amendments is 30 days after the publication of this final rule in the
Federal Register, only the amendments to Appendices A1 and B1 and to 10
CFR 430.2 and 430.23 have an immediate impact on manufacturers. For
purposes of representations, under 42 U.S.C. 6293(c)(2), effective 180
days after DOE amends a test procedure, manufacturers cannot make
representations regarding energy use and efficiency unless the product
was tested in accordance with the amended procedure. A manufacturer,
distributor, retailer or private labeler may petition DOE to obtain an
extension of time for making these representations. (42 U.S.C.
6293(c)(3)) For the purposes of this final rule, DOE interprets the
date of amendment to be coincident with the date of publication of the
final rule.
Manufacturers will need to use new Appendices A and B once they are
required to comply with the amended energy conservation standards.
Likewise, Appendices A and B will be mandatory for representations
regarding energy use or operating cost of these products once
manufacturers must
[[Page 78818]]
comply with the new energy conservation standards.
Under EPCA, DOE must determine by December 31, 2010, whether to
amend energy conservation standards that would apply to refrigeration
products manufactured in 2014. DOE has proposed amending its energy
conservation standards for these products, as required by 42 U.S.C.
6293(e)(2). 75 FR 59470. The amended test procedures of Appendices A
and B will be used in analyzing and finalizing the proposed standards.
DOE received no comments opposing the approach of using the
proposed new Appendices A and B to organize the staging of
implementation of test procedure amendments. Therefore, the
establishment of the new appendices remains as proposed in the NOPR.
However, the effective date for the new appendices has been delayed 90
days to allow time for the comment period associated with the interim
final rule.
D. Amendments To Take Effect Prior to a New Energy Conservation
Standard
This section primarily addresses amendments that manufacturers must
use prior to the compliance date for the new energy conservation
standards. As described above, these amendments become effective in 30
days and will be required for certifying compliance with the current
energy conservation standards and for representation purposes for
products sold starting in 180 days. As described for each of the
subsections, these amendments are made in 10 CFR 430.23. 10 CFR
430.32(a), and to the appropriate sections of Appendices A1 and B1.
These amendments also appear in the new Appendices A and B.
Two of the amendments discussed in this section are made only in
Appendices A and B. These amendments are included in sections III.D.2
and III.D.5 because they fall under the general topics of these
subsections, which also address amendments made in Appendices A1 and
B1.
DOE invited comment on whether any of the proposed amendments would
affect measured energy use and asked commenters to quantify any
potential impacts. AHAM identified four proposed amendments that would
have a significant impact on measured energy use: (1) The test method
for products with variable anti-sweat heaters; (2) the test procedures
for convertible and special compartments; (3) the modified test
procedure for products with long-time or variable defrost to capture
precooling energy use; and (4) the proposed changes addressing multiple
defrost cycle types. (AHAM, No. 16.1 at p. 3). The PRC indicated that
measured energy use would be increased by: (1) The proposed test
procedures addressing products with variable anti-sweat heaters and (2)
modification of test procedures for products with long-time or variable
defrost to capture precooling energy use. (PRC, No. 15.1 at p. 4)
Whirlpool commented that a number of the amendments proposed to take
effect prior to the new energy conservation standards would have a
significant impact on measured energy use, manufacturer cost,
facilities, testing capability, lead time, or combination thereof and
requested that they not take effect prior to January 1, 2014: (1)
Revision of the refrigerator definition; (2) test procedures for
convertible and special compartments; (3) test procedures for products
with variable anti-sweat heating; (4) modification of the test
procedure for long-time or variable defrost to capture precooling
energy; (5) procedures for products with multiple defrost cycle types;
(6) clarification of instructions regarding the presence of ice in the
ice bin during testing; and (7) disallowing energy use ratings for
products that fail to meet standardized temperatures. (Whirlpool, No.
12.1 at p. 2)
DOE obtained clarification from Whirlpool that all of the above-
cited proposals would affect measured energy use. Whirlpool also
clarified how two of these proposed amendments affect measured energy
use. The proposed refrigerator definition change would, in Whirlpool's
view, make it impossible to set fresh food compartments at temperatures
above 39 [deg]F during testing, as compared with current testing with
temperatures bracketing the 45 [deg]F standardized temperature because
the reduced compartment temperature would result in higher thermal load
and energy use. Whirlpool also asserted that the proposed test
procedure clarification that ice should not be in the ice bin during
testing would change the measurement for manufacturers that currently
test with the ice bins filled. (Whirlpool provided no evidence that any
manufacturer tests in this fashion). (Clarification of Written Comments
Submitted by Whirlpool Corporation, No. 35 at p. 1) The available
information indicates otherwise--that all manufacturers test products
without ice in the bins, due to AHAM support of the CSA Informs
Bulletin of August 24, 2009, which discusses ``mechanically simulating
an ice-bin-full condition that produces identical results to testing
with a full bin of ice'' (AHAM Preliminary Proposal for Refrigerator-
Freezer Verification Program, No. 30 at p. 4). NRDC filed comments
asking that the procedures be effective as soon as is practical but
offered no information regarding the potential measured energy use
impacts of the proposed amendments. (NRDC, No. 21.1 at p. 2)
No commenter quantified the energy measurement impacts of the
proposed amendments cited as having an impact on measurements.
Consequently, DOE has no data or other factual information--other than
what it developed on its own--with which to analyze the possible
impacts flowing from its proposed amendments. Nevertheless, DOE gave
careful consideration to these comments and made several modifications
to its proposals to address the concerns raised by individual
commenters. These modifications are described in detail in the sections
that follow.
1. Procedures for Test Sample Preparation
To make the current procedure more clear, the NOPR proposed
changing the manner in which samples are prepared for testing.
Specifically, DOE proposed the following:
Removing the text ``as nearly as practicable'' from the
current set-up instructions that require testing set up to be in
accordance with the printed instructions supplied with the cabinet, and
adding specific deviations from this requirement for test repeatability
and flexibility. This change was proposed for section 2 of Appendices
A1, B1, A, and B in lieu of the current test procedure's reference to
HRF-1-1979. 75 FR 29830.
Adding ``anti-circumvention'' language in 10 CFR 430.23(a)
and (b). Id.
Requiring manufacturers to seek a waiver in those cases
where (1) the prescribed test procedures do not yield measurements that
would be representative of the product's energy use during normal
consumer use, or (2) the set-up instructions are unclear. These
requirements were proposed to be codified by portions of the proposed
text described in the first two bullets above (in section 2 of
Appendices A1, B1, A, and B, and in 10 CFR 430.23(a) and (b)), and by a
new section 7 of Appendices A1, B1, A, and B. Id.
As part of the changes described in the first bullet above, the
NOPR proposed to add specific deviations from the installation
instructions supplied with the product:
(a) Not requiring the connection of water lines and installation of
water filters during testing;
(b) Requiring clearance requirements from product surfaces to be
consistent
[[Page 78819]]
with those described elsewhere in the test procedure;
(c) Requiring the use of an electric power supply as described in
HRF-1-2008, section 5.5.1;
(d) Applying the temperature control settings for testing as
described in section 3 of Appendix A1, B1, A, or B but requiring the
settings for convertible compartments and other temperature-
controllable or special compartments to be those settings that are
described elsewhere in the test procedure; and
(e) Not requiring the anchoring or securing of a product to prevent
tipping during energy testing.
Id.
DOE sought comment on these proposals and specifically asked for
suggestions regarding the need for additional deviations from the
installation instructions.
AHAM and Whirlpool supported removing the words ``as nearly as
practical'' from the test sample preparation language. (AHAM, No. 16.1
at p. 4; Whirlpool, No. 12.1 at p. 2). Electrolux commented that any
deviations in product set-up should be specified in the owner's manual.
(Electrolux, No. 17.2 at p. 1, cell H8). No other suggestions were
offered by commenters.
In response to the Electrolux comment, DOE believes that most of
the deviations proposed in the NOPR are necessary in order to allow for
consistent and repeatable testing. For instance, voltage requirements
can play a role in determining the measured energy use of a particular
product. Product owner manuals, however, do not specify a voltage range
with the tight tolerance specified in HRF-1-1979 section 7.4.1 (within
1% of 115 volts). Instead, they typically allow refrigeration products
to operate with electric power sources with a range of voltages near
the nominal values. GE's owner's manual for GE Profile Side by Side
refrigerators is one such example. The instructions do not specify an
allowable voltage range other than that ``[t]he refrigerator should
always be plugged into its own individual electrical outlet which has a
voltage rating that matches the rating plate.'' (Profile Side by Side
Refrigerators, No. 28 at p. 4) The online specifications for one of
these products provide only a nominal voltage: ``Volts/Hertz/Amps 120v;
60Hz; 15A'' (GE ENERGY STAR 25.9 Cu. Ft. Side-by-Side Refrigerator with
Dispenser, No. 29 at p. 2) DOE believes that the tight tolerance on the
voltage specification specified in HRF-1-1979 is necessary in order to
assure repeatable testing. Repeatable testing that yields measurements
that can be compared across product lines requires the use of
consistent testing conditions, such as the use of an electric supply
with a voltage very close to the nominal 115 volts. This is just one
example of the need for the specific deviations from manufacturer's
instructions proposed in the NOPR. Likewise, many of the other proposed
deviations are also necessary to assure test repeatability. DOE
believes that some of the other proposed deviations, such as not
requiring connection of water lines and waiving instructions to secure
the product so that it will not tip, do not affect the energy use
measurement. DOE notes that Electrolux did not identify which of the
proposed deviations are problematic nor did it explain the reasons for
its position. No other stakeholders expressed concern about the
deviations. Hence, DOE is adopting these deviations as proposed.
Regarding the ``anti-circumvention'' language, AHAM and Whirlpool
urged DOE to adopt the exact language of HRF-1-2008, as adopted by
ENERGY STAR, which does not use the term ``average consumer use''.
(AHAM, No. 16.1 at p. 4; Whirlpool, No. 12.1 at p. 2). AHAM requested
that if DOE decides to use the term ``average consumer use'', DOE
should define the term, provide the data upon which the determination
is reached, and allow for comment before releasing the final rule.
(AHAM, No. 16.1 at pp. 4-5). Electrolux commented that the language
would be acceptable if the 70 [deg]F ambient condition is highlighted.
(Electrolux, No. 17.2 at p. 1, cell H12).
As discussed in the NOPR, DOE's proposal reflects the statutory
requirement, and the Department's longstanding view, that the overall
objective of the test procedure is to measure the product's energy
consumption during a representative average use cycle or period of use.
42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3). Further, the test procedure requires specific
conditions during testing that are designed to ensure repeatability
while avoiding excessive testing burden. DOE's test procedures are
carefully designed and circumscribed in order to attain an overall
calculated measurement of average energy consumption during
representative use, though certain conditions may not individually
appear to be representative of the average use cycle. DOE has held the
consistent view that products should not be designed in a way that
would cause energy consumption to drop during testing as a result of
these apparently unrepresentative conditions. Doing so would result in
a biased measurement that would be unrepresentative of average consumer
use and would circumvent the total test procedure.
The concept of average consumer use is not intended to represent an
annual energy use in kWh to which a measurement according to the test
procedure can be compared. Nor is it intended to represent a specific
set of conditions for parameters that can affect energy use (including
ambient temperature, ambient humidity, door opening patterns, etc.).
Instead, deviation of a test procedure measurement from average
consumer use must be established based on the specific control features
used by a product and consideration of whether the product or any of
its components operate in a fundamentally different way during the
energy test than they would during representative consumer use. To this
end, the NOPR provided an example of a product with anti-sweat heaters
that are controlled by a humidity sensor. In a test under the current
test procedure, the humidity of the test chamber is uncontrolled.
Because the relative humidity level during a test could be at any level
between 0% and 100%, it is unlikely that the measured energy use of the
anti-sweat heaters under the current test would yield results
consistent with their average energy use in a home.
The average consumer use concept is also illustrated in DOE's
``Additional Guidance Regarding Application of Current Procedures for
Testing Energy Consumption of Refrigerator-Freezers With Automatic Ice
Makers''. 75 FR 2122 (January 14, 2010). This document provides
guidance regarding test set up for icemakers, particularly for
refrigerator-freezers with bottom-mounted freezers and through-the-door
ice service. In explaining that the icemaker must remain on but not
producing ice, DOE noted that ``keeping the ice maker and its
associated components on, but preventing them from making ice, better
represents the average use of a refrigerator-freezer, such as when the
machine has a full bin of ice in a consumer's home. Turning off either
the ice maker or components associated with the ice maker, by contrast,
does not represent the average use of a refrigerator-freezer, and may
cause the machine to consume less energy than when the ice maker is on,
but not making ice.'' Id. at 2123.
Hence, DOE believes that the concept of average consumer use, as
used, for example, in the icemaker treatment guidance described above,
is sufficiently understood in the context of the regulatory language.
Therefore the phrase has neither been eliminated from the amended
language nor specifically
[[Page 78820]]
defined. The concept is invoked in the proposed passage that requires
manufacturers to obtain a waiver if a product operates in a way that
makes the test procedure unsuitable for measuring its energy use. The
language retains this passage to reinforce EPCA's requirement that the
test procedures measure energy use under a representative average use
cycle or period of use. 42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3).
However, DOE has considered comments favoring the adoption of the
existing anti-circumvention language in HRF-1-2008, which were based on
the collective belief that harmonization of anti-circumventions
language will improve compliance. The modified anti-circumvention
language that DOE is adopting today retains all of the HRF-1-2008 text
and reads as follows:
The following principles of interpretation should be applied to the
test procedure. The intent of the energy test procedure is to simulate
typical room conditions (approximately 70 [deg]F (21 [deg]C)) with door
openings, by testing at 90 [deg]F (32.2 [deg]C) without door openings.
Except for operating characteristics that are affected by ambient
temperature (for example, compressor percent run time), the unit, when
tested under this test procedure, shall operate in a manner equivalent
to the unit in typical room conditions. The energy used by the unit
shall be calculated when a calculation is provided by the test
procedure. Energy consuming components that operate in typical room
conditions (including as a result of door openings, or a function of
humidity), and that are not exempted by this test procedure, shall
operate in an equivalent manner during energy testing under this test
procedure, or be accounted for by all calculations as provided for in
the test procedure. If (1) a product contains energy consuming
components that operate differently during the prescribed testing than
they would during representative average consumer use and (2) applying
the prescribed test to that product would evaluate it in a manner that
is unrepresentative of its true energy consumption (thereby providing
materially inaccurate comparative data), a manufacturer must obtain a
waiver in accordance with the relevant provisions of 10 CFR 430.
Examples:
1. Energy saving features that are designed to be activated by a
lack of door openings shall not be functional during the energy test.
2. The defrost heater should not either function or turn off
differently during the energy test than it would when operating in
typical room conditions.
3. Electric heaters that would normally operate at typical room
conditions with door openings should also operate during the energy
test.
4. Energy used during adaptive defrost shall continue to be tested
and adjusted per the calculation provided for in this test procedure.
This modification includes the specification of 70 [deg]F as
typical for room conditions, as requested in the Electrolux comment.
(Electrolux, No. 17.2 at p. 1, cell H12). It also includes the proposed
requirement that a manufacturer must petition for a waiver when the
test procedure cannot be used to measure the energy use of a product.
DOE dropped the proposed text's description of a type of product
feature that would make the energy test procedure unsuitable for
testing the product: ``smoothly varying functions of the operating
conditions and the control inputs.'' AHAM viewed this clause as
deficient. (AHAM, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 10 at p. 43). Upon re-
examining this example, DOE acknowledges that the control systems that
this example attempted to highlight are not necessarily incompatible
with the test procedure. One such system is the variable anti-sweat
heater control system, which can use on/off control or discrete power
input steps rather than a gradual increase in power as humidity
increases. An on/off control system is not ``smoothly varying'', but
that does not necessarily mean that the test procedure cannot provide a
representative measurement. Accordingly, DOE decided to eliminate this
example from the proposed regulatory text.
Regarding the proposed requirement for a manufacturer to obtain a
waiver, Whirlpool and AHAM commented that DOE should use an expedited
process such as the FAQ process to address variations in setup instead
of the complex and lengthy waiver process. (Whirlpool, No. 12.1 at p.
2; AHAM, No. 16.1 at p. 5). Whirlpool also commented that any process
used to address exceptions should involve less disclosure of design
details than the waiver process. (Whirlpool, No. 12.1 at p. 3).
DOE appreciates the significance of the issues raised by the
commenters regarding the waiver process. Separate from this proceeding,
DOE has launched a new online database offering guidance on the
Department's test procedures for consumer products and commercial
equipment. See http://www1.eere.energy.gov/guidance/default.aspx?pid=2&spid=1. The new database will provide a publicly
accessible forum for anyone with questions about--or needing
clarification of--DOE's test procedures. However, the Department's
waiver process covers cases where ``the basic model contains one or
more design characteristics which either prevent testing of the basic
model according to the prescribed test procedures, or the prescribed
test procedures may evaluate the basic model in a manner so
unrepresentative of its true energy consumption characteristics * * *
as to provide materially inaccurate comparative data.'' (10 CFR
430.27(a)(1)). The language DOE is adopting simply reiterates this
requirement and illustrates specific cases in which it applies to
refrigeration products. Hence, the amended test procedures retain the
proposed language requiring manufacturers to seek a waiver if that
product, when tested under the prescribed procedure, would produce
results unrepresentative of that product's true energy consumption.
2. Product Clearance Distances to Walls During Testing
DOE proposed to modify the rear wall clearance requirement during
testing by adding a new rear wall clearance subsection as part of
section 2 of Appendices A1, B1, A, and B. 75 FR 29832. Wall clearance
is a necessary element to refrigerator and refrigerator-freezer energy
efficiency testing because condenser performance is affected by the
amount of available air flow. The condenser removes heat from the
refrigeration system to the ambient air and placing the back of a
refrigerator closer to a wall can restrict the amount of condenser air
flow. Reducing this air flow can impact the energy consumption of a
tested product--the condenser will need to operate at a higher
temperature, which implies a higher discharge pressure and higher power
input for the compressor. Similarly, increasing the distance between
the refrigerator and wall can ease the load on the compressor, which
lowers the tested product's overall energy consumption. In this regard,
the current procedure references HRF-1-1979, which provides that
``[t]he space between the back [of the cabinet] and the wall shall be
in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions or as determined by
mechanical stops on the back of the cabinet.'' (HRF-1-1979, section
7.4.2) (10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix A1, section 2.2).
In contrast, HRF-1-2008 provides greater detail by specifying that
``the space between the back and the test room wall or simulated wall
shall be the minimum distance in accordance with the manufacturer's
instructions or as determined by mechanical stops on the
[[Page 78821]]
back of the cabinet.'' (HRF-1-2008, section 5.5.2).
DOE proposed to include in Appendices A1, B1, A, and B, language
that would help clarify the applicable clearance distances:
2.9 The space between the back of the cabinet and the test room
wall or simulated wall shall be the minimum distance in accordance with
the manufacturer's instructions. If the instructions do not specify a
minimum distance, the cabinet shall be located such that the rear of
the cabinet touches the test room wall or simulated wall. The test room
wall facing the rear of the cabinet or the simulated wall shall be flat
within \1/4\ inch, and vertical to within 1 degree. The cabinet shall
be leveled to within 1 degree of true level, and positioned with its
rear wall parallel to the test chamber wall or simulated wall
immediately behind the cabinet. Any simulated wall shall be solid and
shall extend vertically from the floor to above the height of the
cabinet and horizontally beyond both sides of the cabinet.
75 FR 29832.
DOE believes that these proposed requirements are consistent with
the current test procedures, as well as the clearance requirements
found in HRF-1-1979 and HRF-1-2008.
AHAM and Whirlpool suggested using less complex language that
simply required the space between the back of the cabinet and the wall
to be the minimum distance in accordance with manufacturer's
instructions. (AHAM, No. 16.1 at p. 9; Whirlpool, No. 12.1 at p. 6)
Electrolux noted that some products lack automatic door closers, and
that they are installed in an orientation tipped slightly rearward for
gravity to assist in door closing. The product owner's manual includes
instruction for further adjustment for unlevel flooring for proper
operation of the product. (Electrolux, No. 17.2 at p. 1, cell H18).
NRDC requested that DOE specify the maximum distance allowable for
clearance during testing to avoid potential gaming by manufacturers
seeking to maximize the amount of cooling space around the condenser
coil. (NRDC, No. 21.1 at p. 5). Fisher & Paykel suggested that the DOE
test procedure be synchronized with the IEC test procedure by
specifying a maximum allowable distance of not more than ``50 mm from
the plane of the back panel to the vertical surface unless any
permanent rear spacers extend further than that. In that case, the
appliance shall be located so that those spacers are in contact with
the vertical surface.'' (Fisher & Paykel, No. 24.2 at p. 1).
Although DOE is adjusting its approach to account for the issues
raised by some manufacturers, DOE shares the concerns of NRDC and
Fisher & Paykel regarding the potential selection of a rear clearance
instruction in owners' manuals that is unrealistically large. In some
cases such as chest freezers, the specified rear clearance is
consistent with reasonable best practice, but is still large enough
that many consumers may ignore the instruction. For instance, the GE
Model FCM20SUWW 20-cubic foot chest freezer's installation manual
recommends a three-inch clearance (Food Freezers, No. 31 at p. 13), but
DOE suspects that many consumers do not maintain this clearance. The
purpose of requiring permanent mechanical spacers to be installed on
the product if the rear clearance needs to be greater than a certain
distance is to ensure consistency between the test procedure and field
use of the product. By setting this requirement at a larger, rather
than smaller, rear clearance, this approach has a greater potential to
save energy in the field.
The modified requirement will incorporate the language suggested by
AHAM. This modification is made to section 3 of Appendices A1, B1, A,
and B.
The additional provision suggested by Fisher & Paykel requiring use
of mechanical stops if testing is conducted with clearances larger than
a threshold value will also be implemented in Appendices A and B, using
the suggested 50 mm threshold value, which converts to 2 inches in
English units.
3. Alternative Compartment Temperature Sensor Locations
DOE proposed to modify section 5.1 of Appendix A1 (alternative
temperature sensor locations) in order to provide clearer instructions
and to reduce the incidence of deviation from the standard temperature
sensor locations. The proposal would have permitted manufacturer
selection of new locations only in cases where small deviations from
the standard locations were involved. Otherwise, a manufacturer would
need to petition for a waiver. 75 FR 29832. DOE proposed this approach
to facilitate the development of new diagrams addressing new
compartment configurations. In DOE's view, these new diagrams would
help ensure future coverage of a broader range of potential
configurations in the standard set of diagrams that currently exist.
Broader coverage in standardized diagrams would help improve test
consistency. Additionally, DOE proposed that where sensor locations
deviated less than 2 inches from their standard locations, a
manufacturer could simply report that the locations changed in the
certification report and identify the locations of these deviations in
the product's certification test reports. Id.
DOE also sought comment on the frequency of temperature sensor
location revisions from the specifications of the figures of HRF-1-
1979, and on whether the proposed exception allowing for minor
relocation of sensors is sufficient to limit to a reasonable level the
potential number of waivers associated with the proposed requirement.
AHAM, Whirlpool, and Sub-Zero supported a requirement that
manufacturers must report changes to temperature sensor locations as
long as such information is treated confidentially until the
certification report is submitted to DOE. (AHAM, No. 16.1 at p. 5;
AHAM, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 10 at pp. 48-49; Whirlpool, No.
12.1 at p. 3; Sub-Zero, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 10 at p. 51).
AHAM and Sub-Zero commented that alternative temperature sensor
placement should not require a waiver under the current waiver
procedure due to the public nature of the process and the delay in time
to market that it can cause. (AHAM, No. 16.1 at p. 5; Sub-Zero, Public
Meeting Transcript, No. 10 at pp. 51-52). Electrolux commented that
HRF-1-2008 requires even spacing of shelving within the product, which
can create conflicts between the placement of drawers or pans and the
specified sensor locations. Electrolux also recommended reporting of
alternative locations in certification reports. (Electrolux, No. 17.2
at p. 1, cell H20).
DOE appreciates the manufacturers' sensitivity regarding time and
confidentiality. In light of this concern, and the absence of any
comments to the contrary, DOE has decided to eliminate its proposed
waiver requirement. Instead, the use of alternative temperature sensor
locations will be required to be reported in the certification report.
These nonstandard sensor locations, whether significant or minor
deviations, would be reported in the certification test reports. These
modified amendments make any public disclosure of proprietary
information unnecessary until product certification, as requested by
stakeholders. DOE will make these changes in section 5.1 of Appendices
A1, B1, A, and B, which will include the requirement to identify the
new sensor locations in test reports, and in a new 10 CFR part 429,
which
[[Page 78822]]
will provide the amended list of data required in the certification
report. The part 429 changes, if adopted, will be made as part of the
Certification, Compliance, and Enforcement (CCE) rulemaking. See 75 FR
56796, 56819 (September 16, 2010). In addition, because new
requirements for the maintenance of records are under consideration as
part of a new 10 CFR part 429, the proposed clarification for the
section 5.1 amendments regarding test reports (i.e., that manufacturers
maintain test data records ``in accordance with 10 CFR 430.62(d).'')
will be treated separately as part of the ongoing CCE rulemaking. This
potential requirement is also discussed in section III.D.12.
4. Median Temperature Settings for Electronic Control Products and
Establishment of Dual Standardized Temperatures
Median Temperature Settings
DOE proposed to modify the test procedure language related to
temperature control settings, as detailed in section 3 of Appendix A1,
to clarify the procedure for products with electronic controls. Many
current products have electronic controls, which generally have
setpoints indicating specific control temperatures. Section 3.2.1
indicates that a first test is conducted with temperature controls set
in a median position. For electronic controls, an average of the
coldest and warmest temperature settings is generally used as the
median temperature for purposes of testing. However, in some cases
there is no temperature setting exactly equal to this average, and the
controls cannot be mechanically defeated as described in the procedure.
DOE proposed that the test procedure specify that products equipped
with such electronic controls be tested using one of the following
three options: (1) Use of a setting equal to the average of the coldest
and warmest settings, (2) use of the setting that is closest to this
average, or (3) if there are two settings whose difference with the
average is the same, use of the higher of these two settings. This
modification was proposed for Appendices A1 and B1 and would be
retained for new Appendices A and B. 75 FR 29833.
AHAM supported the proposed approach. (AHAM, Public Meeting
Transcript, No. 10 at p. 55; AHAM, No. 16.1 at p. 10). During the
public meeting, the National Institute of Standards and Technology
(NIST) recommended that DOE consider adopting what is commonly known as
the ``triangulation approach'' in place of the interpolation approach.
(NIST, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 10 at pp. 55-56). The
triangulation approach, which has been a part of the Australian/New
Zealand Standard AS/NZS 4474 \2\ for many years, maps both the
refrigerator and freezer compartment temperatures exactly to the target
temperatures by allowing up to three control setting combinations
surrounding the standardized compartment temperatures. GE concurred
that this approach is more flexible and repeatable, because it gives
results at the exact desired sets of temperatures (i.e. 0 [deg]F/39
[deg]F for testing starting in 2014--see section III.E.4 below) rather
than close to those temperatures. (GE, Public Meeting Transcript, No.
10 at pp. 58-59). Whirlpool agreed that the triangulation approach may
be appropriate for adopting into the DOE test procedure in the future,
but that it would incur redevelopment expense if introduced now.
(Whirlpool, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 10 at p. 59). GE indicated
that the triangulation approach could be adopted as an option for
temperature settings, rather than the required procedure. (GE, Public
Meeting Transcript, No. 10 at p. 59). AHAM also supported adopting the
triangulation approach as an option. (AHAM, No. 16.1 at p. 10).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ ``Australian/New Zealand Standard, Performance of Household
Electrical Appliances--Refrigerating Appliances, Part 1: Energy
Consumption and Performance'', AS/NZS 4474. 1:2007, Appendix M,
available for purchase at http://infostore.saiglobal.com/store/results2.aspx?searchType=simple&publisher=all&keyword=AS/NZS%204474
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While the triangulation method presents advantages with respect to
temperature settings, the adoption of this method will require
additional examination by DOE to ascertain its suitability for
inclusion as part of its regulations. DOE may further examine this
method with greater scrutiny as part of a future rulemaking to amend
its test procedure. In light of the significant changes already being
introduced to the final rule that is being adopted today, and in
recognition of the fact that a procedure needs to be finalized in
coordination with the parallel standards rulemaking that is underway,
DOE is declining to adopt the triangulation method as part of today's
rule.
Accordingly, based on the above considerations, DOE is adopting the
proposed amendments addressing median temperature settings for
electronic control products.
Dual Standardized Temperatures
DOE proposed extensive changes to instructions for setting
temperatures as part of Appendices A and B. 75 FR 29843-29846. One
concept adopted for these changes included using dual standardized
temperatures for refrigerator-freezers and basic refrigerators--
products that have two (or more) compartments. The current test
procedures allow manufacturers to select ``second-test'' temperature
settings based only on test results for the freezer compartment. (See
Appendix A1, section 3.2 and sections 3.2.1 through 3.2.3). NIST
advised DOE that, in practice, manufacturers use the warmest setting
for the second test only when both compartments are cooler than their
standardized temperatures during the first test. DOE asked stakeholders
to help clarify the approach for setting of temperature controls for
such products. 75 FR 29846.
GE commented that manufacturers currently use the approach
described by DOE. (GE, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 10 at pp. 137-
138). DOE received no comments indicating that its understanding of the
manufacturers' approach to temperature settings is incorrect. In
particular, DOE received no comments from any manufacturer that uses
any different approach for setting of temperature controls. Hence, DOE
will implement this change in Appendices A1 and A.
5. Test Procedures for Convertible Compartments and Special
Compartments
DOE proposed changing the test procedure for special compartments
to make this procedure consistent with the convertible compartment test
procedure. 75 FR 29833. Under the current DOE test procedure, which
references section 7.4.2 of HRF-1-1979, ``compartments which are
convertible from refrigerator to freezer are operated in the highest
energy usage position.'' (This section of HRF-1-1979 is referenced in
Appendix A1, section 2.2.) The procedure for special compartments calls
for the controls to be ``set to provide the coldest temperature''.
(HRF-1-1979 section 7.4.2) To simplify these requirements to make them
consistent with each other, DOE proposed to require the highest energy
use position for both convertible and special compartments. 75 FR
29833.
DOE also proposed to specify that if a convertible compartment has
external doors (i.e. that the compartment's doors open directly to the
exterior of the product), the compartment shall be tested as a fresh
food or freezer compartment, whichever of these
[[Page 78823]]
functions represents the highest energy use position. Id. Such an
approach is different than requiring the highest energy use position
for the compartment. For example, a compartment that can be controlled
for any temperature between -5 [deg]F and 35 [deg]F would likely use
the most energy at its -5 [deg]F setting. However, testing the
compartment as a freezer compartment, which would most likely represent
a higher energy use than when testing that compartment as a fresh food
compartment, would place its energy use at a 5 [deg]F standardized
temperature under the current test procedure. Testing the compartment
as a freezer compartment would involve a temperature setting 10 [deg]F
warmer than testing in the highest energy use position. This scenario
would most likely use less energy than using the -5 [deg]F setting. The
proposal retained the current instructions to use the highest energy
use position to test convertible compartments that do not have external
doors. DOE also proposed a definition for ``separate auxiliary
compartments'' to identify compartments that have doors that open to
the product's exterior. Id.
ACEEE supported the proposal to test special compartments in their
highest energy usage position, adding that, in the absence of data
detailing how such compartments are used by consumers, the highest
energy usage position makes the most sense. (ACEEE, No. 19.1 at p. 1).
NRDC also supported the proposal to test special compartments in their
maximum energy use position to assure that energy ratings are not
overly optimistic. (NRDC, No. 21.1 at p. 3).
Other stakeholders opposed the proposal for special compartments,
and some offered alternative approaches. AHAM and Whirlpool claimed
that a change from the lowest temperature setting to highest energy use
would add test burden, because multiple tests may be required to
determine which setting results in the highest energy use measurement.
(AHAM, No. 16.1 at p. 5; AHAM, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 10 at p.
61; Whirlpool, No. 12.1 at p. 3). AHAM claimed that virtually every
model, without identifying any representative models, has temperature
controllable compartments, and thus the proposed change could
dramatically increase the test burdens on all manufacturers. (AHAM, No.
16.1 at p. 5). Electrolux commented that the highest energy use
approach is unclear. (Electrolux, No. 17.2 at p. 1, cell H28).
Electrolux discussed some of the complications associated with the
highest energy use position requirement, mentioning (a) the difference
between externally-accessible and internally-accessible compartments
(e.g. such as internal drawers), (b) the possibility that the highest
energy use position is not necessarily consistent with normal use, and
(c) compartments that may engage a feature that increases energy use
for a limited period of time. (Electrolux, No. 17.2 at p. 1, cell H26).
Electrolux also questioned DOE's suggestion of a 2 cubic foot maximum
size delineator for special compartments. (Electrolux, No. 17.2 at p.
1, cell H28). The PRC echoed Electrolux's comment (b) above, indicating
that use of the highest energy use position may not be the best
representation of the ``actual use''. (PRC, No. 15.1 at p. 5).
Additionally, Electrolux pointed out the need for definitions to
help clarify the functions of different compartments, indicating that
there are many different types of compartments, and the test procedures
may not be the same for all of them. (Electrolux, No. 17.2 at p. 1,
cell H26). To this end, AHAM offered definitions for both
``compartment'' and ``sub-compartment'', presumably with the intent
that the proposed amendments may apply to one of these types and not
the other. (AHAM, No. 16.1 at p. 11). Whirlpool recommended that
special compartments subject to the proposed approach should not exceed
10% of total capacity (total product volume), adding that temperatures
should be volume-weighted, but did not elaborate. (Whirlpool, No. 12.1
at p. 3). AHAM recommended using volume-weighted temperature averaging
for special compartments, but did not provide reasons for adopting this
approach. (AHAM, No. 16.1 at p. 6). Electrolux recommended that DOE
consider including a volume adjustment factor dependent on the
(typically cooler) temperature of a special compartment when
determining a product's adjusted volume. While such a change may impact
the related energy usage calculations, it would not affect the manner
in which test sample is set up or the test is conducted and Electrolux
offered no explanation as to how its proposed change would affect the
actual testing of a given product. (Electrolux, No. 17.2 at p. 1, cell
H28). (DOE notes that the volume adjustment factor is used to calculate
adjusted volume (see Appendix A1 section 6.1), which in turn is used to
calculate energy factor (see 10 CFR 430.23(a)(4)) and maximum allowable
energy use (see 10 CFR 430, subpart C, section 32(a)), none of which
impact test set-up and conduct of the test. Since this discussion
addresses the test set-up for special compartments, DOE concludes that
the comment, addressing volume adjustment factor, is not relevant.)
AHAM, Whirlpool, and Electrolux asserted that the measured energy
use under the proposed special compartment procedure would change.
(AHAM, No. 16.1 at pp. 3, 5, 6; AHAM, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 10
at p. 61; Whirlpool, No. 12.1 at p. 3; Electrolux, No. 17.2 at p. 1,
cell H26). Whirlpool further commented that the proposed change should
not be adopted prior to 2014. (Whirlpool, No. 12.1 at p. 2). Whirlpool
further commented that special compartments should be tested at their
coldest temperature position. (Whirlpool, No. 12.1 at p. 3)
In consideration of AHAM's comment that nearly every refrigeration
product has separate compartments with temperature control, DOE
randomly reviewed the refrigerator-freezer product offerings of three
major brands (Whirlpool, GE, and Frigidaire) on their Web sites. These
are the major brands of Whirlpool, GE, and Electrolux, manufacturers
who comprise more than 80% market share for standard-size refrigerator-
freezers.\3\ The research, involving five randomly selected products
from three key product categories (Class 3: refrigerator-freezers--
automatic defrost with top-mounted freezers without through-the-door
ice service; Classes 5 and 5A: refrigerator-freezers--automatic defrost
with bottom-mounted freezers; and Classes 4 and 7: refrigerator-
freezers--automatic defrost with side-mounted freezers) of each of the
three brands indicates that one-fifth of these products have special
compartments. (These product classes are currently listed in 10 CFR
430.32.) (Special Compartment: Research Summary, No. 36 at p.1, cell
F65). The examined classes are those that would be most likely to
employ these types of features because they contain multiple sub-
compartments such as drawers within their fresh food compartments and
constitute a majority of the refrigeration products sold in the market
(roughly 70% of refrigeration product shipments).\4\ DOE also notes
that of the eleven refrigerator-freezer products purchased for reverse
engineering teardowns as part of the energy conservation standard
rulemaking, only two had a separate compartment with separate
temperature
[[Page 78824]]
control--both were refrigerator-freezers with bottom-mounted freezers.
Hence, DOE believes that the level of test burden associated with these
test procedure amendments would be less severe than predicted by AHAM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ ``32nd Annual Portrait of the U.S. Appliance Industry'',
Appliance Magazine, September 2009, Vol. 66, No. 7.
\4\ Shipments of standard-size refrigerator-freezers were near
10 million in 2008, while shipments of compact refrigerators,
standard-size freezers, and compact freezers totaled close to 4.5
million. See the TSD, Chapter 3, ``Market and Technology
Assessment'', section 3.2.6.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Definitions of Compartment Types To Improve Clarity
DOE considered the need for additional definitions, for a variety
of terms--e.g. ``compartment'' and ``sub-compartment''--as suggested by
AHAM, (AHAM, No. 16.1 at p. 11), to clarify which types of compartments
are subject to the different requirements. Because AHAM indicated that
the suggested definitions for these terms were derived from the
Australian/New Zealand standards,\5\ DOE considered this approach and
factored in the international harmonization concerns raised by some
stakeholders (AHAM, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 10 at pp. 42-43;
AHAM, No. 16.1 at pp. 1, 7, 10, 11; Whirlpool, No. 12.1 at p. 5), when
it examined the need for new definitions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ ``Australian/New Zealand Standard, Performance of Household
Electrical Appliances--Refrigerating Appliances, Part 1: Energy
Consumption and Performance'', AS/NZS 4474. 1:2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
AHAM proposed to define a ``compartment'' as ``an enclosed space
within a refrigerating appliance, which is directly accessible through
one or more external doors.'' Under the AHAM proposal, a compartment
``may contain one or more sub-compartments and one or more convenience
features.'' (AHAM, No. 16.1 at p. 11).
In DOE's view, this definition, if adopted, would define a
compartment as having one or more external doors, in spite of the fact
that the freezer compartments of many refrigeration products do not
have external doors. The definitions for ``electric refrigerator'' and
``electric refrigerator-freezer'' do not prescribe that the
compartments associated with these products have external doors (see 10
CFR 430.2), thus, the AHAM-proposed definition would conflict with the
agency's use of the term ``compartment'' within its regulations. At
this time, DOE declines to make this change.
DOE also considered whether any additional definitions are needed
to clarify which instructions apply to which compartment types. The
following discussion walks the reader through these considerations. The
NOPR proposed a series of amendments regarding compartments:
First, DOE proposed a definition for ``separate auxiliary
compartments'' that defined this term as ``a freezer compartment or a
fresh food compartment of a refrigerator or refrigerator-freezer having
more than two compartments that is not the first freezer compartment or
the first fresh food compartment. Access to a separate auxiliary
compartment is through a separate exterior door or doors rather than
through the door or doors of another compartment. Separate auxiliary
compartments may be convertible (e.g., from fresh food to freezer).''
75 FR 29833-29835.
Next, DOE proposed a new section 2.7 (for Appendices A1
and A--parts of it also appear as section 2.5 in Appendices B1 and B)
that would specify the manner in which convertible and special
compartments would be tested: ``Compartments that are convertible
(e.g., from fresh food to freezer) shall be operated in the highest
energy use position. For the special case of convertible separate
auxiliary compartments, this means that the compartment shall be
treated as a freezer compartment or a fresh food compartment, depending
on which of these represents higher energy use. Other compartments with
separate temperature control (such as crispers convertible to meat
keepers), with the exception of butter conditioners, shall also be
tested with controls set in the highest energy use position.'' Id. DOE
notes that these ``other compartments'' fall under the ``special
compartment'' definition in HRF-1-1979 and HRF-1-2008. DOE did not
establish a definition for ``special compartment'' in its proposal,
since it considered that the amended section 2.7 clarifies adequately
that the highest energy use position would be used for the compartments
that fit the description provided in the section.
Finally, DOE proposed new text for sections 3.2 and 6.2
(for Appendices A1, B1, A, and B): ``For the purposes of calculating
per-cycle energy consumption, as described in this section, freezer
compartment temperature shall be equal to a volume-weighted average of
the temperatures of all applicable freezer compartments, and fresh food
compartment temperature shall be equal to a volume-weighted average of
the temperatures of all applicable fresh food compartments. Applicable
compartments for these calculations may include a first freezer
compartment, a first fresh food compartment, and any number of separate
auxiliary compartments.'' Id. These sections describe the additional
procedures associated with convertible separate auxiliary compartments
when treated as fresh food or freezer compartments.
Table III.2 below notes the terminology used in the NOPR for the
listed compartments and also lists the test procedure instructions as
proposed.
Table III.2--Compartment Types Other Than the First Fresh Food Compartment or the First Freezer Compartment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Doors accessible
Temperature range directly from Separate temperature Notes NOPR Testing
exterior? control instructions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fresh Food.................... Y Y Separate Test as a Fresh
N Auxiliary Fresh Food
Food compartment.
Compartment.
N Y Special Highest Energy
Compartment. Use.
N ................ None.
Freezer....................... Y Y Separate Test as a
N Auxiliary Freezer
Freezer compartment.
Compartment.
N Y Special Highest Energy
Compartment. Use.
N ................ None.
Convertible................... Y Y Convertible Test as a Fresh
Separate Food or Freezer
Auxiliary compartment,
Compartment. whichever
results in the
highest energy
use.
N Not likely to None.
exist.
N Y Convertible Highest Energy
Compartment. Use.
N Not likely to None.
exist.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 78825]]
The NOPR proposed to require separate auxiliary compartments that
are not convertible to be tested as either fresh food or freezer
compartments, depending on their temperature range. The instructions
for setting any temperature controls for these compartments are
described in section 3 of proposed Appendices A1, B1, A, and B. The
proposed section 2.7 specified that convertible separate auxiliary
compartments would also be tested either as fresh food or freezer
compartments, depending on which of these selections results in a
higher energy use measurement. The proposed section 2.7 also specified
that convertible compartments that are not separate auxiliary
compartments would be tested using the highest energy use position.
Finally, the proposed section 2.7 specified that other compartments
with separate temperature control that are not butter conditioners
would be tested in the highest energy use position.
After re-examining this proposal and considering the relevant
comments received, DOE recognizes that additional clarification would
help stress that, for testing purposes, special compartments have no
external doors, i.e. doors directly accessible from the exterior. To
clarify the procedure, in light of commenters' concerns that the
compartments involved should be more clearly identified (Electrolux,
No. 17.2 at p. 1, cell H26; AHAM, No. 16.1 at p. 11), DOE has added a
definition for ``special compartment'' in section 1 of Appendices A1,
B1, A, and B.
With respect to the issue of volume, Whirlpool suggested that DOE
adopt a size limit of 10 percent of the total refrigerated volume of a
product for special compartments, but did not provide information or
data justifying such a limit. (Whirlpool, No. 12.1 at p. 3). In
contrast, Electrolux criticized as arbitrary the 2-cubic foot size
delineation used in the NOPR for discussion purposes. (This volume was
not proposed as a size limit). (Electrolux, No. 17.2 at p. 1, cell
H26). DOE notes that there is no available information indicating
typical consumer usage patterns (i.e. typical temperature settings) for
special compartments and the dependence of these temperature settings
on compartment size. DOE believes, however, that most such compartments
are small, as described in the NOPR. 75 FR 29834. DOE notes that the
definitions for the term ``special compartment'' in HRF-1-1979 and HRF-
1-2008 mention several compartment types that are typically small (i.e.
less than 2 cubic feet in size): butter or margarine conditioners,
cheese compartments, crispers, ice storage bins, and meat keepers (HRF-
1-1979 section 3.18; HRF-1-2008 section 3.24). Because these
compartments tend to be small, there is no clear need for a size
limitation since manufacturers will likely continue to limit the sizes
of these compartments. For this reason, and the absence of any
available information to help support the selection of an appropriate
size limit, DOE has decided not to incorporate a size limitation on
special compartments. Accordingly, the new definition for special
compartment reads as follows.
``Special compartment'' means any compartment other than a
butter conditioner, without doors directly accessible from the
exterior, and with separate temperature control (such as crispers
convertible to meat keepers) that is not convertible from fresh food
temperature range to freezer temperature range.
(See section 1 of Appendices A1 and A. A similar definition has
been inserted in Appendices B1 and B)
Instructions for Testing of Special Compartments
As discussed above, stakeholders expressed concern about DOE's
proposal to require testing using the highest energy use positions of
special compartments rather than the lowest temperature. The comments
indicated that the requirement would potentially require manufacturers
to conduct multiple tests to verify that the highest energy use
position was used in a test. DOE acknowledges this possibility. To
address this concern, DOE has decided to modify the amendments so that
they are based on temperature settings rather than the highest energy
use position. Further, DOE has decided to revert to the current test
procedure requirement for the coldest setting for most special
compartments. For products that use the addition of heat to adjust the
temperature of temperature-controllable compartments, the test
procedure will require averaging of tests conducted with the
temperature settings in the warmest and coldest settings. In making
these changes, the potential testing burden will be minimized while
ensuring that the energy consumed by these features is sufficiently
captured under the test procedure.
Based on its examination of a variety of refrigeration products,
DOE expects that most of those products that are equipped with special
compartments provide temperature control of these compartments by
increasing or decreasing the amount of cold air diverted from the
refrigeration system to the special compartment. (In other words, when
more air is diverted into the special compartment, that compartment's
compartment temperature is lower.) As mentioned above, two of the
eleven refrigerator-freezers DOE purchased for its reverse engineering
analysis for the energy conservation standard rulemaking had special
compartments with separate temperature control. Both of these products
were designed to adjust air flow to control the temperature in these
compartments. When a greater quantity of cold air is diverted to
provide a lower temperature in the special compartment, less air is
available to cool the rest of the fresh food compartment. This
situation extends the cooldown time for the fresh food compartment,
which extends the compressor run time and increases the measured energy
use of the product. For such compartments, the coldest temperature
setting and the highest energy use setting are generally the same.
Hence, the proposed approach should not create any change in energy use
measurement.
DOE proposed the change calling for the highest energy use position
to establish consistency with the requirements for convertible
compartments (for which the highest energy use position is prescribed--
see HRF-1-1979 section 7.4.2), and to assure that this highest energy
approach is also applied to products that might use resistive heating
to control the temperature in special compartments. For such products,
the coldest temperature setting would likely be the lowest energy use
setting, because less resistance heat would be needed to raise the
temperature of such a compartment above its minimum temperature.
The modified amendments specify that the requirement for averaging
tests with the settings in the coldest and warmest positions applies to
special compartments that use any form of heat addition for any part of
the controllable temperature range of the compartments. DOE has decided
to modify its earlier proposal and implement this modification only in
Appendices A and B, which will require manufacturers to use this
procedure in conjunction with the new energy standards that DOE is
currently considering promulgating. DOE believes that these changes in
the amendments will eliminate most of the added test burden potentially
associated with them, since DOE's examination of the market indicates
that most products do not use heat addition for special compartment
temperature control. By delaying implementation of the exception for
heated temperature control, the change will also eliminate the impact
of the test procedure change on products manufactured prior to the
[[Page 78826]]
compliance date for the new energy conservation standards. Likewise,
because, as described above, the coldest and highest energy use
settings are equivalent for most special compartments (i.e. those
controlled by adjusting the flow of cooling air), DOE believes that
this amendment (coldest position, except for the minority special
compartments using heat addition) does not significantly alter the
proposal (highest energy use position) and will adequately capture the
energy use of these features.
DOE recognizes that the highest energy use position may not be
consistent with normal use, as indicated by Electrolux and PRC
(Electrolux, No. 17.2 at p. 1, cell H26; PRC, No. 15.1 at p. 5). ACEEE
and NRDC both supported use of the highest energy use position in light
of the lack of such consumer data. (ACEEE, No. 19.1 at p. 1: NRDC, No.
21.1 at p. 3) The modified amendment addresses the concerns of
Electrolux and PRC by allowing the use of averaging of warmest-setting
and coldest-setting measurements for products with special compartments
with heated temperature control systems. Neither stakeholder submitted
any information suggesting what temperature settings are used by
consumers. There is no currently agreed-upon standard as to what
constitutes a normal use setting for special and convertible
compartments. Based on its careful analysis, DOE believes its selected
averaging approach is likely to provide a reasonable representation of
consumer use for these compartments, because the approach does not
represent an extreme control setting.
Regarding Electrolux's comment about temporary functions associated
with special compartments (Electrolux, No. 17.2 at p. 1, cell H26),
Electrolux did not provide any description of the types of such
functions that might be at issue. However, DOE notes that ``features''
are addressed by HRF-1-2008, section 5.5.2 which are manually initiated
and which operate temporarily, such as quick-chill compartments. In
response to these comments, DOE chose to modify the proposed amendment
to clarify that the requirement for temperature setting of special
compartments do not apply to any such temporary feature or functions.
This change will appear in section 2.7 of Appendices A1 and A, and in
section 2.5 of Appendices B1 and B.
Instructions for Testing of Separate Auxiliary Convertible Compartments
Convertible compartments are those compartments that can operate as
either freezer compartments or fresh food compartments. As discussed
above, a separate auxiliary convertible compartment would be tested as
either a freezer compartment or a fresh food compartment, depending on
which of these functions uses more energy. Because these compartments
have temperature ranges spanning those of both freezer and fresh food
compartments, using the standard coldest, median, and warmest settings
during testing as a freezer or fresh food compartment may be
inappropriate in certain cases. For example, a separate auxiliary
convertible compartment could have a range of temperature settings from
-6 [deg]F to 46 [deg]F. The median setting would be 20 [deg]F, which is
too high a setpoint for a freezer compartment of a refrigerator-freezer
and too low for a fresh food compartment. To resolve this issue, DOE
has added language in the final rule specifying settings (a) within 2
[deg]F of the standardized temperatures as the median settings, (b) at
least 5 [deg]F above the standardized temperature as the warmest
setting for testing the compartment as a freezer compartment, and (c)
at least 5 [deg]F below the standardized temperature as the coldest
setting for testing as a fresh food compartment. The new language also
indicates that if the control setpoints do not represent specific
temperatures (i.e. as might be the case for mechanical controls), that
the measured compartment temperatures rather than the setpoints must
meet these requirements. This change is incorporated in section 3 of
Appendices A1 and A.
Additional Discussion
DOE agrees in principle with AHAM's comment that volume-weighted
temperature averaging may be appropriate for special compartments.
However, as AHAM indicated (AHAM, No. 16.1 at p. 6), such an approach
represents a departure from the current test procedure that would
change the measured energy use. The current test procedure requires
that these compartments be set in their coldest position and does not
include a procedure to measure their temperatures. The modified test
procedure established by the final rule and the interim final rule
requires the coldest temperature position for these compartments for
most products, i.e. those that do not utilize heat addition for
temperature control. DOE has adopted this approach to maintain greater
consistency with the current test procedure. DOE may consider use of
volume-weighted temperature averaging in a future test procedure
rulemaking.
The test procedure for special compartments established with the
interim final rule modifies the test procedure only for products that
use heat addition for temperature control. Based on available
information, which suggests that few products have such special
compartments, DOE expects the number of products that are likely to be
impacted by this change to be modest. Stakeholders have not provided
any information suggesting otherwise nor have they provided data that
would permit DOE to evaluate the likely effects of this change.
However, in consideration of these comments, DOE has modified the
timing of the amendments. This change will not require manufacturers of
products using heat addition for temperature control to use the new
averaging approach until the new energy conservation standards take
effect. As a result, manufacturers will have additional time to
redesign such products to adjust to the new procedure. Hence, the final
changes in the procedures for convertible and special compartments are
(1) new definitions for ``separate auxiliary compartment'' and
``special compartment'' in Appendices A1, B1, A, and B; (2)
clarification that the highest energy use position requirement for
convertible compartments implies they shall be tested as a freezer or
fresh food compartment only if they are separate auxiliary compartments
in Appendices A1 and A; (3) requirements for special compartments
reiterating current procedures calling for the coldest temperature
settings in Appendices A1, B1, A, and B; and (4) instructions for
temperature settings for separate auxiliary convertible compartments
that take into account the wide temperature control range of these
compartments, which will be inserted in Appendices A1 and A. In
addition, the interim final rule change is an exception to the
requirements for special compartments in products that use heat
addition for temperature control, for which the averaging of the
warmest- and coldest-temperature settings tests shall be used, which
will be prescribed as part of Appendices A and B.
6. Establishing a Temperature-Averaging Procedure for Auxiliary
Compartments
The NOPR proposed amendments that would address the testing of
external-door compartments other than the two main compartments of a
refrigerator-freezer. Specifically, DOE proposed requirements for (1)
adjusting temperature controls, (2) measuring auxiliary compartment
temperatures,
[[Page 78827]]
and (3) incorporating the auxiliary compartment temperature into the
calculation of energy consumption. 75 FR 29833-29835. DOE proposed the
following:
(1) Temperature settings, generally--Consistent with current
requirements, the temperature controls for auxiliary compartments with
external doors that have individual temperature control capability
would be set at the same median, cold, or warm setting used for the
first fresh food compartment and/or the first freezer compartment, or
some combination thereof as described in section 3.2.1 of Appendix A1
or B1. Id.
(2) Auxiliary compartment temperature measurements--Measurement of
external door-equipped auxiliary compartment temperatures would be done
in the same manner as prescribed in the current test procedure for the
main fresh food and freezer compartments, as described in section 5.1
of Appendix A1 or B1. Id.
(3) Incorporation of auxiliary compartment temperature measurements
in the test procedure calculations--calculations for the freezer
temperature for a product with more than one freezer compartment
(including one or more auxiliary freezer compartments with external
doors) would be performed using a volume-weighted average of the
compartment temperatures measured within each freezer compartment. A
similar approach would apply to fresh food compartments. These freezer
and fresh food temperatures would be used to determine the appropriate
temperature settings for subsequent testing, and to calculate the
energy use. Id.
DOE proposed to insert these amendments into Appendices A1 and A to
address those auxiliary compartments with external doors that are found
in some refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers. DOE proposed similar
amendments to Appendices B1 and B to address the auxiliary compartments
found in some freezers. DOE further proposed to define ``separate
auxiliary compartments'' to include auxiliary compartments with
external doors in order to ensure they are treated consistently with
other auxiliary compartments. Id.
Commenters generally supported this approach. For example, AHAM and
Whirlpool both concurred that auxiliary compartment temperatures should
be volume-weighted. (AHAM, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 10 at p. 65;
Whirlpool, No. 12.1 at p. 4). AHAM provided an equation to illustrate
the volume-weighted averaging of multiple compartments. (AHAM, No. 16.1
at p. 6).
While DOE agrees that AHAM's suggested equation properly represents
the proposed approach, because it provides a weighted average of
compartment temperatures in which the temperatures are weighted by the
compartment volumes, the final rule and interim final rule adopt a more
general equation that is functionally equivalent by averaging for a
general number of fresh food compartments. DOE is also adopting an
equivalent volume-averaging equation for the freezer compartment
temperature. These changes have been made in Appendices A1, B1, A, and
B. The requirements for testing of auxiliary compartments otherwise
remain as they were proposed, except for the clarification regarding
temperature settings for convertible separate auxiliary compartments,
discussed above in section III.D.5.
7. Modified Definition for Anti-Sweat Heater
DOE proposed to modify the definitions of anti-sweat heater in both
the refrigerator and refrigerator-freezer test procedures and in the
freezer test procedures to clarify that such heaters can be used for
both interior and exterior surfaces. 75 FR 29835.
The current DOE test procedure definition for anti-sweat heater
applies to heaters that prevent the accumulation of moisture on the
exterior surfaces of the cabinet (see 10 CFR part 430, subpart B,
appendix A1, section 1.3 and appendix B1, section 1.2). However, some
refrigerator-freezers also use anti-sweat heaters to prevent moisture
accumulation on internal surfaces of the cabinet. In particular,
manufacturers of French door refrigerator-freezers with through the
door (TTD) ice service have used anti-sweat heaters to prevent moisture
accumulation inside the fresh food compartment near the air duct
embedded in the side wall that carries refrigerated air to the ice
compartment.
To account for heaters that operate in this manner, DOE proposed to
change the anti-sweat heater definition found in Appendices A1 and B1.
DOE also proposed to include these modified definitions in Appendices A
and B. This proposed modification would not change the test procedure
but would clarify that interior heaters used to prevent sweating are to
be treated as anti-sweat heaters for purposes of calculating energy
usage under the procedure. Id.
AHAM, Whirlpool, ACEEE, and NRDC supported the DOE proposal for the
anti-sweat heater to apply to both interior and exterior surfaces
(AHAM, No. 16.1 at p. 6; Whirlpool, No. 12.1 at p. 4; ACEEE, No. 19.1
at p. 2; NRDC, No. 21.1 at p. 3). There were no comments objecting to
this proposal.
DOE also sought comment on whether the proposed definition needed
to be modified to indicate that a heater that prevents the accumulation
of moisture, irrespective of whether that heater is designated as an
anti-sweat heater, should be defined as an anti-sweat heater.
Commenters provide no views on this issue.
In light of the support from commenters for DOE's proposed
approach, and the absence of any additional comment regarding any
further modifications to address heaters that prevent moisture
accumulation, DOE has decided to adopt its proposal to modify the
definition of anti-sweat heater to apply to interior as well as
exterior cabinet surfaces.
8. Applying the Anti-Sweat Heater Switch Averaging Credit to Energy Use
Calculations
DOE proposed to modify the calculation for annual energy use to
make it consistent with the annual operating cost calculation. 75 FR
29835. Currently, the energy conservation standards for refrigeration
products are based on the annual energy use calculated for these
products. This value is calculated based on a ``standard cycle.'' (see
10 CFR 430.23(a)(5) and (b)(5)). The standard cycle is defined as ``the
cycle type in which the anti-sweat heater control, when provided, is
set in the highest energy consuming position.'' (see Appendix A1,
section 1.7 or Appendix B1, section 1.5).
In contrast, the annual operating cost, which serves as the basis
for the figures reported on the Federal Trade Commission's EnergyGuide
label, can be calculated based on the average of energy consumption
test results using the standard cycle and a cycle with the anti-sweat
heater switch ``in the position set at the factory just prior to
shipping''. (see 10 CFR 430.23(a)(2) and (b)(2)). Manufacturers
generally set the switch off prior to shipping. Thus, the annual
operating cost is calculated as an average of tests with the switch on
and off. This is referred to as the ``anti-sweat heater switch
averaging credit'' for the purposes of this discussion. DOE understands
that most manufacturers test and rate refrigeration products equipped
with anti-sweat heater switches using the averaging credit and use the
same results for reporting both energy use and annual operating cost.
DOE proposed to modify the annual energy use calculation to ensure
consistency with the annual operating cost calculation by making
changes to
[[Page 78828]]
10 CFR 430.23(a) and 10 CFR 430.23(b). 75 FR 29835.
Electrolux favored preserving the current test procedure for
testing with an anti-sweat heater switch and sought clarification
regarding the agency's rationale for its proposed change. (Electrolux,
No. 17.2 at p. 1, cell H50). DOE received no comments calling for
elimination of the anti-sweat heater switch averaging credit. To
clarify, DOE's proposed modification would change the test procedure to
ensure consistency with the manner in which manufacturers already test
products--by averaging the test results with the anti-sweater heater
switch positioned in the on and the factory-set positions. As explained
in the NOPR, this approach was the original intent of the test
procedure, and there is nothing from the preamble to the final rule
that first established the annual energy use metrics of 10 CFR
430.23(a) and 430.23(b) (see 54 FR 6062 (February 7, 1989)) to indicate
that the omission of the anti-sweat heater averaging credit in these
metrics was anything but an oversight. 75 FR 29835. Having received no
other comment from stakeholders, DOE has decided to proceed with the
proposed modification.
9. Incorporation of Test Procedures for Products With Variable Anti-
Sweat Heating Control Waivers
Variable anti-sweat heating (VASH) control systems are used to
adjust the use of anti-sweat heaters based on ambient conditions. These
systems are typically active under high humidity conditions but
deactivate when their sensors detect that ambient humidity conditions
are dry enough such that their operation is not required.
Commercialized products incorporating such control systems have been
tested for certification under test procedure waivers using a test
procedure based on calculation rather than measurements. This procedure
was initially proposed in a GE waiver petition, which was granted
February 27, 2008 (GE waiver). 73 FR 10425, 10427. This procedure
calculates the additional energy use of the anti-sweat heaters based on
manufacturers' data for average heater power input at 10 different
humidity levels. Id. To address products that have these systems, the
NOPR proposed an alternative test procedure prescribing a method for
measuring the energy use impact of the anti-sweat heaters during the
product's operation, rather than the procedure described in the GE
waiver. 75 FR 29835-29837.
The proposed test would require measuring a product's energy use in
a chamber controlled at 72 [deg]F at three different humidity levels,
including a low humidity level for which the anti-sweat heater would be
expected to be inactive. The difference in energy use measurements made
in moderate- and high-humidity tests and the energy use measurement of
the low-humidity test would provide a measurement of the energy use
associated with the heaters operating under VASH control. These
measurements would be used to calculate the energy use contribution
associated with the anti-sweat heaters at the 10 humidity levels of the
GE waiver. A weighted average of these energy use contributions, based
on the same weighting factors of the GE waiver procedure, would
constitute an adjustment factor that a manufacturer would add to the
energy use measured during a test in a 90 [deg]F ambient with the anti-
sweat heaters deactivated, similar to the approach of the GE waiver.
DOE had proposed that deactivation of the anti-sweat heaters in this 90
[deg]F test would be achieved by requiring a low ambient humidity (i.e.
less than 35% relative humidity) to ensure that the VASH control system
would not engage the heaters. DOE proposed this procedure rather than
adopt the GE waiver's calculation approach because DOE initially did
not consider the calculation approach amenable to verification. DOE
also proposed to use the standard cycle for calculating energy use for
products with VASH control and anti-sweat heater switches rather than
using the averaging credit for such products, as allowed in the GE
waiver procedure because of concern that the additional energy savings
associated with the switch is not likely to occur during consumer use
if the VASH control already turns off the heaters when they are not
needed. Id.
Responding to this proposal, AHAM, Fisher & Paykel, and Whirlpool,
asserted that (1) it is possible to independently verify published
energy consumption measured under the GE waiver, (2) DOE's proposal
imposes undue test burden on the manufacturer without a corresponding
increase in accuracy, (3) DOE's proposal penalizes variable anti-sweat
heater systems compared to fixed anti-sweat heater systems (because of
the proposed elimination of the anti-sweat heater switch averaging
credit), and (4) DOE's proposal has a significant impact on measured
energy use, requiring adjustment of the energy conservation standards.
(AHAM, No. 16.1 at pp. 2-3; Fisher & Paykel, No. 24.3 at p. 1;
Whirlpool, No. 12.1 at pp. 4-5). GE also asserted that an independent
laboratory could verify the reported energy consumption by measuring
the wattage of the heater at the various humidity levels at the
appropriate ambient temperature. (GE, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 10
at pp. 80-81).
AHAM noted that the requirement to control relative humidity in
test chambers below 35 percent would increase test burden. (AHAM,
Public Meeting Transcript, No. 10 at p. 85) GE added that achieving 95
percent relative humidity is difficult because of the heavy amount of
condensation that would result during testing. (GE, Public Meeting
Transcript, No. 10 at p. 166) Electrolux expressed concern over the
significant transition time when changing chamber humidity levels and
allowing the product to reach equilibrium. (Electrolux, Public Meeting
Transcript, No. 10 at pp. 167-168) Whirlpool, Electrolux, and GE
reiterated that available humidity chambers are not currently capable
of achieving the required accuracy for measuring energy consumption
with the prescribed level of accuracy under the proposed procedure and
that making the required upgrades to achieve this accuracy would not be
possible within the proposed 30-day period.\6\ Whirlpool requested that
these proposed changes take place in conjunction with the 2014
standards that DOE is currently promulgating, but not earlier.
(Whirlpool, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 10 at pp. 78-79; Electrolux,
No. 17.2 at p. 1, cell H65; GE, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 10 at
pp. 165-166).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Stakeholders apparently have interpreted the effective date
of the test procedure amendments, which is 30 days after the final
rule, to also be the date that representations regarding energy use
of manufactured products must start to be based on the amended test
procedures. As explained earlier, the transition to representations
based on the amended test procedure must occur within 180 days of
the final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
AHAM and Fisher & Paykel urged DOE to adopt the GE waiver in its
entirety without modification. (AHAM, No. 16.1 at pp. 2-3; Fisher &
Paykel, No. 24.3 at p. 1) In addition, AHAM stated in the public
meeting that there is industry consensus around several issues: (1) 30
days is insufficient to begin testing under this proposed procedure,
(2) the increase in test burden would likely not change the test
results, (3) Japanese researchers have presented data showing that the
1.3 system factor \7\ is accurate, and (4) DOE should harmonize with
IEC and Canada where possible. (AHAM, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 10
at pp. 79-80) DOE notes that the IEC has not yet published
[[Page 78829]]
a test procedure incorporating the GE waiver procedure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ The 1.3 system factor is used in the GE waiver test
procedure to convert energy use of the anti-sweat heaters to energy
use of the product.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The PRC requested that the test procedure should use relative
humidity measurement points of 35 percent and 80 percent instead of 25
percent and 95 percent in order to yield representative results. The
PRC asserted that a 25 percent relative humidity (RH) level would
likely not require an anti-sweat heater and 95 percent RH conditions
are rare. (PRC, No. 15.1 at p. 4) Whirlpool and Electrolux noted that
the infiltration load (i.e. the thermal load added to the refrigeration
system associated with leakage of ambient air into the cabinet)
increases as ambient humidity increases. Hence, the adjustment factor
determined using the measurement would include an adjustment for
infiltration that is not associated with the anti-sweat heaters, which
would exaggerate the impact of the heater energy use. (Whirlpool,
Public Meeting Transcript, No. 10 at p. 167; Electrolux, Public Meeting
Transcript, No. 10 at p. 71-73).
NRDC supported DOE's proposal to measure variable anti-sweat heater
energy and to define the moisture content of the test chamber. (NRDC,
No. 21.1 at p. 4) NRDC suggested that DOE should allow manufacturers to
apply for a waiver to avoid the test burden associated with achieving
95 percent RH and allow manufacturers to use an alternative maximum-
humidity condition for the test. NRDC also indicated that manufacturers
should report the anti-sweat heater wattages at different humidity
levels to aid DOE's verification efforts. Id. ACEEE noted that
Thermotron, Cincinnati Sub Zero, and Scientific Climate Systems all
supply temperature- and humidity-controlled environmental chambers
capable of achieving a relative humidity range of 20 percent to 98
percent within 2-3 degrees of accuracy. (ACEEE, No. 19.1 at p. 2).
NIST also made a general request during the public meeting that DOE
require manufacturers to report their heater control algorithms in
certification reports. NIST also requested that DOE modify the test
requirements to ensure that the humidity levels used during testing are
selected based on the algorithm details to provide the most appropriate
test for verifying the performance of a tested product's anti-sweat
heater. (NIST, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 10 at pp. 75-76)
Electrolux also pointed out that different products may use different
control strategies. (Electrolux, No. 17.2 at p. 1, cell H53).
The IOUs recommended that DOE investigate VASH control
characteristics to ensure that the test procedure favors those systems
that use more adaptive controls. The IOUs also asked that DOE consider
requiring confirmation during the test that the anti-sweat heater is
off at the 25 percent RH condition to prevent circumvention of the test
procedure. (IOUs, No. 14.1 at p. 4). Fisher & Paykel also voiced
concern about the potential for circumvention associated with heaters
that do not deactivate at 25 percent RH (Fisher & Paykel, No. 24.3 at
p. 2). The company explained that because the incremental energy use
associated with the proposed test at 65 percent and 95 percent relative
humidities involves subtracting the measured energy use of those tests
from the energy use measured in the 25 percent relative humidity test,
any activation of the heaters in the 25 percent test would increase the
energy measured in the 25 percent test, which would reduce the
incremental energy use calculated by the subtractions for the 65 and 95
percent tests. A manufacturer can simply reduce the energy use
adjustment determined for the anti-sweat heaters (which is determined
based on the incremental measurements of the 65 and 95 percent tests)
by allowing activation of the heaters during the 25 percent test.
However, DOE notes that this concern was intended to be alleviated in
the proposed procedure by also requiring that the 90 [deg]F ambient
test be conducted using sensor-based deactivation of the heaters, also
in a 25 percent relative humidity ambient. Any reduction of measured
heater energy use in the 72 [deg]F/25 percent relative humidity test
due to heater activation would be negated by higher energy measurement
in the 90 [deg]F/25 percent relative humidity test.
Fisher & Paykel also indicated that the proposed equations for the
energy differences at 65 percent and 95 percent relative humidities
presented in the proposed new Appendix A were incorrect, using minus
signs where equals signs should have been. (Fisher & Paykel, No. 24.2
at p. 3). See 75 FR at 29864.
DOE acknowledges the potential burden associated with the proposed
VASH test procedure and that the proposal did not fully address all
VASH control variants, nor the possibility of exaggeration of the
measurement as a result of infiltration (as suggested by the Electrolux
and Whirlpool comments). Notwithstanding this fact, DOE continues to
believe that the adoption of a measurement-based test as opposed to a
calculation to account for the energy use of products employing these
types of control systems is critical to ensuring that the procedures
yield meaningful information regarding the performance of products
equipped with these systems. Without such a method, DOE's ability to
resolve cases of circumvention (i.e. a manufacturer claiming that a
product has variable anti-sweat heater control when it does not) would
be significantly weakened. This is because, although DOE could conduct
tests to verify manufacturers' claims regarding their control
algorithms, as suggested by some stakeholders (AHAM, No. 16.1 at pp. 2-
3; Fisher & Paykel, No. 24.3 at p. 1; Whirlpool, No. 12.1 at pp. 4-5),
the test procedures used for such verification are not codified and
could be called into question. Also, the direct measurement of anti-
sweat heater wattage as suggested in the comments may be difficult or
impossible, depending on the routing of wires to these heaters.
However, in lieu of a more comprehensive VASH test procedure, DOE is
codifying the procedure that DOE previously approved as part of the
test procedure waivers granted to several manufacturers. This approach
will provide a uniform method to help account for the energy used by
these systems until such time that DOE re-examines this procedure and
decides on potentially more comprehensive modifications. Hence, the GE
waiver procedure has been adopted in Appendices A1 and A.
DOE believes that the use of the averaging credit for products with
anti-sweat heaters and VASH control is inconsistent with field usage,
because, as described in the NOPR, an anti-sweat heater switch is not
likely to provide additional savings if the VASH controls already
respond to ambient conditions and turn off the heaters when they are
not needed. 75 FR 29837. However, DOE believes that this provision
should remain in place at this time, as specified in the GE waiver
procedure, because without the ability to turn off the anti-sweat
heater with such a switch, it would be difficult to conduct the test as
specified in the waiver because turning off the heaters would require
disconnecting the wires supplying their power, which may be difficult
or impossible with damaging the product. It is not clear that
universally-applicable instructions could be developed for running the
90 [deg]F ambient test with the anti-sweat heater disengaged for
products without such switches. Developing a general procedure
addressing VASH systems would likely need to include development of an
approach to address this issue for these products in order to ensure
that the
[[Page 78830]]
procedure provides results comparable to the energy usage found in the
field.
DOE also sought comment on whether the VASH test procedures should
apply to freezers as well as refrigerator-freezers. AHAM and Fisher &
Paykel both indicated that these test procedures should apply to
freezers (AHAM, No. 16.1 at p. 3: Fisher & Paykel, No. 24.2 at p. 1).
Based on these responses, the final rule will add these procedures to
Appendices B1 and B.
10. Elimination of Part 3 of the Variable Defrost Test
DOE proposed eliminating the optional third part of the test
currently in place for products equipped with a variable defrost
capability. 75 FR 29839-29840. The current procedure, which appears at
10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix A1, section 4.1.2.3, was added to
the test procedures in 1989. 54 FR 36238. This test was designed to
measure the mean time between defrosts for variable defrost-equipped
products. DOE included this optional step to provide manufacturers with
an alternative to the default specification for the CT value (10 CFR
part 430, subpart B, appendix A1, section 5.2.1.3) that would
ordinarily be used when calculating energy use. (CT represents the
number of hours of compressor operation between defrost cycles)
As the NOPR explained, the time required to conduct this part of
the test ranges from 1 to 2 weeks. To ascertain the impact on accuracy
of using the default calculation for CT rather than the optional test,
DOE tested a variable defrost product using the optional procedure. The
test results showed that the calculated energy use using the CT
determined by the optional third part of the test differs from the
energy use determined using the default value of CT by less than 0.4%
(Third Part Test, No. 33 at p. 1, cell E57). DOE is unaware of any
manufacturer that has used the optional procedure to rate a
refrigeration product, which indicates to DOE that the industry
generally considers the default equation for CT to be adequately
represent the performance of variable defrost systems. For this reason,
and to simplify the test procedure, DOE proposed to eliminate this
optional test from Appendices A1, B1, A, and B. 75 FR 29839-29840.
Both AHAM and Whirlpool supported the proposal to eliminate the
optional third part of the test. (AHAM, No. 16.1 at p. 6; Public
Meeting Transcript, No. 10 at p. 111; Whirlpool, No. 12.1 at p. 4) DOE
did not receive any comments from manufacturers or other parties that
indicate that the test has been used to rate a product's energy use.
DOE did not receive any comments in favor of retaining this optional
step. Hence, DOE has decided to adopt its proposal to eliminate this
optional step.
11. Corrections and Other Test Procedure Language Changes
This section discusses three other amendments to the current test
procedure.
Simplification of Energy Use Equation for Products With Variable
Defrost Control
DOE proposed modifying Appendix A1 by removing the clarifying
equations for F, ETM, and ETL, eliminating
references to the optional third part of the test (see section III.D.10
above, which discusses eliminating this part of the test), and
correcting the units in the definitions for CTM (maximum
time between defrosts in hours of compressor run time) and
CTL (lowest time between defrosts in hours of compressor run
time). Additionally, DOE proposed that parallel changes be made in
Appendices B1, A, and B. (In Appendix B1, the change would be made in
the current section 5.2.1.3.) 75 FR 29840.
AHAM supported the proposed modifications. (AHAM, No. 16.1 at pp.
6-7) Fisher & Paykel commented that the proposed language would not
sufficiently clarify that the CT, CTM and CTL
values represent compressor run time rather than clock time.
In order to address Fisher & Paykel's comment, DOE has modified the
sections of the test procedure that use CT in the energy use equations
(e.g. sections 5.2.1.2 through 5.2.1.5 of the new Appendix A) to help
clarify that these values represent compressor run time rather than
clock time. DOE notes that not all of these sections required exactly
the same modifications. Similar adjustments have also been made in
Appendices A1, B1, and B.
Energy Testing and Energy Use Equation for Products With Dual Automatic
Defrost
DOE proposed to amend Appendix A1 to correct certain errors in the
instructions for testing dual automatic defrost-equipped products.
These proposed amendments affected two areas. First, DOE proposed to
modify the text in section 4.1.2.4 of Appendix A1 to explicitly include
the compressor and defrost heater in the list of components associated
with each system that must have their energy use separately measured.
Second, DOE proposed to correct errors in the energy use equation that
addresses this class of products (section 5.2.1.5 of Appendix A1 of the
current test procedure). 75 FR 29841.
DOE received no comments objecting to these proposed changes.
However, AHAM suggested that DOE adopt a different approach.
Specifically, AHAM suggested removing the dual compressor system
equations of section 5.2.1.4, removing the proposed test procedure for
products with multiple defrost cycle types (proposed as section 5.2.1.6
of Appendix A--see section III.E.2 below), and inserting a more general
procedure addressing multiple compressor systems as well as single-
compressor systems with more than one active defrost cycle. AHAM's
written comments included a draft test procedure for DOE's
consideration. AHAM explained that the modified equations would be
simpler and more efficient, and that, because they are under
consideration by the IEC and other countries, their adoption would
enhance international standards harmonization. (AHAM, No. 16.1 at p. 7)
Sub Zero supported AHAM's comment regarding this issue. (Sub-Zero, No.
23.1 at p. 1)
DOE notes that a key distinction between the energy use
calculations of proposed section 5.2.1.6 and the calculations of
section 5.2.1.4 is that the former applies to products with a single
compressor with multiple defrost cycle types, while the latter applies
to products with two compressors. DOE believes that testing products
equipped with two compressors is significantly more complicated than
testing products with single compressors and multiple defrost cycle
types because, when conducting the second part of the test that
measures defrost cycle energy use for one of the two or more
refrigeration systems, the operation of these other compressors
continues. Unless the average energy use of these compressors and their
fans is the same during the second part of the test conducted for the
first compressor as it is for the first part of the test, the
difference in their energy use for the two parts of the test will be
added to or subtracted from the first-compressor defrost cycle energy
measurement. The only way to avoid this addition or subtraction is by
separately measuring the systems during both the first part of the test
and during the second part of the test. In contrast, for a system with
a single compressor but multiple evaporators, the compressor turns off
during the defrost cycle for any of the evaporators, which allows the
product's measured overall energy use to accurately measure defrost
cycle energy use. Hence, establishing the proposed section 5.2.1.6 will
both permit a simpler approach to testing single-compressor products
with
[[Page 78831]]
multiple defrost cycle types and ensure that energy measurement for
these products is accurate.
After analyzing this alternative proposal for multiple compressors,
DOE does not believe that it simplifies testing of systems with two or
more compressors. In particular, it does not alleviate the test
procedure burden associated with having to separately measure the
energy use for the different systems, which is part of the procedure of
the current dual-compressor product test procedure. DOE understands
that this is a key difficulty in testing such systems since it
introduces burden and that, in some cases, it may be impossible to
accomplish, depending on the details of the internal wiring of such
products. DOE is not convinced that AHAM's approach avoids the need for
a separate measurement. AHAM's proposed equation includes a term
EP2j that is defined as the average power for system ``j''
while system ``i'' is in defrost and recovery. Measuring the average
power for this system would still require a separate measurement, as
provided under the current test procedure for dual compressor systems.
Thus, the AHAM-proposed procedure appears to represent little or no
improvement over the current procedure.
DOE acknowledges that this final rule does not eliminate the
difficulty of obtaining separate energy use measurements required in
the test procedure for dual compressor products. However, as discussed
above, neither does the AHAM-proposed approach. Additionally, as far as
DOE is aware, the AHAM procedure has not been subject to the review of
interested parties. It is a fairly complex procedure and its adoption
into DOE's regulations would require review and comment by the public.
In light of DOE's statutory obligation to finalize the refrigeration
product energy conservation standard rulemaking by the end of this
year, a complete evaluation of AHAM's procedure is not possible within
the context of this rulemaking. Hence, DOE has retained in Appendices
A1 and A, the dual-compressor system test procedure with the
modifications proposed in the NOPR. DOE may consider further revising
this part of the procedure in a future rulemaking to address the
measurement issues discussed in this section and may reconsider AHAM's
proposal at that time.
Freezer Variable Defrost
This section discusses an issue independently raised by
stakeholders and is not directly related to any of the specific NOPR
proposals. In the test procedures set out for variable defrost-equipped
freezers, AHAM pointed out that the energy use equations are missing
the freezer correction factor k. (AHAM, No. 16.1 at p. 11) The factor k
adjusts the measured energy use for freezers for consistency with
consumer usage patterns of these products. Its value is 0.85 for
upright freezers and 0.7 for chest freezers. Applying these values
means that the calculated energy use of upright freezers is 15% lower
than the measured energy use. Correspondingly, the calculated energy
use of chest freezers is 30% lower than the measured energy use.
DOE notes that the other energy use equations of the current
version of Appendix B1 (sections 5.2.1.1 and 5.2.1.2), which
collectively address products that are not equipped with variable
defrost, include the factor k. Variable defrost was introduced into the
test procedures for refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and freezers
in the 1989 final rule. 54 FR 36238. That final rule did not address
the omission of the freezer correction factor in the equations for
energy use of freezers with variable defrost. From the absence of any
discussion of this issue in the preamble, there is nothing to suggest
that DOE intended to treat variable defrost freezers differently from
freezers not having this type of control. Hence, today's final rule
corrects this oversight.
12. Including in Certification Reports Basic Information Clarifying
Energy Measurements
This section describes amendments for reporting that were proposed
in the NOPR but will be adopted in the CCE rulemaking. 75 FR 56819. DOE
proposed to modify its regulation to require that certification reports
explain how products with advanced controls features (e.g. variable
defrost control or variable anti-sweat heater control) or with
temperature sensor locations different from the standard locations are
tested. 75 FR 29841-42. The energy use of such products cannot be
measured properly without knowing specific information regarding these
control systems or how the temperature sensor locations have been
modified from their standard locations. This information impacts how
such a product is tested and how its energy use is calculated. In order
to allow verification of the energy use ratings for such products by
parties other than their manufacturers, DOE proposed that information
clarifying these test details be included in certification reports. Id.
DOE proposed that manufacturers identify in their certification
reports whether the product has (1) variable defrost control, and if
so, the values of CTL and CTM used in the energy
use calculation, (2) variable anti-sweat heater control, and (3)
internal design details requiring adjustment during testing of
temperature sensor locations from their standard locations. The NOPR
proposed modifying 10 CFR 430.62(a)(4)(xii) to implement these changes.
This section of the CFR lists the information specific to refrigeration
products that must be provided in certification reports. The NOPR
proposed that the relocation of temperature sensors from standard
locations be allowed without petitioning for a waiver only if the new
locations are no more than 2 inches from the standard locations. Id.
DOE sought comment and suggestions on its proposal. AHAM and
Whirlpool supported adding the proposed data to the certification
report reporting requirements if parallel changes are made to DOE's
online data submission template. (AHAM, No. 16.1 at p. 11; Whirlpool,
No. 12.1 at p. 8) However, AHAM added that the temperature sensor
locations would need to remain confidential until the certification
reports are submitted to DOE. (AHAM, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 10
at p. 48) As described in section III.D.3, stakeholders opposed using
the waiver process for reporting any deviation from the standard
locations. DOE has decided not to include a requirement for waivers in
case of temperature sensor relocation since it will be receiving this
information as part of a certification report.
Stakeholders also encouraged DOE to add a requirement to report the
wattage values used in the variable anti-sweat heating energy use
calculation. See Section III.D.9, above. Based on these comments and
the absence of any objections, DOE is modifying this proposal within
the context of the CCE rulemaking to require manufacturers to report
the wattages used in the variable anti-sweat heating energy use
calculation for products having this type of control system.
Any such changes that DOE may make to these reporting requirements
would be made through the ongoing CCE rulemaking and would be set out
in a new 10 CFR part 429. 75 FR 56819. DOE will also make any necessary
updates to its online data submission template as appropriate.
13. Rounding Off Energy Test Results
DOE requested comment on whether it needed to clarify the test
procedure to specify the required precision in reporting refrigeration
product energy use. 75 FR 29847.
[[Page 78832]]
AHAM and Whirlpool both supported rounding annual energy use to the
nearest kilowatt-hour. (AHAM, No. 16.1 at p. 10-11; AHAM, Public
Meeting Transcript, No. 10 at p. 162; Whirlpool, No. 12.1 at p. 7) No
commenters objected to this approach. Hence, with this final rule, DOE
will implement this requirement in 10 CFR 430.23(a), for refrigerators
and refrigerator-freezers, and in 10 CFR 430.23(b), for freezers.
DOE recognizes that, if energy use is reported to the nearest
kilowatt-hour, the specification of maximum allowable energy use must
also be rounded to the nearest kilowatt-hour to prevent a reporting
error. For example, if the energy standard was 500.7 kWh for a product
whose energy use measurement was 500.6 kWh, rounding the measurement to
501 kWh might appear to show energy use higher than the maximum
allowable under the standard. Hence, DOE also proposed that the maximum
allowable energy use under the energy conservation standard be rounded
to the nearest kilowatt-hour as part of the energy conservation
standard rulemaking. 75 FR 59570.
Because this change is primarily clerical and does not represent a
change in the measured energy use of these products, DOE is not
delaying the implementation of this provision as part of the new
standards that are under consideration for 2014. Accordingly, this
provision will be inserted into 10 CFR part 430, subpart C, section
32(a).
E. Amendments To Take Effect Simultaneously With a New Energy
Conservation Standard
This section discusses additional proposed changes that would apply
to manufacturers when demonstrating compliance with any standard levels
that DOE sets as part of its parallel rulemaking for amended energy
conservation standards, scheduled to take effect in 2014. DOE had
initially proposed that two of these changes be required for testing
products prior to the compliance date of the new energy conservation
standards, but, due to stakeholders comments, DOE has shifted these so
that they will be required for testing starting on the compliance date
of the new energy standards. These two changes include (1) modifying
the test procedures for products with long-time or variable defrost
functions to capture precooling energy use and (2) establishing test
procedures for products with multiple defrost cycle types. (Sections
III.E.1 and III.E.2 below discuss these amendments.) DOE further notes
that some of the amendments that it had proposed have been modified to
mitigate their potential impacts. These include the proposed amendments
affecting convertible and special compartments and test procedures for
products with variable anti-sweat heater control, discussed in sections
III.D.5 and III.D.9 above. These changes were made to help ensure that
manufacturers obtain test results that are representative of average
consumer use.
Responding to the NOPR, stakeholders commented that DOE should
adjust the new energy conservation standard to address the potential
changes in measured energy use associated with several of the proposed
test procedure amendments. AHAM and ACEEE jointly commented that if DOE
adopts the energy standards jointly proposed by industry and energy
advocates, the standards should be revised to ensure that there is no
change in the stringency of the allowable energy use before and after
the changes to the test procedures. (Joint Comments, No. 20.1 at p. 3)
The standard levels proposed in the energy conservation standard NOPR
(see 75 FR 59471-59472) were set taking into consideration the impacts
of the compartment temperature changes and the modified volume
calculation method. These test procedure amendments are described below
in sections III.E.4 and III.E.5. Commenters indicated that additional
adjustment of the new energy conservation standards might be necessary.
These issues are discussed in other sections of this notice. However,
DOE notes that the adjustment of the energy conservation standard is
not within the scope of today's notice and does not provide a final
resolution of these issues.
1. Modification of Long-Time and Variable Defrost Test Method To
Capture Precooling and Temperature-Recovery Energy
DOE proposed to revise the test procedures for products with long-
time or variable defrost to capture precooling energy. 75 FR 29837-
29839. Long-time defrost is defrost control in which compressor run
time between defrosts exceeds 14 hours. Variable defrost is a type of
defrost control in which the time interval between defrosts is adjusted
based on need, i.e. when a sufficient amount of moisture has collected
on the evaporator as frost to reduce refrigeration performance.
Precooling involves cooling the compartment(s) of a refrigerator-
freezer to temperatures significantly lower than the user-selected
temperature settings prior to an automatic defrost cycle. This
technique may be employed in certain systems to limit maximum freezer
compartment temperature during defrost cycles. A precooling control
system initiates an extra long compressor run before the defrost cycle
to reduce the temperature of the cabinet or one of its compartments
significantly more than would occur during a normal compressor cycle.
An extra long compressor run is one where the compressor on-cycle
continues for at least 10% longer than the length of a typical
compressor on-cycle after the compartment temperature has dropped down
to the temperature at which the compressor typically turns off during
steady state cycling operation between defrosts.
Although precooling consumes energy in refrigeration products used
by consumers, the current test procedure does not include this energy
use. The current long-time defrost test (used also for products with
variable defrost) consists of two parts. The first part measures the
steady cycling energy use of the refrigerator-freezer with no
contribution from the defrost cycle. The second part measures the
energy use contribution associated with the defrost cycle. The second
part of the test starts when the last compressor cycle before the
defrost stops. Appendix A1, section 4.1.2.1. If this last compressor
cycle is a precooling cycle, representing more average energy use than
is measured during part 1 of the test, the test cannot measure all of
the energy use associated with the defrost cycle. This situation
presents a potential loophole in the current test procedure that the
amendment described in this section is closing.
The DOE test procedure for products with automatic defrost in which
defrost cycles are separated by less than 14 hours of compressor run
time specify that the test period be ``from one point during a defrost
period to the same point during the next defrost period.'' 10 CFR part
430, subpart B, appendix A1, section 4.1.2. In 1982, DOE amended the
test procedures to include the alternative procedure for long-time
defrost (section 4.1.2.1 of Appendix A1) to accommodate long periods of
time between defrosts (i.e. significantly greater than 24 hours of test
time) without making the energy test period unduly burdensome. 47 FR
34517 (August 10, 1982). This change, made to reduce test burden, was
made at a time when control systems capable of precooling were not in
general use--hence, the time period defined for the test did not
include precooling compressor cycles. The change does not imply that
DOE had intended that part of the energy use associated with defrost
does not need to be measured.
[[Page 78833]]
The variable defrost test, introduced in 1989, accommodates even
longer times between defrosts compared to the time periods in the long-
time defrost test. (See 54 FR 36238 discussing calculated values of CT
(hours of compressor run time between defrosts to be used in the
equation for energy consumption) with values ranging from 28.96 to 45
hours, as compared to approximately 14 hours for long-time defrost).
DOE proposed to make the following modifications to address
precooling energy use:
Modifying the long-time defrost test procedure description
to read as follows.
4.1.2.1 Long-time Automatic Defrost. If the model being tested has
a long-time automatic defrost system, the two-part test described in
this section may be used. The first part is the same as the test for a
unit having no defrost provisions (section 4.1.1). The second part
starts when the compressor turns off at the end of a period of steady-
state cycling operation just before initiation of the defrost control
sequence. If the compressor does not cycle during steady-state
operation between defrosts, the second part starts at a time when the
compartment temperatures are within their ranges measured during steady
state operation, or within 0.5 [deg]F of the average during steady
state operation for a compartment with a temperature range during
steady state operation no greater than 1 [deg]F. This control sequence
may include additional compressor operation prior to energizing the
defrost heater. The second part terminates when the compressor turns on
the second time after the defrost control sequence or 4 hours after the
defrost heater is energized, whichever occurs first. See Figure 1. 75
FR 29838-39.
Modifying Figure 1, which shows the long-time defrost test
period to reflect the proposed language discussed above and adding a
second illustration showing the appropriate measurement technique when
there is precooling. Id.
ACEEE, NRDC, and the IOUs supported the proposed language for the
long-time automatic defrost test method (ACEEE, No. 19.1 at p. 3; NRDC,
No. 21.1 at p. 4; IOUs, No. 14.1 at p. 5) Whirlpool supported modifying
the test procedure to clarify that the second part of the test starts
when the compartment temperatures are at steady state operation, adding
parenthetically that this could be interpreted to mean within 0.5
[deg]F. (Whirlpool, No. 12.1 at p. 6) GE supported the inclusion of a
means to measure precooling energy use in the test procedure. (GE,
Public Meeting Transcript, No. 10 at p. 97)
AHAM suggested that the test procedure specify that the average
temperatures be the averages calculated from the first part of the
long-time defrost test. AHAM also commented that the test procedure
should rely on temperature control cycles instead of compressor time in
order to address variable speed compressors. (AHAM, No. 16.1 at p. 8;
AHAM, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 10 at p. 105)
Fisher & Paykel supported starting (and stopping) the defrost and
recovery measurements in steady state conditions. (Fisher & Paykel, No.
24.2 at p. 2)
Electrolux expressed two key concerns regarding the proposed test
procedure language. It noted that (1) the procedure must be able to
address both cycling and variable-speed compressors and (2) the
proposed test procedure does not sufficiently clarify how to determine
when the test starts, i.e. what temperature criteria are used.
(Electrolux, No. 17.2 at p. 1, cell H74)
AHAM, Whirlpool, GE, Electrolux, PRC, and NIST noted that the
proposed modification to the test procedure for pre-cooling energy
would affect tested energy use. (AHAM, Public Meeting Transcript, No.
10 at p. 104; AHAM, No. 16.1 at p. 8; Whirlpool, No. 12.1 at p. 6; GE,
Public Meeting Transcript, No. 10 at pp. 96-97; Electrolux, No. 17.2 at
p. 1, cell H74; PRC, No. 15.1 at p. 4; NIST, Public Meeting Transcript,
No. 10 at pp. 103-104) AHAM, Whirlpool, GE, and NIST also indicated
that this impact should be considered as part of the new energy
conservation standard and that the test procedure amendment should not
be implemented prior to 2014. Id.
DOE notes the contrast between statements of Fisher-Paykel
indicating that the proposed language (``steady state conditions'') is
sufficient to describe the starting point for the second part of the
test and those of Electrolux indicating that the start time is
ambiguous. (Fisher-Paykel, No. 24.2 at p. 2; Electrolux, No. 17.2 at p.
1, cell H74) Whirlpool suggested that DOE quantify the temperature
criterion for the start time of the second part of the test, i.e. 0.5
[deg]F (Whirlpool, No. 12.1 at p. 6) DOE received later clarification
that this statement meant that the second part of the test should start
when the compartment temperature is within 0.5 [deg]F of the average
temperature of the first part of the test. (Clarification of Written
Comments Submitted by Whirlpool Corporation, No. 35 at p. 2) DOE
recognizes the value of providing a set specification, and the interim
final rule addresses this concern.
As described below, DOE considered what criterion could be used to
specify start of the second part of the test.
DOE notes that specifying a start time for the second part of the
test when the compartment temperature is within 0.5 [deg]F of its
first-part average is not generally appropriate, because this
requirement would conflict with the typical start time of the second
part under the current test procedure for a product with a cycling
compressor--at the end of a compressor on-cycle, when the compartment
temperature should be near the minimum temperature measured during the
first part of the test. However, DOE notes that selecting a start time
for the second part when the compartment temperature is within 0.5
[deg]F of its minimum temperature measured during the first part is
also inappropriate, since a manufacturer could program a control to
provide one temperature minimum during the first part at a low extreme
and repeat this low extreme just prior to the defrost. The added energy
use associated with the extended compressor operation to achieve this
low extreme during the first part of the test might be mitigated in the
energy use calculation because (a) an extended compressor shutdown as
the compartment temperature rises again would lower measured energy
use, (b) the relatively long duration of the first part of the test
reduces the average power impact of the single extended compressor run,
and (c) the average compartment temperature during this extended
compressor run and its subsequent off period would be lower than during
steady state operation, thus reducing the temperature measured for the
first part of the test, which reduces the energy use calculated as
described in Appendix A1, section 6.2. Such a control approach
(initiating one extended compressor run during the first part of the
test) could eliminate precooling energy from the energy use measurement
without a significant energy use penalty (i.e. without a significant
increase in the energy use measured during the first part of the test
as a result of the single extended compressor run).
DOE considered a start for the second part of the test when the
compartment temperature is within 0.5 [deg]F of the average of the
minimum temperatures achieved at the ends of each of the compressor
runs during the first part. However, such a requirement would be
complicated and potentially burdensome to calculate.
DOE will instead provide a specification based on the averaging of
compartment temperatures over a full compressor cycle to clarify what
it
[[Page 78834]]
means to be at the end of such a period of steady state operation. The
clauses describing the starting time for cycling compressor systems
during the second part of the test is as follows: ``* * * the second
part starts at the termination of the last regular compressor ``on''
cycle. The average temperature of the compartment measured from the
termination of the previous compressor ``on'' cycle to the termination
of the last regular compressor ``on'' cycle must be within 0.5 [deg]F
of the average temperature of the compartment measured for the first
part of the test.'' This change responds to stakeholders' desires for a
specification based on temperature measurement.
In response to the concerns expressed by AHAM and Electrolux
regarding the treatment of products with variable-speed compressors,
DOE's proposed language specifies how to start the test for such
products. To cover these systems, the proposal included the following
language: ``If the compressor does not cycle during steady-state
operation between defrosts, the second part starts at a time when the
compartment temperatures are within their ranges measured during steady
state operation, or within 0.5 [deg]F of the average during steady
state operation for a compartment with a temperature range during
steady state operation no greater than 1 [deg]F.'' 75 FR 29839.
However, DOE agrees with AHAM that the reference to steady state
operation for this part of the test procedure should clarify that the
reference is to the steady state operation of the first part of the
test. Hence, DOE will modify this text to read, ``the second part
starts at a time before defrost during stable operation when the
compartment temperature is within 0.5 [deg]F of the average temperature
of the compartment measured for the first part of the test.'' The
clause uses ``stable operation'' rather than ``steady state'' to
distinguish from the definition of steady state in Appendix A1 section
2.5.
Responding to comments that the proposed test procedure amendment
to address precooling would alter the measured energy use, DOE has
decided to remove this proposed language from Appendices A1 and B1 and
to retain them for Appendices A and B. In DOE's view, the overall
objective of the test procedure is to measure the product's energy
consumption during a representative average use cycle or period of use.
42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3). To ensure that its procedures sufficiently
measure the energy consumption of these regulated products, DOE
believes it is necessary to capture the energy consumption of
precooling systems.
Amendments To Address Partial Recovery
DOE also requested comment on whether DOE should consider an
amendment in the long-time and variable defrost test procedure to
capture energy use associated with temperature recovery after the end
of the second part of the test currently contained in the test
procedure. (the ``partial recovery'' issue) 75 FR 29839.
The energy use associated with the defrost cycle includes energy
used by the refrigeration system to remove the heat added to the
compartment by the defrost heater and the thermal load added to the
compartment while the compressor was not operating. The compressor runs
for an extra long period after defrost to remove this heat and bring
the compartment temperature down to the levels typical for steady
state. For a cycling compressor system, this generally means that the
temperature at the end of this long run would be close to the typical
temperature measured during the first part of the test after each
regular compressor on-cycle. The second part of the test ends when the
compressor starts the second time after defrost (see Appendix A1
section 4.1.2.1). If the compartment temperature at the end of the
first long compressor run after defrost is still significantly warmer
than the typical first part compressor-stop temperature, a portion of
the post-defrost cooldown is not captured by the second part of the
test, and part of the energy used during consumer use is not measured
by the test. As with precooling, this is a loophole in the test
procedure that the amendments described in this section are closing.
DOE did not propose a specific method to address partial recovery.
Instead, DOE raised three possible options for stakeholders to
consider, including (1) providing a temperature recovery specification
for the compartment to define the end of the second part of the test,
(2) extending the test by a specific amount of time after the defrost
to assure temperature recovery, or (3) considering the average
compartment temperature measured during the second part of the test
when determining the average temperature that is used in the energy use
calculation interpolation. 75 FR 29839.
Stakeholders generally supported amending the procedure to capture
the energy use associated with temperature recovery. NIST suggested
that test procedure changes should be made to address partial recovery.
It noted Working Group 12 of Technical Committee 59 of the IEC, which
is developing IEC 62552, an international standard for testing
refrigeration products, is considering incorporating the temperature of
the second part of the test when calculating energy use. (NIST, Public
Meeting Transcript, No. 10 at p. 104) Fisher & Paykel commented that
the second part of the test should both start and end during steady
state conditions. (Fisher & Paykel, No. 24.2 at p. 2) ACEEE and the
IOUs supported DOE's proposal to address partial temperature recovery.
However, the IOUs noted that SCE found through its own testing of
several products that the impact of partial recovery on energy use was
small. (ACEEE, No. 19.1 at p. 3; IOUs, No. 14.1 at p. 5) ACEEE
recommended that DOE specify that the automatic defrost test continue
until average freezer temperature is within 0.5 [deg]F of the average
lowest temperature attained during steady-state operation. (ACEEE, No.
19.1 at p. 3)
AHAM requested that DOE use a holistic approach in modifying the
test procedure to address both precooling and partial recovery. (AHAM,
No. 16.1 at p. 8)
DOE considered different approaches to address partial recovery in
the second part of the test, as described below.
DOE first considered the approach suggested by NIST in treating
partial recovery. DOE concluded that such an approach would increase
the measured energy use of refrigeration products, whether or not they
exhibit partial recovery, since the energy use interpolation would be
based on a measurement associated with a higher temperature. This
result would occur because the energy use is calculated as an
interpolation, which is a weighted average of the two measurements made
at the two different temperature control settings. (See, e.g., Appendix
A1, section 6.2.2.2) The first equation in this section is E = ET1 +
((ET2-ET1) x (45.0-TR1)/(TR2-TR1)), where E is the energy use, ET1 and
ET2 are the energy use measurements for the first and second tests,
respectively, and TR1 and TR2 are the fresh food compartment
temperatures for the first and second tests, respectively. In those
cases where T2 is warmer than T1, ET2 would be less than ET1 (less
energy would be measured when the compartments are warmer). The
equation can be rearranged to read:
[[Page 78835]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16DE10.004
If both T1 and T2 were raised by a fixed increment, associated with
including the temperature measured during the second part of the test
in the compartment temperature measurement, the value used to multiply
ET1 in the equation would increase, and the value used to multiply ET2
would decrease. This result would increase the weighting of ET1, the
higher energy use measurement, in the calculation for ET. In order to
maintain better consistency with the current test procedure and avoid
an energy standard adjustment to be applied to all products with long-
time or variable anti-sweat heater control, DOE rejected applying the
compartment temperature measured during the second part of the test to
this equation.
DOE next considered the approach suggested by ACEEE to require the
second part of the test to continue until the compartment temperature
is within 0.5 [deg]F of the average lowest temperature attained during
steady state operation. DOE points out two issues with this approach,
as follows.
First, the current test procedure requires the second part of the
test to stop when the compressor cycles on the second time after the
defrost. 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix A1, section 4.1.2.1. The
test stop time suggested by ACEEE, when the compartment temperature is
within 0.5 [deg]F of a minimum temperature measured in the first part
of the test, is a time at the end of a period of compressor operation,
since the compressor must operate to bring the temperature down to this
minimum, and the compartment temperature starts to increase again
shortly after the compressor stops. Using a stop time for the second
part of the test when the compressor stops would make a significant
impact on the measured energy use, as reported in the NOPR public
meeting presentation. (Public Meeting Presentation, No. 9 at p. 53)
Second, the ``average lowest temperature'' is the average of the
series of minimum temperatures associated with the ends of compressor
on-cycles during the first part of the test. Such an average would be
burdensome to calculate, as described above in the discussion of
precooling.
DOE agrees, however, with using a temperature specification rather
than a compressor event to determine the stop time for the second part
of the test. DOE feels this is appropriate because the temperature is
an indicator of the thermal state of the product, while the control
system could start and stop the compressor at any time, whether or not
stable conditions have been reached. Consistent with the amendment
described above associated with the start time of the test, the new
amendment will provide a means to indicate for systems with cycling
compressors whether a given system has re-entered steady state
operation. This amendment will provide that ``[t]he test period for the
second part of the test ends at the initiation of the first regular
compressor cycle after the compartment temperatures have fully
recovered to their stable conditions.'' Additionally, ``[t]he average
temperature of the compartment measured from this initiation of the
first regular compressor ``on'' cycle until the initiation of the next
regular compressor ``on'' cycle must be within 0.5 [deg]F of the
average temperature of the compartment measured for the first part of
the test.'' These changes will appear in Appendices A and B in a new
section 4.2.1.1.
For products with variable speed compressors, specifying a stop
time for the second part of the test is similar to the specification of
start time. In this instance, ``[t]he second part stops at a time after
defrost during stable operation when the compartment temperature is
within 0.5 [deg]F of the average temperature of the compartment
measured for the first part of the test.'' This is a simple
requirement, consistent with the requirement for start of the second
part of the test, and consistent with the recommendations of AHAM to
address variable speed compressors.
The selection of stop times for the second part of the test, as
described above addresses both cycling and variable speed compressors.
It also uses compartment temperature rather than compressor cycling to
define the test--both of these test characteristics were specifically
requested by stakeholders. See the discussion above in this section.
For non-cycling compressors, this amendment also reduces test time by
allowing for the second part of the test to terminate prior to the four
hours currently required by the test procedure. The current procedure
specifies that the second part ``terminates at the second turn ``on''
of the compressor or four hours from the initiation of the defrost
heater, whichever comes first.'' 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix
A1, section 4.1.2.1. DOE will, however, retain the 4-hour limit for the
second part of the test, to limit test duration in case of extremely
slow recovery.
The modified procedure for the second part of the test that DOE is
adopting today for incorporation as section 4.2.1 reads as follows: \8\
\8\ DOE is also simplifying the numbering of section 4, which
currently includes a section 4.1, but no section 4.2. The ``1.''
representing the second level of the numbering system will be
removed from all of the current section numbers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4.2.1 Long-time Automatic Defrost
If the model being tested has a long-time automatic defrost
system, the two-part test described in this section may be used. The
first part is a stable period of compressor operation that includes
no portions of the defrost cycle, such as precooling or recovery,
that is otherwise the same as the test for a unit having no defrost
provisions (section 4.1). The second part is designed to capture the
energy consumed during all of the events occurring with the defrost
control sequence that are outside of stable operation.
4.2.1.1 Cycling Compressor System
For a system with a cycling compressor, the second part starts
at the termination of the last regular compressor ``on'' cycle. The
average temperature of the compartment measured from the termination
of the previous compressor ``on'' cycle to the termination of the
last regular compressor ``on'' cycle must be within 0.5 [deg]F of
the average temperature of the compartment measured for the first
part of the test. If any compressor cycles occur prior to the
defrost heater being energized that cause the average temperature in
the compartment to deviate from the first part temperature by more
than 0.5 [deg]F, these compressor cycles are not considered regular
compressor cycles and must be included in the second part of the
test. As an example, a ``precool'' cycle, which is an extended
compressor cycle that lowers the compartment temperature prior to
energizing the defrost heater, must be included in the second part
of the test. The test period for the second part of the test ends at
the initiation of the first regular compressor cycle after the
compartment temperatures have fully recovered to their stable
conditions. The average temperature of the compartment measured from
this initiation of the first regular compressor ``on'' cycle until
the initiation of the next regular compressor ``on'' cycle must be
within 0.5 [deg]F of the average temperature of the compartment
measured for the first part of the test. The second part of the test
may be terminated after 4 hours if the above conditions cannot be
met. See Figure 1.
4.2.1.2 Non-cycling Compressor System
For a system with a non-cycling compressor, the second part
starts at a time before defrost during stable operation when the
compartment temperature is within 0.5 [deg]F
[[Page 78836]]
of the average temperature of the compartment measured for the first
part of the test. The second part stops at a time after defrost
during stable operation when the compartment temperature is within
0.5 [deg]F of the average temperature of the compartment measured
for the first part of the test. The second part of the test may be
terminated after 4 hours if the above conditions cannot be met. See
Figure 2.
To help clarify these procedures, DOE is modifying the already
existing Figure 1 by adding both power input and compartment
temperature information. Accordingly, Figure 1 will show the
relationship between compressor power input and compartment
temperature. DOE has also provided a figure illustrating the second
part test period for a non-cycling compressor system as a new Figure 2.
Additional Test Period and Temperature Measurement Procedure Changes
DOE determined that some additional test procedure changes are
needed because of the compartment-temperature-based determination of
start and stop times for the second part of the test. These changes
include (1) further emphasis that the first part of the test does not
include any portion of the defrost cycle such as precooling or
temperature recovery, (2) use of the same test period for both energy
and temperature measurements, and (3) clarification that if the
defrosting of evaporators in both the freezer and fresh food
compartments occurs simultaneously, the freezer compartment temperature
shall serve as the basis of the second part start and stop. The first
two changes are discussed in this section, while the third change is
discussed in section III.E.2, below.
The current specifications for the first part of the test for
products with long-time or variable defrost prescribe that ``[a] first
part would be the same as the test for a unit having no defrost
provisions (current section 4.1.1).'' (Appendix A1, section 4.1.2.1)
Current section 4.1.1 specifies a test period at least three hours long
and consisting of two or more whole number of compressor cycles; for
non-cycling compressors, a three-hour test period is specified.
(Appendix A1, section 4.1.1) This definition of the first part of the
test does not clearly indicate that it may not include any portion of a
precooling period or a recovery period. The inclusion of such periods
would add to the energy measurement for the first part of the test some
of the defrost cycle energy use, which is intended to be included only
in the measurement for the second part of the test.
However, because of the current specification for determining the
compartment temperature, including precooling and/or recovery periods
within the first part of the test could also weaken the temperature-
based definition for the start and stop of the second part of the test.
Appendix A1, section 5.1.2.1, which applies to products with cycling
compressors, specifies that the temperature measurement includes a
number of complete compressor cycles equal to the number of minutes
between temperature measurements rounded up to the nearest whole
number. It also specifies that the last complete compressor cycle of
the test period should be included in this measurement.
DOE believes that all testing is currently conducted using modern
computer-based data acquisition systems \9\ that provide much greater
measurement capabilities at much lower cost than systems that were in
use when the test procedures were first written. DOE believes that the
time interval between measurements does not generally exceed 1 minute,
which allows a technician to use the last complete compressor cycle of
the test period of the first part of the test to determine the
compartment temperature. If a test period is chosen that occurs just
before a defrost cycle and includes a precooling cycle, the criterion
for the start of the second part of the test may be the comparison of
the average temperature for this precooling compressor cycle to itself,
which is a meaningless comparison. Even if the last compressor cycle in
the test period is not a precooling cycle, but is the last regular
compressor cycle during stable operation, the criterion for the second
part of the test could still be the comparison of the temperature
measured for this period to itself, because (1) this last regular
compressor cycle could be the basis of the temperature measurement for
the first part of the test if it is the last compressor cycle in the
test period, and (2) the new approach for determining start of the
second part of the test compares the temperature average for this last
regular compressor cycle to the temperature measurement for the first
part of the test.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See, for example, the data acquisition products offered by
National Instruments, http://www.ni.com/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To remedy this situation, DOE is first modifying the current
section 4.1.2.1 (to be renumbered section 4.2.1) to specify that the
first part of the test includes only the stable system operation
between defrosts that do not include any portions of the defrost cycle,
``such as precooling or recovery''. Second, DOE is modifying the
temperature measurement procedures by requiring that temperature
measurements be averages for the full test period specified in section
4. This will ensure examination of at least two compressor cycles to
obtain the temperature measurement for the first part of the test, thus
avoiding the meaningless comparison of a temperature to itself to
determine start of the second part of the test. For non-cycling and
incomplete-cycling systems, requiring examination of the same test
period for energy use measurement and temperature measurement also
strengthens the temperature-based determination of start and stop times
for the second part of the test, because it avoids the current focus of
the temperature measurement on the end of the test period used for
energy measurement. (The current temperature measurement for non-
cycling systems is for the last 32 minutes of the 3-hour test period
(see Appendix A1 sections 4.1.1 and 5.1.2.2) and for incomplete-cycling
systems it is for the last 3 hours of the 24-hour test period (see
Appendix A1 sections 4.1.1 and 5.1.2.3)). In any case in which the
control system reduces temperature (i.e. engages precooling) for the
short temperature-measurement period, the new temperature-based
determination of second-part start can be shifted to a time after this
precooling has occurred. Hence, DOE is extending the temperature
measurement to cover the entire test period for all of these system
types.
These changes to sections 4 and 5 have been made in Appendices A
and B.
2. Establishing Test Procedures for Multiple Defrost Cycle Types
DOE proposed adding procedures to address products with one
compressor and two or more evaporators in which each evaporator
undergoes active defrost cycles that use electric defrost heaters to
melt frost. Also, DOE proposed adding a definition for ``defrost cycle
type'' by defining this term as ``a distinct sequence of control whose
function is to remove frost and/or ice from a refrigerated surface.''
75 FR 29839. DOE noted in this proposed definition that there may be
variations in the defrost control sequence, such as the number of
defrost heaters energized, and that each of these variations
establishes a separate distinct defrost cycle type. DOE also noted that
defrost achieved regularly during the compressor off-cycles by warming
of the evaporator without active heat addition
[[Page 78837]]
is not a defrost cycle type. See generally 75 FR 29839.
Products with one compressor and multiple evaporators with active
defrost may use multiple defrost cycle types. This amendment would not
address products that are equipped with two or more evaporators that
defrost simultaneously. In this case, there is only one defrost cycle
type, which includes the defrosting of all of the evaporators. The
procedure would also not address a product equipped with a freezer
evaporator that undergoes conventional automatic defrost and a fresh
food evaporator that undergoes off-cycle defrost (in which frost is
melted between compressor cycles by the fresh food compartment air,
which is above freezing temperature). Such a product also would have
just one defrost cycle type, which consists of defrosting only the
freezer evaporator.
DOE proposed these amendments to address primarily those products
equipped with long-time or variable defrost. Id. Long-time defrost
refers to defrost control in which defrost cycles are separated by 14
or more hours of compressor operation. Variable defrost refers to
defrost control in which the compressor operation time between defrosts
varies (and generally exceeds 14 hours). The proposal also clarified
how to determine which defrost cycle test procedure should be used for
products with multiple defrost cycle types--i.e. long-time, variable,
or the simplified automatic defrost control procedure. (See, e.g. 10
CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix A1, section 4.1.2) This proposed
clarification indicated that, assuming the defrost control is not
variable, the test technician would consider the number of hours of
compressor operation between defrosts for each of the defrost cycle
types. If the largest of these numbers of hours is less than 14 hours,
the current procedure from Appendix A1 section 4.1.2 (automatic
defrost) would apply. Otherwise, the proposed test procedure for these
products would apply. 75 FR 29839.
The point of the amended test procedure is to ensure that the
energy use from each defrost cycle type, using the appropriate factors
representing its frequency, is included in the total energy use
calculation. Currently, the energy use for products with long-time or
variable defrost (for conventional products having a single defrost
cycle type) is calculated by adding the energy use from the measured
steady-state operation between defrosts (the first part of the test) to
the energy use from the defrost cycle (the second part of the test).
See 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix A1, sections 5.2.1.2 (long-
time defrost) and 5.2.1.3 (variable defrost). The energy use per
defrost cycle is adjusted in this energy use equation to account for
defrost frequency. DOE proposed an energy use equation for products
with multiple defrost cycle types that adds the energy use separately
for each defrost cycle type and adjusts for the different defrost cycle
frequencies that may be present. 75 FR 29839. The energy use equation
provided in the proposal was generic, allowing for any number of
defrost cycle types by using summation notation indicating that the
defrost energy use contribution would be summed for all defrost cycle
types. Id. at 29863.
Whirlpool supported the proposed changes that would address
products with multiple defrost cycle types. (Whirlpool, No. 12.1 at p.
6) However, Whirlpool also indicated that this proposed amendment was
one of several in the NOPR that would have a significant impact on a
product's measured energy use, manufacturer cost, facilities, testing
capability and/or lead time, and requested that it not take effect
until 2014. (Whirlpool, No. 12.1 at p. 2) AHAM generally supported the
proposal, but expressed several concerns. (AHAM, Public Meeting
Transcript, No. 10 at pp. 108-109; AHAM, No. 16.1 at p. 9) These
concerns included (a) the proposed time between defrosts of the freezer
section may not apply to the fresh food section, (b) the presence of
off-cycle defrost in the fresh food compartment should not make the
proposed procedure applicable to a particular product, (c) DOE should
clarify that the optional third part of the test to determine typical
intervals between defrosts is not required, and (d) the proposed
amendment would affect measured energy use and should be considered
when DOE sets its new energy conservation standards for refrigeration
products. AHAM also agreed with DOE's conclusion that the defrost cycle
type with the longest compressor run time between defrosts should be
the basis upon which to determine whether the long-time defrost test
method would be applicable, and with DOE's decision not to include this
amendment in test procedures for freezers. Id. However, AHAM indicated
that it would prefer that DOE adopt the procedure proposed by AHAM for
multiple compressor systems, intending that it apply to both multiple
compressor products and products with single compressors and multiple
active evaporator defrosts. (AHAM, No. 16.1 at p. 7; Clarification of
Written Comments Submitted by AHAM, No. 34 at p. 2) Electrolux also
supported the need to capture all defrost energy use in the test
procedure, but expressed concern about the near-term introduction of
this amendment, arguing that it should be delayed until 2014, when the
new energy conservation standards take effect. (Electrolux, No. 17.2 at
p. 1, cell H89)
Based on the stakeholder comments indicating that this test
procedure amendment would impact measured energy use, DOE has decided
to apply this amendment to Appendix A, thus, making it mandatory for
manufacturers to use during product testing once the standards that DOE
promulgates for 2014 must be met. This slight delay in implementation
will also provide manufacturers with time to adjust to this new
requirement. Consistent with the proposal, this amendment does not
apply to freezers.
In DOE's view, the current energy test procedure does not include
test procedures for products with multiple defrost cycle types. For
this reason, there is no basis for manufacturers' claims that the
amendment would impact energy use measurements. DOE has no
documentation regarding the test procedures manufacturers are using to
certify these products, and has received no petitions for waivers
suggesting the need for any such test procedures. Hence, DOE has no
information on which to form a decision on how to adjust the new energy
conservation standard to account for these amendments. Until these
amendments are required in conjunction with the 2014 standards,
manufacturers introducing products equipped with multiple defrost cycle
types should, consistent with 10 CFR 430.27, petition for a waiver
since the modified version of Appendix A1 set out in today's notice
will not include a specified method for capturing this energy usage.
Manufacturers who attempt to measure the energy use of such products
without a waiver would be unable to certify these products.
As for AHAM's comment regarding the need to consider the different
time intervals between defrosts of the fresh food and freezer
compartments, DOE agrees that such a need exists. This is the reason
that DOE proposed this amendment. The procedure adds the energy use of
the defrost cycles in accordance with their frequencies of occurrence
(i.e. their different time intervals). However, the test procedure is
designed to address defrost cycle types separately rather than fresh
food and freezer compartment defrosts separately, as suggested by the
AHAM comment. DOE proposed this approach
[[Page 78838]]
because if the fresh food and freezer compartments are defrosted at the
same time, it is impossible to measure the energy use associated with
these defrost cycles separately. Even if the energy consumption of the
two defrost heaters were separately measured, it is impossible to
allocate the energy use of the single compressor separately to the two
compartments. The entire defrost cycle type involving defrost of both
compartments can be considered individually.
However, DOE recognizes that additional clarification must be
provided for the defrost test period for defrost cycle types involving
the defrosting of more than one compartment. Applying the compartment-
temperature-based specifications for the start and stop times of the
second part of the test as described in section III.E.1, rather than
the current procedure's use of compressor start/stop times, raises the
question of which compartment's temperatures serve as the basis of the
specification. DOE believes that the temperature of the freezer
compartment would provide a better indication of appropriate start of
the second part of the test (prior to any precooling operation of the
compressor), and would also provide a better indication of when steady
state operation has been achieved after completion of the defrost
cycle. This is because the melting temperature to which the evaporators
must be heated to melt frost is a much greater deviation from normal
compartment temperature for the freezer compartment than it is for the
fresh food compartment. Hence, the amended procedure clarifies that the
start and stop times for the second part of the test for defrost cycle
types involving defrost of both fresh food and freezer compartments are
determined by the freezer compartment temperatures. DOE notes that this
clarification would apply even if there is only one defrost cycle type.
DOE also agrees with AHAM's comment that off-cycle defrost does not
represent a defrost cycle type, and has modified the definition of
defrost cycle type to make this clarification.
Regarding the optional third part of the test, DOE has eliminated
this test from its test procedures, making further clarification
unnecessary. (see section III.D.10).
Finally, DOE considered an additional complication associated with
applying the proposed test procedure to refrigeration products. In
particular, it is possible that there may be more than one interval in
the compressor run time between the occurrences of a particular defrost
cycle type. For instance, a product may employ a control system that
initiates a defrost of both the fresh food and freezer compartment
every 18 hours of compressor run time, and initiates defrost of only
the fresh food compartment at intervals of 6 hours and 12 hours of
compressor run time after the dual-compartment defrost. For such a
product, the compressor run time interval between instances of the
fresh-food-only defrost cycle type is both 6 hours and 12 hours.\10\
For such instances, selection of the appropriate value for
CTi for use in the energy use equation (see proposed section
5.2.1.6 of Appendix A (75 FR 29863)) is unclear. Determining the
appropriate value for CTi should be based on the fact that
the 12/CTi ratio is intended to represent the frequency of
occurrence of defrost cycle type ``i'' in a 24-hour period, subject to
the assumption that compressor run time averages 50%.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Let the ``compressor operation time'', COT of successive
dual-compartment defrosts be 0 hours, 18 hours, 36 hours, etc. The
COTs of the fresh-food-only defrosts are 6 hours, 12 hours, 24
hours, 30 hours, etc. The difference in COTs between successive
fresh-food-only defrosts is 6 hours or 12 hours, depending on which
pair of such defrosts is considered.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE is unaware of any refrigeration products on the market to which
this issue applies. However, in order to clarify the test procedure and
to cover this possibility, DOE has inserted additional language as
follows, in the section describing energy use calculation for systems
with multiple defrost cycle types: ``For cases in which there are more
than one fixed CT value (for long-time defrost models) or more than one
CTM and/or CTL value (for variable defrost
models) for a given defrost cycle type, an average fixed CT value or
average CTM and CTL values shall be selected for
this cycle type so that 12 divided by this value or values is the
frequency of occurrence of the defrost cycle type in a 24 hour period,
assuming 50% compressor run time.''
In summary, the interim final rule makes four changes to the
proposal affecting products with multiple defrost cycle types. First,
manufacturers need to comply with these amendments once the new
standards for refrigeration products apply, rather than sooner. Second,
it clarifies the definition for ``defrost cycle type'' by excluding
off-cycle defrost. Third, it clarifies how to determine CT values in
those products equipped with multiple defrost types if there is more
than one compressor run time interval between instances of a particular
defrost cycle type. And fourth, it clarifies that for defrost cycle
types in which both fresh food and freezer compartments are defrosted,
that the freezer compartment temperature is the basis of the start and
stop times of the second part of the test.
3. Incorporating by Reference AHAM Standard HRF-1-2008 for Measuring
Energy and Internal Volume of Refrigerating Appliances
DOE proposed to incorporate references to AHAM Standard HRF-1-2008
in new Appendices A and B. 75 FR 29842.
The current DOE test procedures for refrigeration products
reference sections of AHAM Standard HRF-1-1979. The referenced sections
specify the test facility, test sample set-up, measurement procedure,
and volume calculation requirements that manufacturers must follow when
testing their products. DOE proposed to adopt the most recent version
of this industry procedure, HRF-1-2008, for products subject to the new
energy conservation standards that DOE is currently considering for
2014. Id. HRF-1-2008 incorporates many changes, including new
compartment temperatures and new volume calculation methods, which are
discussed further in sections III.E.4 and III.E.5. Adopting the
provisions in HRF-1-2008 for new compartment temperatures will alter
the measured energy use of these products, as described in the NOPR.
Id. The temperature and volume calculation method changes will change
the adjusted volume (which is integral to the calculated energy use)
because (1) the temperature changes affect the volume adjustment
factors (adjusted volume is equal to the fresh food compartment volume
plus the volume adjustment factor multiplied by the freezer compartment
volume), and (2) the volume measurements themselves will change.
Because the energy standards for refrigeration products express energy
use as a function of adjusted volume, the temperature and volume
changes necessitate a change in the energy conservation standard. DOE
proposed that these amendments referencing HRF-1-2008 would take effect
once any new energy conservation standards that DOE decides to adopt as
part of its current standards rulemaking become required. Id.
Besides updating the existing test procedure references to HRF-1-
2008, DOE also proposed including a reference to the definitions
section of HRF-1-2008. Id.
In addition, DOE proposed including language explaining that in
cases where the referenced sections of HRF-1-2008 and the regulatory
language of 10 CFR part 430 conflict, the regulatory language takes
precedence. Id.
[[Page 78839]]
AHAM and Whirlpool generally agreed with this proposal, mentioning
that it would incorporate the most up-to-date industry standards and
practices. (AHAM, No. 16.1 at p. 4; Whirlpool, No. 12.1 at p. 2)
General Electric asked whether DOE would adopt updates of HRF-1 beyond
HRF-1-2008 when they are established. (General Electric, Public Meeting
Transcript, No. 10 at p. 124) DOE is open to considering these updates
for inclusion if and when they are finalized.
Because no concerns were raised by stakeholders regarding these
proposals, the interim final rule includes the amendments as proposed.
The new Appendices A and B, referencing HRF-1-2008, will be required
for testing to determine compliance with energy standards when
manufacturers are required to comply with the new energy conservation
standards.
4. Establishing New Compartment Temperatures
DOE proposed to adopt the new compartment temperatures described in
section 5.6.2 of HRF-1-2008 and their associated volume adjustment
factors found in section 6.3 of HRF-1-2008 into the DOE test
procedures. 75 FR 29842-29843. These amendments will improve the test
procedure's consistency with the actual use of refrigeration products
in the field. The amendment will also help facilitate the international
harmonization of appliance test procedures with IEC 62552. Reducing the
energy test compartment temperatures for refrigerators (excluding all-
refrigerators) and refrigerator-freezers will result in higher measured
energy use because of the higher thermal load associated with the
increased temperature difference between ambient conditions and the
compartments. These compartment temperature changes also led AHAM to
change the volume adjustment factors, which depend on compartment
temperatures. Consistent with HRF-1-2008, DOE also proposed to make
similar changes to its volume adjustment factors. DOE had proposed to
implement these changes by adding appropriate regulatory text into
Appendices A and B, rather than simply referencing HRF-1-2008. Id.
DOE invited interested parties to comment on this proposed change.
ACEEE, AHAM, the IOUs, and Whirlpool generally supported the proposal
to adopt the new compartment temperatures. (ACEEE, No. 19.1 at p. 2;
AHAM, No. 16.1 at p. 8; IOUs, No. 14.1 at p. 4-5; Whirlpool, No. 16.1
at p. 5) GE and Whirlpool added that establishing new compartment
temperatures will impact the energy conservation standard. (GE, Public
Meeting Transcript, No. 10 at pp. 130-131; Whirlpool, Public Meeting
Transcript, No. 10 at pp. 128-129) After considering these comments and
considering the potential impacts that this change would be likely to
have, DOE has decided to implement these changes as part of the amended
test procedure that will be required with the new standards that DOE is
considering. 75 FR 59470.
Specifically, ACEEE and the IOUs also expressed concerns related to
DOE's examination of the potential changes in measured energy use
stemming from the proposed amendments. These commenters suggested that
DOE investigate the nonlinearity of energy use for products with
smaller volumes. (ACEEE, No. 19.1 at p. 2; IOUs, No. 14.1 at p. 4-5)
The preliminary TSD that DOE had published previously suggested the
possibility of this nonlinearity. See Preliminary TSD, section 5.4.2.3
(Engineering Analysis \11\). DOE has not, however, received sufficient
data to either confirm this nonlinearity or to permit it to develop a
nonlinear energy use equation for these products. Accordingly, DOE
could not account for this possibility within the context of the test
procedure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Preliminary Technical Support Document: U.S. Department of
Energy-Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Energy
Efficiency Program For Consumer Products: Refrigerators,
Refrigerator-Freezers, and Freezers. November 2009. Washington, DC.
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/residential/pdfs/ref_frz_prenopr_prelim_tsd.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under today's interim final rule, these new compartment
temperatures and their associated volume adjustment factors will be
incorporated into new Appendices A and B.
5. Establishing New Volume Calculation Method
DOE proposed to add the volume calculation procedure used in HRF-1-
2008 to new Appendices A and B that would apply to all compliance
testing for products required to meet the new 2014 standards that DOE
is currently considering. 75 FR 29843. The proposed volume calculation
method is simpler than the one contained in the current procedure and
removes the subjective nature of the current method that test
technicians use when estimating volume.
The NOPR invited interested parties to comment on this proposed
change. ACEEE, AHAM, and Whirlpool supported the DOE decision to adopt
new volume calculation methods. (ACEEE, No. 19.1 at p. 3; AHAM, No.
16.1 at p. 8; Whirlpool, No. 12.1 at p. 5)
In light of this support, and the absence of any comments objecting
to its adoption, DOE is adopting this new method as part of the new
test procedures contained in Appendices A and B. Adopting this new
method offers a critical advantage over the current method. First, the
use of this new method will improve the accuracy of volume reporting.
Second, because the energy use equation that serves as the basis for
each standard depends on the calculated adjusted volume for each
product class, a more accurate volume calculation will also improve the
accuracy of the calculation of the energy standard. As a result, the
amendment will help improve compliance with the standard.
Additionally, DOE noted that HRF-1-2008 does not explicitly address
how to treat automatic icemakers and ice storage bins within the
context of the volume calculation method. (See section 4, ``Method for
Computing Refrigerated Volume of Refrigerators, Refrigerator-Freezers,
Wine Chillers, and Freezers'' of HRF-1-2008.) To address this
shortcoming, DOE proposed that these elements be considered part of the
internal volume for refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers (covered in
Appendix A). DOE also proposed to apply this clarification to freezers
(covered in Appendix B), since freezers could also be equipped with
automatic icemakers. DOE sought comment on this approach. 75 FR 29843.
AHAM supported DOE's proposed clarification for automatic icemakers
and ice storage bins, including its application to freezers. (AHAM, No.
16.1 at p. 8; AHAM, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 10 at p. 133) There
were no comments objecting to this proposed amendment. In light of the
additional clarity that this change would provide manufacturers when
testing their products and the absence of any objections, DOE is
amending its procedure to cover these icemaking-related components as
part of the internal volume of refrigeration products as applicable.
These clarifications will appear in both Appendices A and B.
Fisher & Paykel also raised an issue regarding the proposed volume
calculation method. It noted that some manufacturers have tested
products that have TTD ice service with their ice delivery chutes
filled or covered. By testing products in this way, manufacturers would
be able to reduce that product's measured energy use. The adjusted
volume measurement may also be reduced (as would the calculated
[[Page 78840]]
energy standard for the product), but only slightly, because the volume
reduction multiplied by the energy standard equation slope is generally
less than the energy use reduction, thus providing the manufacturer an
advantage with respect to compliance with the energy standard. Fisher &
Paykel asserted that using such an approach may constitute
circumvention of the test procedures. To address this potential
problem, Fisher & Paykel suggested that DOE add an additional
clarification to the proposed changes to the volume calculation method
by requiring that ``all chutes and throats required for the delivery of
ice shall be free of packing, covers or other blockages that may be
fitted for shipping or when the icemaker is not in use.''
After considering Fisher & Paykel's concern and its proposed
solution, DOE is adopting this clarification. DOE wants to ensure that
the procedure that it adopts today provides sufficient clarity without
leaving potential room for circumvention. To achieve this goal, DOE is
inserting this additional requirement into section 2 of new Appendices
A and B, as well as amended Appendices A1 and B1, to help clarify the
test preparation process. DOE also believes that, as a practical
matter, consumers will remove any such packing material or temporary
covers during actual use of these products since they are likely to use
these features (e.g., TTD ice service) rather than opt to let them
remain dormant. Consequently, removing such packing material and/or
covers is more consistent with consumer use of the product than
permitting this material to remain in place during testing.
As with the incorporation of new compartment temperatures, DOE will
incorporate the proposed volume calculation changes as part of the
procedures that manufacturers must use when certifying compliance to
the new energy standards that will be required for refrigeration
products to meet in 2014.
6. Control Settings for Refrigerators and Refrigerator-Freezers During
Testing
Section III.D.4 above discusses two temperature control amendments
that manufacturers must use prior to the promulgation of the new energy
conservation standards that will apply in 2014. These amendments
include (a) addressing products equipped with electronic controls for
which exact median settings cannot be selected, and (b) modifying the
DOE test procedure to include two standardized temperatures for
products with both fresh food and freezer compartments. This latter
change would help achieve some consistency with the test approach
already used by manufacturers when selecting temperature settings for
the second test that must be run.
The remaining amendments that will be required when determining
compliance with the standards under consideration for products
manufactured in 2014 are discussed in this section.
Refrigerator-Freezers and Refrigerators With Freezer Compartments
The NOPR discussed gaps present in the current procedure regarding
refrigerator-freezers and refrigerators with freezer compartments. In
particular, in certain cases, depending on the results of the first
test, the current instructions in section 3.2 of Appendix A1 do not
address: (1) Control settings for the second test and/or third test,
and (2) which energy test results to use in the energy use
calculations. The NOPR presented a chart illustrating the logic behind
the temperature setting requirements according to the current test
procedure for refrigerator-freezers and refrigerators with freezer
compartments. The table is reproduced below as Table III.3.
The logic in the chart was presented to be consistent with the
typical test practice of using the warm/warm setting only if both
compartment temperatures are lower than the standardized temperatures
in the first test. While this practice is inconsistent with the current
DOE test procedure, as described above in section III.D.4, it is
consistent with current manufacturer test practices. As discussed in
the NOPR, the current procedure does not clearly address the
temperature setting requirements for the second test, nor does it
clearly indicate which test results to use when calculating total
energy use, for Cases 2, 5, and 6 shown in Table III.3. DOE proposed to
amend the test procedure to address this deficiency. 75 FR 29844-29845.
Table III.3--Temperature Setting Chart for Refrigerators and Refrigerator-Freezers
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First test Second test
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Third test settings Energy calculation Case
Settings Results Settings Results based on: No.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fzr Mid FF Mid................... Fzr Low FF Low...... Fzr Warm FF Warm.... Fzr Low FF Low...... None................ Second Test Only.... 1
Fzr Low FF High..... None................ Not Clear........... 2
Fzr High FF Low..... None................ First and Second 3
Tests.
Fzr High FF High.... None................ First and Second 4
Tests.
Fzr Low FF High..... Fzr Cold FF Cold.... Fzr Low FF High..... None................ Not Clear........... 5
Fzr Low FF Low...... None................ Not Clear........... 6
Fzr High FF Low..... Fzr Cold FF Cold.... Fzr High FF Low..... Fzr Warm FF Warm.... Second and Third 7
Tests.
Fzr Low FF Low...... None................ First and Second 8
Tests.
Fzr High FF High.... Fzr Cold FF Cold.... Fzr Low FF Low...... None................ First and Second 9
Tests.
Fzr Low FF High..... None................ First and Second 10
Tests.
Fzr High FF Low..... Fzr Warm FF Warm.... Second and Third 11
Tests.
Fzr High FF High.... Fzr Warm FF Warm.... Second and Third 12
Tests.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: Fzr = Freezer Compartment, FF = Fresh Food Compartment.
[[Page 78841]]
In particular, DOE proposed to include a modified temperature
setting logic chart in the test procedure in section 3.2 of Appendix A
to clarify the temperature setting instructions. DOE pointed out that,
under some scenarios, one or both of the compartments might not achieve
the required standardized temperature when the temperature controls are
in their coldest settings. Id. DOE requested comment on the proposed
amendments but also asked stakeholders to consider whether disallowing
an energy rating would be a more appropriate solution in those cases
where a particular product's compartment temperatures cannot achieve
the required standardized temperatures. In other words, what should
happen to products that have compartments that are set to the coldest
temperature setting but are warmer than the standardized temperatures
prescribed in the test procedure?
As DOE explained in the NOPR, the inability to achieve the
standardized temperatures may create a potential conflict with the
product definitions. DOE offered a few examples to illustrate this
situation. For example, if a refrigerator's fresh food compartment
exceeds the standardized temperature for fresh food compartments during
an energy test, the product might be considered not to meet the current
refrigerator definition, which specifies the use of ``temperatures
above 32 [deg]F and below 39 [deg]F''. (10 CFR 430.2) Thus, the
questions presented to DOE are (1) whether such products can still be
refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, or freezers even if they are
unable to attain the required standardized temperatures during testing
and (2) whether these products should even be rated.
DOE received no specific comments on either the proposed
temperature setting logic or the temperature setting instructions
proposed for the currently undefined cases described above. Comments
were received, however, regarding DOE's suggestion to prevent
certification of products that do not reach the standardized
temperatures when tested with their coldest temperature settings.
ACEEE, AHAM, the IOUs, Earthjustice, Fisher & Paykel, NRDC, and
Whirlpool all supported this approach. (ACEEE, No. 19.1 at p. 4-5;
AHAM, No. 16.1 at p. 10; IOUs, No. 14.1 at p. 5-6; Earthjustice, No.
22.1 at p. 2; Fisher & Paykel, No. 24.2 at p. 3; Whirlpool, No. 12.1 at
p. 7) In response to these comments, DOE will adopt the proposed
revisions in temperature setting requirements, but with modifications
to indicate that products that are incapable of meeting required test
conditions (i.e., achieving the standardized temperatures when all
controls are at their coldest settings) are not considered compliant
with the applicable standards. These changes will be adopted in
Appendices A and B.
The definitions for refrigerator, refrigerator-freezer, and freezer
and the changes DOE is making to these definitions are discussed in
sections III.A and III.B. Products that meet any of these definitions
are considered to be covered products that are subject to DOE
regulations. The new definitions all include temperature ranges for the
products' compartments to help classify product types. However, as
mentioned in section III.B, these temperature ranges are not strictly
defined to apply solely to energy test conditions. Hence, if a
refrigerator cannot maintain 39 [deg]F compartment temperature with
temperature controls in the coldest setting during an energy test, this
does not mean the product is not a refrigerator and exempt from
coverage. The new definitions specify that the product is designed to
be capable of attaining the 39 [deg]F temperature without specifying
the ambient or other conditions. The implication is that a product
designed to be a refrigerator that fails to meet 39 [deg]F compartment
temperature during energy testing cannot be certified. However, since
it is a covered product, it cannot be sold as a product other than a
refrigerator. Similar restrictions apply to the other products, i.e.,
the refrigerator-freezer and freezer.
DOE's temperature setting modifications will take effect once any
new standards affecting products manufactured in 2014 become required.
These amendments will appear in new Appendices A and B. The
instructions will include the amendment, discussed above in section
III.D.4, that modifies the test procedure for consistency with current
industry practice (i.e., consideration of standardized temperatures for
both compartments and use of the warm/warm setting only if both
compartments are lower than their standardized temperatures in the
first test). The procedure will also indicate that a product cannot be
certified if it fails to achieve the required compartment standardized
temperatures. Also, DOE will add to the test procedure a modified
version of the test setting logic chart for basic refrigerators and
refrigerator-freezers that is consistent with the new requirements.
This modified table is presented as Table III.4 below.
Table III.4--Interim Final Temperature Setting Chart for Refrigerators and Refrigerator-Freezers
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First test Second test
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Energy calculation
Settings Results Settings Results based on:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fzr Mid......................... Fzr Low........... Fzr Warm.......... Fzr Low........... Second Test Only.
FF Mid.......................... FF Low............ FF Warm........... FF Low............
Fzr Low........... First and Second
FF High........... Tests.
Fzr High.......... First and Second
FF Low............ Tests.
Fzr High.......... First and Second
FF High........... Tests.
Fzr Low........... Fzr Cold.......... Fzr Low........... No Energy Use
FF High........... FF Cold........... FF High........... Rating.
Fzr Low........... First and Second
FF Low............ Tests.
Fzr High.......... Fzr Cold.......... Fzr High.......... No Energy Use
FF Low............ FF Cold........... FF Low............ Rating.
Fzr Low........... First and Second
FF Low............ Tests.
Fzr High.......... Fzr Cold.......... Fzr Low........... First and Second
FF High........... FF Cold........... FF Low............ Tests.
[[Page 78842]]
Fzr Low........... No Energy Use
FF High........... Rating.
Fzr High.......... No Energy Use
FF Low............ Rating.
Fzr High.......... No Energy Use
FF High........... Rating.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: Fzr = Freezer Compartment, FF = Fresh Food Compartment.
All-Refrigerators and Freezers
DOE also proposed that a logic chart for single-compartment
products be provided for all-refrigerators and freezers. 75 FR 29846.
Based on stakeholder comments, the test instructions for these
products have been modified to prevent the rating of any product that
fails to achieve the standardized temperature during testing with
controls set at the coldest position. The logic chart for these
products has also been modified accordingly. The modified chart is
shown below as Table III.5.
Table III.5--Temperature Setting Chart for All-Refrigerators and Freezers
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First test Second test
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Energy calculation based
Settings Results Settings Results on:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mid.......................... Low............. Warm............ Low............. Second Test Only.
High............ First and Second Tests.
High............ Cold............ Low............. First and Second Tests.
High............ No Energy Use Rating.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE believes the test instructions listed in Table III.4 and Table
III.5 should adequately address all test result possibilities for their
respective products. First, for single-compartment products, the
measured temperature for each test could either be higher or lower than
the standardized temperature for each compartment. This scenario
represents two possibilities for each of two tests, indicating a total
of two multiplied by two, or four possibilities. Second, for two-
compartment products, the temperature of each of the two compartments
could be higher or lower than their standardized temperatures. This
scenario represents four possibilities for each test. Hence, the
maximum number of possible outcomes for such products is sixteen (fours
tests multiplied by four possible outcomes). However, four of these
possibilities are very unlikely. For example, if the freezer
temperature is lower than the standardized temperature for the first
test, which is conducted with the settings at the median position, and
the next test is conducted with the settings in the coldest position,
it is unlikely that the freezer temperature will rise above its first-
test measurement during the second test to exceed the standardized
temperature. Four of the sixteen possible outcomes are eliminated based
on similar considerations. All of these test procedure changes will
become mandatory for testing on the compliance date of any new energy
conservation standards that DOE decides to adopt for products
manufactured in 2014.
7. Icemakers and Icemaking
The current test procedure for refrigerators and refrigerator-
freezers does not measure the energy use associated with ice production
(HRF-1-1979, section 7.4.2). As stated in the NOPR, DOE estimates that
the energy use associated with automatic icemaking is in the range of
64 to 73 kWh and represents 10 percent to 15 percent of the rated
energy use of typical refrigeration products. 75 FR 29846-29847.
Because of the potential magnitude of this energy use, DOE is
considering developing a test procedure to account for the energy
consumed by automatic icemaking systems. However, as the NOPR
discussed, developing a robust and repeatable test procedure will take
longer than the current rulemaking cycle will allow. Hence, instead of
proposing to amend the test procedure to include a measurement of
icemaking energy use, DOE proposed to modify the test procedure to
incorporate a fixed placeholder value to represent icemaking energy
use. DOE intends to continue working on the development of an icemaking
test procedure with the intent of eventually integrating it into the
test procedure in place of the fixed placeholder as soon as possible.
DOE selected a fixed placeholder value for icemaking energy use
based on ``AHAM Update to DOE on Status of Ice Maker Energy Test
Procedure.'' (No. 5.1 at p. 11) That document specifies a daily
production rate of 1.8 pounds of ice. The average energy usage
measurement from this test was 128 Watt-hours per pound. Thus, the
average daily energy use associated with icemaking of these preliminary
measurements is 0.23 kWh and the average annual energy use is 84 kWh.
DOE proposed to implement this value in the test procedure by
integrating the icemaking energy use value, designated IET and measured
in kWh per cycle, into the equations for energy use per cycle, which
would be included in the proposed Appendices A and B in section 6.2. 75
FR 29846-29847.
Most stakeholders agreed with this approach. The Joint Comments,
ACEEE, AHAM, the IOUs, NDRC, NIST, Sub-Zero and Whirlpool all accepted
the
[[Page 78843]]
proposed approach to address icemaking and also the temporary
placeholder value. (Joint Comments, No. 20.1 at p. 5; ACEEE, No. 19.1
at p. 3-4; AHAM, No. 16.1 at p. 10; IOUs, No. 14.1 at p. 1-2; NDRC, No.
21.1 at p. 5; NIST, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 10 at p. 148; Sub
Zero, No. 10 at p. 150-151; Whirlpool, No. 12.1 at p. 6-7) The value of
0.23 kWh per day was of concern to Electrolux, who asserted that the
value is too low and does not truly represent the icemaking energy
across all refrigerators-freezers. (Electrolux, No. 17.2 at p. 1, cell
H155) Electrolux provided in their comments the same data that AHAM
submitted to DOE in November 2009 (Electrolux, No. 17.2 at p. 3) These
same data were used by DOE in developing these placeholder values.
Since no new data were provided, nor did Electrolux state specific
arguments as to why the AHAM data might be flawed, DOE does not believe
there is sufficient evidence or guidance to either raise or lower the
proposed value.
There was interest from the IOUs, NDRC, and NIST to define the
daily ice production factor in kWh/pound rather than kWh/year, to allow
flexibility for variation in icemaking capacity. (IOUs, No. 14.1 at p.
3; NIST, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 10 at p. 147; NRDC, No. 21.1 at
p. 5-6) A production factor in kWh/pound, when coupled with a
standardized ice production rate of lbs/day, would enable a metric in
units of kWh/year to be calculated. This metric could then be added to
the total energy use of the product. The IOUs additionally suggested
differentiating the placeholder value energy use depending on the
functional differences between refrigerators and freezers with
automatic icemakers. However, the available data provides an
insufficient basis on which to establish such variation in the
placeholder value based on product characteristics. Also, since DOE is
instituting a fixed placeholder value for automatic icemaker energy
use, DOE perceives no value in representing the energy use on a kWh per
pound basis at this time. Hence, the placeholder value will be
represented in kWh per year and added to the measured energy use to
provide a single metric for refrigeration product performance.
GE suggested that adding the energy use of automatic icemakers into
the energy use calculation, but not providing a similar placeholder for
manual icemaking, misleads consumers because it implies that there is
no energy associated with manual icemaking. (GE, Public Meeting
Transcript, No. 10 at p. 156-157) Currently, DOE has data only on
automatic icemaking and none on manual icemaking that would permit DOE
to create a comparable placeholder value for this task. The available
information, as described by the IOUs, suggests that much of the
automatic icemaking energy use is associated with the electric heater
used to free the ice from the mold. (IOUs, No. 14.1 at p. 2) In
comparison, manual icemaking involves the additional energy use
associated with opening the freezer door to insert the ice, which is
likely to be small when compared to the heater impact from automatic
icemaking systems.
Taking these factors into account, DOE will incorporate a single,
temporary placeholder value that will apply to products that have
automatic icemakers. This value would apply to products equipped either
with or without TTD ice service. Because automatic icemaking is
possible in both refrigerator-freezers and freezers, the modifications
will be made in both Appendices A and B.
Development of a Test Method
DOE sought comment on developing a test method to determine
icemaking energy use. DOE expects to work with AHAM to develop such a
procedure.
Electrolux voiced concern that the proper development of a robust
and reproducible icemaking test procedure will take longer than the
time permitted under this rulemaking. (Electrolux, No. 17.2 at p. 1,
cell H159) The Joint Comments provided a draft timeline for development
of a procedure including (1) development of a test procedure by January
1, 2012, (2) a test procedure rulemaking to modify the DOE test
procedure to adopt this procedure starting on January 1, 2012, and
culminating in a final rule by December 31, 2012, (3) an energy
conservation standard rulemaking culminating in a final rule by July 1,
2013, that would adjust the energy conservation standards to address
any differences between the current placeholder value and the average
automatic icemaker energy use measured using the new procedure, and (4)
an effective date for the adjusted standards three years after the
energy standard rulemaking final rule. (Joint Comment, No. 20.1 at p.
5-6) This schedule extends beyond the final rule of this rulemaking, as
suggested by Electrolux. DOE intends to support the development of a
test method for measurement of icemaking energy use, and will act to
amend the test procedure and energy standard accordingly, once a test
method has been developed.
Other comments addressed how the test method should report the
results to the consumer. The IOUs and Electrolux believe that the kWh
per year value for icemaking from the future test method should be
communicated to the consumer on the product as a visible separate value
from the kWh per year value. (IOUs, No. 14.1 at p. 1-2; Electrolux, No.
17.2 at p. 1, cell H157) The development of EnergyGuide requirements is
under the jurisdiction of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) rather
than DOE. Hence, FTC will ultimately decide on the content of the
label.
Ice in the Bin During Testing
DOE requested comment on whether the test procedure should provide
instructions regarding whether ice bins should contain ice during
testing. AHAM, GE, and Whirlpool asserted that no ice should be present
because the amount of ice in the bin could vary from unit to unit and
its presence introduces a thermal load that can affect temperature
measurements. (AHAM, No. 16.1 at p. 10; GE, Public Meeting Transcript,
No. 10 at p. 143-145; Whirlpool, No. 12.1 at p. 7) DOE acknowledges
that adding ice during testing would affect the thermal loading--and
overall measured energy consumption--of a refrigerator-freezer equipped
with automatic defrost. Whirlpool also asserted that there may be
significant impacts on measured energy use, manufacturer cost,
facilities, testing capability, lead time, or any combination of these
if this amendment is introduced prior to the compliance date for the
new energy conservation standards. (Whirlpool, No. 12.1 at p. 2)
Under the current procedure (Appendix A1, section 2.3),
refrigerator-freezers with automatic defrost are tested with no thermal
load in their freezer compartments. Hence, the thermal load associated
with a full ice bin could represent a significant additional thermal
mass, which would lengthen the compressor on-cycles during testing, and
may reduce the measured energy use by reducing off-cycle losses. To
avoid this result, in DOE's view, refrigerator-freezers with automatic
defrost should be tested with empty ice bins. To ensure consistency
among test procedures of different products, DOE is requiring that all
ice bins remain empty for all products during testing. To address
concerns regarding potential changes in measured energy use, this
change will apply to new Appendices A and B.
[[Page 78844]]
F. Other Issues
This section discusses comments made by stakeholders regarding
items for which DOE has not made corresponding changes in the test
procedure.
1. Electric Heaters
Refrigeration products use electric heaters for a variety of
functions. The NOPR discussed these functions, described current
approaches to heater operation during energy testing, and highlighted
possible modifications to the current test requirements for heaters.
Five types of heaters were discussed--anti-sweat, defrost, temperature
control, automatic icemaker, and exterior heaters. The NOPR asked
whether these heaters serve any other functions and whether other types
of electric resistance heaters are present in refrigeration products.
DOE sought to understand any additional heater applications, how they
contribute to energy use in normal operating conditions and during
testing under the current DOE energy test, and whether the current
procedure requires any amending to more accurately reflect their actual
energy usage in the field. 75 FR 29848-29849.
Whirlpool commented that they were unaware of additional uses for
electric resistance heaters in refrigeration products. (Whirlpool, No.
12.1 at p. 7) NDRC commented generally, stating that better insulation
in many cases could be used to ameliorate the need for resistance
heating. (NDRC, No. 21.1 at p. 6) Because stakeholders identified no
new functions for electric heaters, DOE has made no additional test
procedure amendments to address their energy use at this time.
2. Vacuum Insulation Panel Performance
DOE did not propose any test procedure changes specifically
associated with vacuum insulation panel (VIP) performance in the NOPR.
Nanopore commented that the test procedure should include a
lifetime performance test to evaluate the long-term efficiency of
products. Nanopore made this recommendation to address some low quality
vacuum panels that can lose as much as 80 percent of their thermal
resistance over the timeframe of a few months. Suggested procedures to
measure long-term performance included (1) requiring a measurement 6 or
12 months after manufacture, (2) aging of vacuum insulation panels in
an 80 [deg]C environment for a period of time and then testing them,
and (3) aging of the entire product and subsequently testing it.
(Nanopore, No. 11.1 at p. 1).
Additionally, ThermoCor provided details of an accelerated life
test (ALT) developed by Panasonic, a vacuum panel manufacturer.
ThermoCor proposed that this test could be conducted for the entire
refrigeration cabinet to assess long-term performance, and that a
different test could be developed to assess the long-term performance
of the compressor. The ALT uses cycling between 80 [deg]C and -30
[deg]C. A first test is conducted prior to the accelerated aging.
Subsequently, the test is repeated three times after three separate
periods of 9 days of temperature cycling. (ThermoCor, No. 18.1 at pp.
1-3)
Testing of the long-term efficiency of products has not yet been
introduced in DOE test procedures, although it has been proposed for
refrigerated walk-in enclosures. See 75 FR 55068, 55074 (September 9,
2010). DOE recognizes the importance of such a test, particularly for a
component that may have a degraded lifetime performance as suggested by
Nanopore. However, applying such lifetime performance tests to entire
refrigeration products (i.e., rather than to individual vacuum panels)
has, to DOE's knowledge, not been evaluated to confirm the accuracy of
this approach. DOE further notes that this type of test could represent
a significant additional test burden. In light of these concerns, the
adoption of such a procedure into DOE's regulations would require
additional input from the public. Consequently, DOE is not adopting a
lifetime performance test at this time.
3. Metric Units
DOE did not propose in the NOPR any test procedure changes
specifically addressing the use of metric units. See generally, 75 FR
29824.
Fisher & Paykel commented that all dimensions detailed in the test
procedures should be expressed in rounded metric units and that
Imperial (i.e., English) units should be provided in parentheses. In
Fisher & Paykel's view, such a change would be justified since all
other international markets other than the U.S. use the metric system.
The company added that making this change would also remove potential
sources of error. (Fisher & Paykel, No. 24.2 at p. 1) DOE notes that
the Imperial system, using inches, feet, and Fahrenheit for some of the
key measurements made for refrigeration products, is the primary system
used by U.S. consumers. Since some of the measurements, such as product
volumes, are used in marketing literature as well as in the test
procedure and test reports, converting to metric would potentially
affect consumers. Fisher & Paykel did not identify any particular
instances of test procedure values being in round Imperial units that
introduce errors in testing, nor did they indicate whether converting
to round metric units could cause any change in measured energy use,
making it difficult for DOE to fully evaluate this recommendation.
Further, prior to making such a change, DOE would, ideally, obtain
comments from other stakeholders involved in testing and reporting
product performance to determine if this concern is widely shared.
Hence, DOE is declining to adopt the change suggested by Fisher &
Paykel. DOE may revisit this issue in a future rulemaking.
G. Compliance With Other EPCA Requirements
In addition, DOE examined its other obligations under EPCA in
developing this final rule and interim final rule. These requirements
are addressed in greater detail below.
1. Test Burden
Section 323(b)(3) of EPCA requires that ``any test procedures
prescribed or amended under this section shall be reasonably designed
to produce test results which measure energy efficiency, energy use * *
* or estimated annual operating cost of a covered product during a
representative average use cycle or period of use * * * and shall not
be unduly burdensome to conduct.'' (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) For the
reasons that follow, DOE has concluded that the amendments being
adopted today satisfy this requirement.
The amendments generally incorporate minor adjustments to test
sample set-up procedures, the treatment of certain product features
such as convertible compartments, compartment temperatures, and volume
calculation methods. Most of these amendments require no changes in the
current requirements for equipment and instrumentation for testing or
the time required for testing.
With respect to the test method for variable anti-sweat heaters,
the procedure DOE is adopting today applies the test procedure found in
the GE waiver (see discussion in section III.D.9 above) rather than the
more complicated approach proposed in the NOPR that would have required
the use of a humidity-controlled test chamber and the conducting of
three tests to measure energy use for steady-state cycling operation of
a refrigerator-freezer. By adopting this modified approach, the new
procedure reduces the number of tests required for
[[Page 78845]]
products with anti-sweat heater switches and relies on a calculated
value to represent the anti-sweat heater energy use contribution when
calculating the total energy usage of a given product. This change
considerably reduces the testing burden manufacturers would have faced
under the proposal while providing a definitive method to account for
anti-sweat heater energy use.
Regarding heated-temperature-control special compartments, the
procedure in the interim final rule requires the averaging of tests
conducted with the temperature control settings in the coldest and
warmest positions. This approach doubles the test time for products
with such special compartments. However, as described in section
III.D.5, few products have such compartments. DOE estimates that these
products represent less than 5% of standard-size refrigerator-freezers,
based on (1) estimates that 20% of such products have special
compartments (see the discussion in section III.D.5 reviewing major
manufacturers' product details), and (2) the observation that of the
two refrigerator-freezers examined for reverse engineering as part of
the refrigeration product energy conservation standard rulemaking that
had special compartments, neither utilized heating to achieve
temperature control. The averaging of two tests potentially represents
a smaller test burden than the proposed approach of requiring the
highest energy use position. Under the proposed approach, AHAM
indicated that manufacturers would have to run tests at each setting to
determine which represents the highest energy use. (AHAM, No. 16.1 at
p. 5) DOE notes that the averaging of such tests that is being adopted
today is justified because it provides better consistency with a
representative average use cycle, as required by EPCA. (42 U.S.C.
6293(b)(3))
2. Potential Amendments To Include Standby and Off Mode Energy
Consumption
EPCA directs DOE to amend test procedures ``to include standby mode
and off mode energy consumption * * * with such energy consumption
integrated into the overall energy efficiency, energy consumption, or
other energy descriptor for each covered product, unless the Secretary
determines that--(i) the current test procedures for a covered product
already fully account for and incorporate the standby and off mode
energy consumption of the covered product * * *'' 42 U.S.C.
6295(gg)(2)(A)(i).
The procedure that DOE is adopting today already satisfies these
requirements. The DOE test procedures for refrigeration products
involve measuring the energy use of these products during extended time
periods that include periods when the compressor and other key
components are cycled off. All of the energy these products use during
the ``off cycles'' is included in the measurements. The refrigeration
product could include any auxiliary features which draw power in a
standby or off mode. HRF-1-1979 and HRF-1-2008 provide instructions
that certain auxiliary features should be set to the lowest power
position during testing. In this lowest power position, any standby or
off mode energy use of such auxiliary features would be included in the
energy measurement. Hence, no separate changes are needed to account
for standby and off mode energy consumption, since the current
procedures (and as modified in this final rule and interim final rule)
address these modes.
3. Addressing Changes in Measured Energy Use
Section 323(e)(1) of EPCA requires that DOE consider whether a new
test procedure alters the measured energy use of any covered product.
(42 U.S.C. 6293(e)(1)) Further, section 323(e)(2) of EPCA requires DOE
to amend the applicable standards if DOE determines that a new test
procedure would alter the measured energy use of a covered product. The
amended standard would be based on the average measurements made for a
representative sample of minimally compliant products. (42 U.S.C.
6293(e)(2))
As discussed above, DOE has made a number of changes to account for
the concerns raised by industry regarding the timing of certain
provisions that DOE had proposed to make effective 30 days after the
publication of the final rule. These changes include providing
manufacturers with additional time (2014) to use certain procedures
when conducting the test procedure. As a result, the interim final rule
sets out the procedures manufacturers must follow starting in 2014 with
respect to special compartments with heated temperature control, long-
time or variable defrost in order to capture pre-cooling and partial
recovery energy use, and multiple defrost cycles. The interim final
rule also addresses compartment temperature changes and volume
calculations.
Also as discussed above, industry and efficiency advocates
negotiated a consensus agreement, dated July 30, 2010, that sets forth
a series of standard levels for refrigeration products. DOE's parallel
standards rulemaking proposed levels that are based on the levels
submitted as part of that agreement. The industry has since raised
concerns about the interplay between these proposed standards and the
test procedure that DOE ultimately adopts. These concerns revolve
around the following issues: (1) Modification of the set-up procedures
for special compartments with heated temperature control; (2)
modification of the long-time defrost test procedure to capture pre-
cooling energy use; and (3) establishment of test procedures for
products with multiple defrost cycle types.
DOE notes that its test procedure NOPR was published on May 27,
2010, over two months before the date of the consensus agreement. Given
this fact, DOE believes that industry negotiators had an ample
opportunity to consider the potential impacts of the proposed test
procedure amendments prior to finalizing the consensus agreement
standards. The industry has not asserted that it has had an
insufficient amount of time to consider the NOPR's provisions in
developing the consensus standard levels. Accordingly, DOE believes
that the standards set forth in that agreement were based on a serious
and thoughtful consideration of the new changes to the test procedure
that DOE proposed in May 2010.
In spite of these facts, DOE is modifying its scheduled
implementation of certain provisions to provide manufacturers with
additional time to adjust to the new procedures. By implementing these
particular changes through the interim final rule, DOE seeks to
mitigate the potential burdens on industry while ensuring that the test
procedure is sufficiently robust and comprehensive to capture the
energy use from refrigeration products. Additionally, by following this
approach, DOE invites the submission of additional input from the
public regarding the procedures to address special compartments with
heated temperature control, long-time or variable defrost in order to
capture pre-cooling and partial recovery energy use, and multiple
defrost cycles. DOE will consider these comments and, to the extent
necessary, consider any needed adjustments.
IV. Procedural Requirements
A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget has determined that test
procedure rulemakings do not constitute ``significant regulatory
actions'' under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866,
[[Page 78846]]
Regulatory Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993).
Accordingly, this action was not subject to review under the Executive
Order by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in 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 proposed 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 the General
Counsel's Web site (http://www.gc.doe.gov).
DOE reviewed the test procedures in today's final rule and interim
final rule under the provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act and
the procedures and policies published on February 19, 2003. This final
rule and interim final rule prescribe test procedures that will be used
to test compliance with energy conservation standards for the products
that are the subject of this rulemaking.
The Small Business Administration (SBA) considers an entity to be a
small business if, together with its affiliates, it employs less than a
threshold number of workers specified in 13 CFR part 121, which relies
on size standards and codes established by the North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS). The threshold number for NAICS code
335222, which applies to Household Refrigerator and Home Freezer
Manufacturing, is 1,000 employees.
DOE searched the SBA Web site (http://dsbs.sba.gov/dsbs/search/dsp_dsbs.cfm) to identify manufacturers within this NAICS code that
produce refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and/or freezers. Most of
the manufacturers supplying these products are large multinational
corporations with more than 1,000 employees. There are several small
businesses involved in the sale of refrigeration products that are
listed on the SBA Web site under the NAICS code for this industry.
However, DOE believes that only U-Line Corporation of Milwaukee,
Wisconsin is a small business that manufactures these products. U-Line
primarily manufactures compact refrigerators and related compact
products such as wine coolers and icemakers (these icemakers are
distinguished from the automatic icemakers installed in many
residential refrigeration products in that they are complete icemaking
appliances using either typical residential icemaking technology or the
clear icemaking technology used extensively in commercial icemakers--
they are distinguished from refrigerators in that their sole purpose is
production and storage of ice).
DOE had tentatively concluded that the final rule and interim final
rule will not have a significant impact on small manufacturers under
the provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. DOE received no
comments objecting to this conclusion. Accordingly, the final rule and
the interim final rule amend DOE's energy test procedures for
refrigeration products. These amendments do not require use of test
facilities or test equipment that differ significantly from the test
facilities or test equipment that manufacturers currently use to
evaluate the energy efficiency of these products. Further, the amended
test procedures will not be significantly more difficult or time-
consuming to conduct than current DOE energy test procedures.
For these reasons, DOE concludes and certifies that the proposed
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Accordingly, DOE has not prepared a
regulatory flexibility analysis for this rulemaking. DOE has
transmitted the certification and supporting statement of factual basis
to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the SBA for review under 5 U.S.C.
605(b).
C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
Manufacturers of refrigeration products must certify to DOE that
their products comply with any applicable energy conservation standard.
In certifying compliance, manufacturers must test their products
according to the DOE test procedure for refrigeration products,
including any amendments adopted for that test procedure. DOE has
proposed regulations for the certification and recordkeeping
requirements for all covered consumer products and commercial
equipment, including the refrigeration products addressed by today's
final rule and interim final rule. 75 FR 56796 (Sept. 16, 2010). The
collection-of-information requirement for the certification and
recordkeeping is subject to review and approval by OMB under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). This requirement has been submitted to
OMB for approval. Public reporting burden for the certification is
estimated to average 20 hours per response, including the time for
reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the
collection of information.
Public comment is sought regarding: whether this proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall
have practical utility; the accuracy of the burden estimate; ways to
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be
collected; and ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information, including through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. Send comments on
these or any other aspects of the collection of information to Subid
Wagley (see ADDRESSES) and by e-mail to [email protected].
Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is
required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty
for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the PRA, unless that collection of information displays
a currently valid OMB Control Number.
D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
In this notice, DOE amends its test procedure for refrigerators,
refrigerator-freezers, and freezers. These amendments will improve the
ability of DOE's procedures to more accurately account for the energy
consumption of products that incorporate a variety of new technologies
that were not contemplated when the current procedure was promulgated.
The amendments also will be used to develop and implement future energy
conservation standards for refrigeration products. DOE has determined
that this final rule and interim final rule fall 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 DOE's
implementing regulations at 10 CFR part 1021. Specifically, this rule
amends an existing rule without changing its environmental effect, and,
therefore, is covered by the Categorical Exclusion in 10 CFR part 1021,
subpart D, paragraph A5. The exclusion applies because this rule
establishes revisions to existing test procedures that will not affect
the amount, quality, or distribution of
[[Page 78847]]
energy usage, and, therefore, will not result in any environmental
impacts. Accordingly, neither an environmental assessment nor an
environmental impact statement is required.
E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism,'' imposes certain requirements
on agencies formulating and implementing policies or regulations that
preempt State law or that have Federalism implications. 64 FR 43255
(August 10, 1999). 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 that it will follow in developing such
regulations. 65 FR 13735. DOE examined this final rule and interim
final rule and determined that it will 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. EPCA governs
and prescribes Federal preemption of State regulations as to energy
conservation for the products that are the subject of today's final
rule and interim final rule. States can petition DOE for exemption from
such preemption to the extent, and based on criteria, set forth in
EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6297) No further action is required by Executive Order
13132.
F. Review Under Executive Order 12988
Regarding the review of existing regulations and the promulgation
of new regulations, section 3(a) of Executive Order 12988, ``Civil
Justice Reform,'' 61 FR 4729 (Feb. 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; (3) provide a clear legal standard for affected
conduct rather than a general standard; and (4) 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 specifies the following: (1) The
preemptive effect, if any; (2) any effect on existing Federal law or
regulation; (3) a clear legal standard for affected conduct while
promoting simplification and burden reduction; (4) the retroactive
effect, if any; (5) definitions of key terms; and (6) 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 sections 3(a) and 3(b) to determine whether
they are met or whether 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 final rule and interim final rule meet
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 (UMRA) (Pub.
L. 104-4; 2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) requires each Federal agency to assess
the effects of Federal regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal
governments and the private sector. For a regulatory action resulting
in a rule that may cause the expenditure by State, local, and Tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100 million
or more in any one year (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 such governments. On March 18, 1997,
DOE published a statement of policy on its process for
intergovernmental consultation under UMRA. 62 FR 12820. (The policy is
also available at http://www.gc.doe.gov). Today's final rule and
interim final rule contain 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,
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.
Today's final rule and interim final 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 that might require compensation under the Fifth
Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
J. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act,
2001
Section 515 of 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 (Feb. 22, 2002), and
DOE's guidelines were published at 67 FR 62446 (Oct. 7, 2002). DOE has
reviewed today's rule under 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 significant energy action. A
``significant energy action'' is defined as any action by an agency
that promulgates 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 significant energy action, the agency must give a detailed
statement of any adverse effects on energy supply, distribution, or use
if the regulation is implemented, and of reasonable alternatives to the
action and their expected benefits on energy supply,
[[Page 78848]]
distribution, and use. Today's regulatory action is not a significant
regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. It has likewise not been
designated as a significant energy action by the Administrator of OIRA.
Moreover, it would not have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. Therefore, it is not a significant
energy action, and, 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 DOE Organization Act (Pub. L. 95-91; 42
U.S.C. 7101 et seq.), DOE must comply with section 32 of the Federal
Energy Administration Act of 1974, as amended by the Federal Energy
Administration Authorization Act of 1977 (FEAA). (15 U.S.C. 788)
Section 32 essentially provides in part that, where a proposed rule
authorizes or requires use of commercial standards, the rulemaking must
inform the public of the use and background of such standards. In
addition, section 32(c) requires DOE to consult with the Attorney
General and the Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC)
concerning the impact of the commercial or industry standards on
competition.
The proposed modifications to the test procedures addressed by this
action incorporate testing methods contained in certain sections of the
commercial standards, AHAM Standards HRF-1-1979 and HRF-1-2008. DOE has
evaluated these two versions of this standard and is unable to conclude
whether it fully complies with the requirements of section 32(b) of the
FEAA (i.e., whether it was developed in a manner that fully provides
for public participation, comment, and review.) DOE has consulted with
both the Attorney General and the Chairman of the FTC about the impact
on competition of using the methods contained in these standards and
has received no comments objecting to their use.
M. Congressional Notification
As required by 5 U.S.C. 801, DOE will report to Congress on the
promulgation of today's rule before 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).
V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of these final
rules.
List of Subjects in 10 CFR part 430
Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business
information, Energy conservation, Household appliances, Imports,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Small
businesses.
Issued in Washington, DC, on November 18, 2010.
Cathy Zoi,
Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
0
For the reasons stated in the preamble, DOE amends part 430 of chapter
II of title 10, of the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth below:
PART 430--ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAM FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS
0
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.
0
2. Section 430.2 is amended by revising the definitions for ``electric
refrigerator'' and ``electric refrigerator-freezer'' to read as
follows:
Sec. 430.2 Definitions.
* * * * *
Electric refrigerator means a cabinet designed for the refrigerated
storage of food, designed to be capable of achieving storage
temperatures above 32 [deg]F (0 [deg]C) and below 39 [deg]F (3.9
[deg]C), and having a source of refrigeration requiring single phase,
alternating current electric energy input only. An electric
refrigerator may include a compartment for the freezing and storage of
food at temperatures below 32[deg]F (0 [deg]C), but does not provide a
separate low temperature compartment designed for the freezing and
storage of food at temperatures below 8 [deg]F (-13.3 [deg]C).
Electric refrigerator-freezer means a cabinet which consists of two
or more compartments with at least one of the compartments designed for
the refrigerated storage of food and designed to be capable of
achieving storage temperatures above 32 [deg]F (0 [deg]C) and below 39
[deg]F (3.9 [deg]C), and with at least one of the compartments designed
for the freezing and storage of food at temperatures below 8 [deg]F (-
13.3 [deg]C) which may be adjusted by the user to a temperature of 0
[deg]F (-17.8 [deg]C) or below. The source of refrigeration requires
single phase, alternating current electric energy input only.
* * * * *
0
3. Section 430.3 is amended by redesignating paragraph (g)(1) as (g)(2)
and adding new paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(3), to read as follows:
Sec. 430.3 Materials incorporated by reference.
(g) * * *
(1) ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-1979, (Revision of ANSI B38.1-1970), (``HRF-1-
1979''), American National Standard, Household Refrigerators,
Combination Refrigerator-Freezers and Household Freezers, approved May
17, 1979, IBR approved for Appendices A1 and B1 to Subpart B.
* * * * *
(3) AHAM Standard HRF-1-2008, (``HRF-1-2008''), Association of Home
Appliance Manufacturers, Energy and Internal Volume of Refrigerating
Appliances (2008), including Errata to Energy and Internal Volume of
Refrigerating Appliances, Correction Sheet issued November 17, 2009,
IBR approved for Appendices A and B to Subpart B.
* * * * *
0
3. Section 430.23 is amended by
0
a. Adding an introductory paragraph before paragraph (a); and
0
b. Revising paragraphs (a) and (b).
The additions and revisions read as follows:
Sec. 430.23 Test procedures for the measurement of energy and water
consumption.
When the test procedures of this section call for rounding off of
test results, and the results fall equally between two values of the
nearest dollar, kilowatt-hour, or other specified nearest value, the
result shall be rounded up to the nearest higher value.
(a) Refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers. (1) The estimated
annual operating cost for electric refrigerators and electric
refrigerator-freezers without an anti-sweat heater switch shall be the
product of the following three factors, the resulting product then
being rounded off to the nearest dollar per year:
(i) The representative average-use cycle of 365 cycles per year;
(ii) The average per-cycle energy consumption for the standard
cycle in kilowatt-hours per cycle, determined according to 6.2 (6.3.6
for externally vented units) of Appendix A1 of this subpart before
Appendix A becomes mandatory and 6.2 (6.3.6 for externally vented
units) of Appendix A of this subpart after Appendix A becomes mandatory
(see the note at the beginning of Appendix A); and
(iii) The representative average unit cost of electricity in
dollars per kilowatt-hour as provided by the Secretary.
[[Page 78849]]
(2) The estimated annual operating cost for electric refrigerators
and electric refrigerator-freezers with an anti-sweat heater switch
shall be the product of the following three factors, the resulting
product then being rounded off to the nearest dollar per year:
(i) The representative average-use cycle of 365 cycles per year;
(ii) Half the sum of the average per-cycle energy consumption for
the standard cycle and the average per-cycle energy consumption for a
test cycle type with the anti-sweat heater switch in the position set
at the factory just before shipping, each in kilowatt-hours per cycle,
determined according to 6.2 (6.3.6 for externally vented units) of
Appendix A1 of this subpart before Appendix A becomes mandatory and 6.2
(6.3.6 for externally vented units) of Appendix A of this subpart after
Appendix A becomes mandatory (see the note at the beginning of Appendix
A); and
(iii) The representative average unit cost of electricity in
dollars per kilowatt-hour as provided by the Secretary.
(3) The estimated annual operating cost for any other specified
cycle type for electric refrigerators and electric refrigerator-
freezers shall be the product of the following three factors, the
resulting product then being rounded off to the nearest dollar per
year:
(i) The representative average-use cycle of 365 cycles per year;
(ii) The average per-cycle energy consumption for the specified
cycle type, determined according to 6.2 (6.3.6 for externally vented
units) of Appendix A1 to this subpart before Appendix A becomes
mandatory and 6.2 (6.3.6 for externally vented units) of Appendix A of
this subpart after Appendix A becomes mandatory (see the note at the
beginning of Appendix A); and
(iii) The representative average unit cost of electricity in
dollars per kilowatt-hour as provided by the Secretary.
(4) The energy factor for electric refrigerators and electric
refrigerator-freezers, expressed in cubic feet per kilowatt-hour per
cycle, shall be:
(i) For electric refrigerators and electric refrigerator-freezers
without an anti-sweat heater switch, the quotient of:
(A) The adjusted total volume in cubic feet, determined according
to 6.1 of Appendix A1 of this subpart before Appendix A becomes
mandatory and 6.1 of Appendix A of this subpart after Appendix A
becomes mandatory (see the note at the beginning of Appendix A),
divided by--
(B) The average per-cycle energy consumption for the standard cycle
in kilowatt-hours per cycle, determined according to 6.2 (6.3.6 for
externally vented units) of Appendix A1 of this subpart before Appendix
A becomes mandatory and 6.2 (6.3.6 for externally vented units) of
Appendix A of this subpart after Appendix A becomes mandatory (see the
note at the beginning of Appendix A), the resulting quotient then being
rounded off to the second decimal place; and
(ii) For electric refrigerators and electric refrigerator-freezers
having an anti-sweat heater switch, the quotient of:
(A) The adjusted total volume in cubic feet, determined according
to 6.1 of Appendix A1 of this subpart before Appendix A becomes
mandatory and 6.1 of Appendix A of this subpart after Appendix A
becomes mandatory (see the note at the beginning of Appendix A),
divided by --
(B) Half the sum of the average per-cycle energy consumption for
the standard cycle and the average per-cycle energy consumption for a
test cycle type with the anti-sweat heater switch in the position set
at the factory just before shipping, each in kilowatt-hours per cycle,
determined according to 6.2 (6.3.6 for externally vented units) of
Appendix A1 of this subpart before Appendix A becomes mandatory and 6.2
(6.3.6 for externally vented units) of Appendix A of this subpart after
Appendix A becomes mandatory (see the note at the beginning of Appendix
A), the resulting quotient then being rounded off to the second decimal
place.
(5) The annual energy use of electric refrigerators and electric
refrigerator-freezers, expressed in kilowatt-hours per year, shall be
the following, rounded to the nearest kilowatt-hour per year:
(i) For electric refrigerators and electric refrigerator-freezers
without an anti-sweat heater switch, the representative average use
cycle of 365 cycles per year multiplied by the average per-cycle energy
consumption for the standard cycle in kilowatt-hours per cycle,
determined according to 6.2 (6.3.6 for externally vented units) of
Appendix A1 of this subpart before Appendix A becomes mandatory and 6.2
(6.3.6 for externally vented units) of Appendix A of this subpart after
Appendix A becomes mandatory (see the note at the beginning of Appendix
A), and
(ii) For electric refrigerators and electric refrigerator-freezers
having an anti-sweat heater switch, the representative average use
cycle of 365 cycles per year multiplied by half the sum of the average
per-cycle energy consumption for the standard cycle and the average
per-cycle energy consumption for a test cycle type with the anti-sweat
heater switch in the position set at the factory just before shipping,
each in kilowatt-hours per cycle, determined according to 6.2 (6.3.6
for externally vented units) of Appendix A1 of this subpart before
Appendix A becomes mandatory and 6.2 (6.3.6 for externally vented
units) of Appendix A of this subpart after Appendix A becomes mandatory
(see the note at the beginning of Appendix A).
(6) Other useful measures of energy consumption for electric
refrigerators and electric refrigerator-freezers shall be those
measures of energy consumption for electric refrigerators and electric
refrigerator-freezers that the Secretary determines are likely to
assist consumers in making purchasing decisions which are derived from
the application of Appendix A1 of this subpart before Appendix A
becomes mandatory Appendix A of this subpart after Appendix A becomes
mandatory (see the note at the beginning of Appendix A).
(7) The estimated regional annual operating cost for externally
vented electric refrigerators and externally vented electric
refrigerator-freezers without an anti-sweat heater switch shall be the
product of the following three factors, the resulting product then
being rounded off to the nearest dollar per year:
(i) The representative average-use cycle of 365 cycles per year,
(ii) The regional average per-cycle energy consumption for the
standard cycle in kilowatt-hours per cycle, determined according to
6.3.7 of Appendix A1 of this subpart before Appendix A becomes
mandatory and 6.3.7 of Appendix A of this subpart after Appendix A
becomes mandatory (see the note at the beginning of Appendix A); and
(iii) The representative average unit cost of electricity in
dollars per kilowatt-hour as provided by the Secretary.
(8) The estimated regional annual operating cost for externally
vented electric refrigerators and externally vented electric
refrigerator-freezers with an anti-sweat heater switch shall be the
product of the following three factors, the resulting product then
being rounded off to the nearest dollar per year:
(i) The representative average-use cycle of 365 cycles per year;
(ii) Half the sum of the average per-cycle energy consumption for
the standard cycle and the regional average per-cycle energy
consumption for a test cycle with the anti-sweat heater switch in the
position set at the factory just
[[Page 78850]]
before shipping, each in kilowatt-hours per cycle, determined according
to 6.3.7 of Appendix A1 of this subpart before Appendix A becomes
mandatory and 6.3.7 of Appendix A of this subpart after Appendix A
becomes mandatory (see the note at the beginning of Appendix A); and
(iii) The representative average unit cost of electricity in
dollars per kilowatt-hour as provided by the Secretary.
(9) The estimated regional annual operating cost for any other
specified cycle for externally vented electric refrigerators and
externally vented electric refrigerator-freezers shall be the product
of the following three factors, the resulting product then being
rounded off to the nearest dollar per year:
(i) The representative average-use cycle of 365 cycles per year;
(ii) The regional average per-cycle energy consumption for the
specified cycle, in kilowatt-hours per cycle, determined according to
6.3.7 of Appendix A1 of this subpart before Appendix A becomes
mandatory and 6.3.7 of Appendix A of this subpart after Appendix A
becomes mandatory (see the note at the beginning of Appendix A); and
(iii) The representative average unit cost of electricity in
dollars per kilowatt-hour as provided by the Secretary.
(10) The following principles of interpretation should be applied
to the test procedure. The intent of the energy test procedure is to
simulate typical room conditions (approximately 70 [deg]F (21 [deg]C))
with door openings, by testing at 90 [deg]F (32.2 [deg]C) without door
openings. Except for operating characteristics that are affected by
ambient temperature (for example, compressor percent run time), the
unit, when tested under this test procedure, shall operate in a manner
equivalent to the unit in typical room conditions. The energy used by
the unit shall be calculated when a calculation is provided by the test
procedure. Energy consuming components that operate in typical room
conditions (including as a result of door openings, or a function of
humidity), and that are not exempted by this test procedure, shall
operate in an equivalent manner during energy testing under this test
procedure, or be accounted for by all calculations as provided for in
the test procedure. If:
(i) A product contains energy consuming components that operate
differently during the prescribed testing than they would during
representative average consumer use and
(ii) Applying the prescribed test to that product would evaluate it
in a manner that is unrepresentative of its true energy consumption
(thereby providing materially inaccurate comparative data), a
manufacturer must obtain a waiver in accordance with the relevant
provisions of 10 CFR part 430. Examples:
A. Energy saving features that are designed to be activated by a
lack of door openings shall not be functional during the energy test.
B. The defrost heater should not either function or turn off
differently during the energy test than it would when operating in
typical room conditions.
C. Electric heaters that would normally operate at typical room
conditions with door openings should also operate during the energy
test.
D. Energy used during adaptive defrost shall continue to be tested
and adjusted per the calculation provided for in this test procedure.
(b) Freezers. (1) The estimated annual operating cost for freezers
without an anti-sweat heater switch shall be the product of the
following three factors, the resulting product then being rounded off
to the nearest dollar per year:
(i) The representative average-use cycle of 365 cycles per year;
(ii) The average per-cycle energy consumption for the standard
cycle in kilowatt-hours per cycle, determined according to 6.2 of
Appendix B1 of this subpart before Appendix B becomes mandatory and 6.2
of Appendix B of this subpart after Appendix B becomes mandatory (see
the note at the beginning of Appendix B); and
(iii) The representative average unit cost of electricity in
dollars per kilowatt-hour as provided by the Secretary.
(2) The estimated annual operating cost for freezers with an anti-
sweat heater switch shall be the product of the following three
factors, the resulting product then being rounded off to the nearest
dollar per year:
(i) The representative average-use cycle of 365 cycles per year;
(ii) Half the sum of the average per-cycle energy consumption for
the standard cycle and the average per-cycle energy consumption for a
test cycle type with the anti-sweat heater switch in the position set
at the factory just before shipping, each in kilowatt-hours per cycle,
determined according to 6.2 of Appendix B1 of this subpart before
Appendix B becomes mandatory and 6.2 of Appendix B of this subpart
after Appendix B becomes mandatory (see the note at the beginning of
Appendix B); and
(iii) The representative average unit cost of electricity in
dollars per kilowatt-hour as provided by the Secretary.
(3) The estimated annual operating cost for any other specified
cycle type for freezers shall be the product of the following three
factors, the resulting product then being rounded off to the nearest
dollar per year:
(i) The representative average-use cycle of 365 cycles per year;
(ii) The average per-cycle energy consumption for the specified
cycle type, determined according to 6.2 of Appendix B1 of this subpart
before Appendix B becomes mandatory and 6.2 of Appendix B of this
subpart after Appendix B becomes mandatory (see the note at the
beginning of Appendix B); and
(iii) The representative average unit cost of electricity in
dollars per kilowatt-hour as provided by the Secretary.
(4) The energy factor for freezers, expressed in cubic feet per
kilowatt-hour per cycle, shall be:
(i) For freezers not having an anti-sweat heater switch, the
quotient of:
(A) The adjusted net refrigerated volume in cubic feet, determined
according to 6.1 of Appendix B1 of this subpart before Appendix B
becomes mandatory and 6.1 of Appendix B of this subpart after Appendix
B becomes mandatory (see the note at the beginning of Appendix B),
divided by--
(B) The average per-cycle energy consumption for the standard cycle
in kilowatt-hours per cycle, determined according to 6.2 of Appendix B1
of this subpart before Appendix B becomes mandatory and 6.2 of Appendix
B of this subpart after Appendix B becomes mandatory (see the note at
the beginning of Appendix B), the resulting quotient then being rounded
off to the second decimal place; and
(ii) For freezers having an anti-sweat heater switch, the quotient
of:
(A) The adjusted net refrigerated volume in cubic feet, determined
according to 6.1 of Appendix B1 of this subpart before Appendix B
becomes mandatory and 6.1 of Appendix B of this subpart after Appendix
B becomes mandatory (see the note at the beginning of Appendix B),
divided by--
(B) Half the sum of the average per-cycle energy consumption for
the standard cycle and the average per-cycle energy consumption for a
test cycle type with the anti-sweat heater switch in the position set
at the factory just before shipping, each in kilowatt-hours per cycle,
determined according to 6.2 of
[[Page 78851]]
Appendix B1 of this subpart before Appendix B becomes mandatory and 6.2
of Appendix B of this subpart after Appendix B becomes mandatory (see
the note at the beginning of Appendix B), the resulting quotient then
being rounded off to the second decimal place.
(5) The annual energy use of all freezers, expressed in kilowatt-
hours per year, shall be the following, rounded to the nearest
kilowatt-hour per year:
(i) For freezers not having an anti-sweat heater switch, the
representative average use cycle of 365 cycles per year multiplied by
the average per-cycle energy consumption for the standard cycle in
kilowatt-hours per cycle, determined according to 6.2 of Appendix B1 of
this subpart before Appendix B becomes mandatory and 6.2 of Appendix B
of this subpart after Appendix B becomes mandatory (see the note at the
beginning of Appendix B), and
(ii) For freezers having an anti-sweat heater switch, the
representative average use cycle of 365 cycles per year multiplied by
half the sum of the average per-cycle energy consumption for the
standard cycle and the average per-cycle energy consumption for a test
cycle type with the anti-sweat heater switch in the position set at the
factory just before shipping, each in kilowatt-hours per cycle,
determined according to 6.2 of Appendix B1 of this subpart before
Appendix B becomes mandatory and 6.2 of Appendix B of this subpart
after Appendix B becomes mandatory (see the note at the beginning of
Appendix B).
(6) Other useful measures of energy consumption for freezers shall
be those measures the Secretary determines are likely to assist
consumers in making purchasing decisions and are derived from the
application of Appendix B1 of this subpart before Appendix B becomes
mandatory and Appendix B of this subpart after Appendix B becomes
mandatory (see the note at the beginning of Appendix B).
(7) The following principles of interpretation should be applied to
the test procedure. The intent of the energy test procedure is to
simulate typical room conditions (approximately 70 [deg]F (21 [deg]C))
with door openings, by testing at 90 [deg]F (32.2 [deg]C) without door
openings. Except for operating characteristics that are affected by
ambient temperature (for example, compressor percent run time), the
unit, when tested under this test procedure, shall operate in a manner
equivalent to the unit in typical room conditions. The energy used by
the unit shall be calculated when a calculation is provided by the test
procedure. Energy consuming components that operate in typical room
conditions (including as a result of door openings, or a function of
humidity), and that are not exempted by this test procedure, shall
operate in an equivalent manner during energy testing under this test
procedure, or be accounted for by all calculations as provided for in
the test procedure. If:
(i) A product contains energy consuming components that operate
differently during the prescribed testing than they would during
representative average consumer use and
(ii) Applying the prescribed test to that product would evaluate it
in a manner that is unrepresentative of its true energy consumption
(thereby providing materially inaccurate comparative data), a
manufacturer must obtain a waiver in accordance with the relevant
provisions of 10 CFR part 430. Examples:
A. Energy saving features that are designed to be activated by a
lack of door openings hall not be functional during the energy test.
B. The defrost heater should not either function or turn off
differently during the energy test than it would when in typical room
conditions.
C. Electric heaters that would normally operate at typical room
conditions with door openings should also operate during the energy
test.
D. Energy used during adaptive defrost shall continue to be tested
and adjusted per the calculation provided for in this test procedure.
* * * * *
0
4. Add a new Appendix A to subpart B of part 430 to read as follows:
Appendix A to Subpart B of Part 430--Uniform Test Method for Measuring
the Energy Consumption of Electric Refrigerators and Electric
Refrigerator-Freezers
The provisions of Appendix A shall apply to all products
manufactured on or after the effective date of any amended standards
promulgated by DOE pursuant to Section 325(b)(4) of the Energy
Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, as amended by the Energy
Independence and Security Act of 2007 (to be codified at 42 U.S.C.
6295(b)(4)).
1. Definitions
Section 3, Definitions, of HRF-1-2008 (incorporated by
reference; see Sec. 430.3) applies to this test procedure.
1.1 ``Adjusted total volume'' means the sum of:
(i) The fresh food compartment volume as defined in HRF-1-2008
(incorporated by reference; see Sec. 430.3) in cubic feet, and
(ii) The product of an adjustment factor and the net freezer
compartment volume as defined in HRF-1-2008 in cubic feet.
1.2 ``All-refrigerator'' means an electric refrigerator that
does not include a compartment for the freezing and long time
storage of food at temperatures below 32[deg]F (0.0 [deg]C). It may
include a compartment of 0.50 cubic-foot capacity (14.2 liters) or
less for the freezing and storage of ice.
1.3 ``Anti-sweat heater'' means a device incorporated into the
design of a refrigerator or refrigerator-freezer to prevent the
accumulation of moisture on the exterior or interior surfaces of the
cabinet.
1.4 ``Anti-sweat heater switch'' means a user-controllable
switch or user interface which modifies the activation or control of
anti-sweat heaters.
1.5 ``Automatic defrost'' means a system in which the defrost
cycle is automatically initiated and terminated, with resumption of
normal refrigeration at the conclusion of the defrost operation. The
system automatically prevents the permanent formation of frost on
all refrigerated surfaces. Nominal refrigerated food temperatures
are maintained during the operation of the automatic defrost system.
1.6 ``Automatic icemaker'' means a device, that can be supplied
with water without user intervention, either from a pressurized
water supply system or by transfer from a water reservoir located
inside the cabinet, that automatically produces, harvests, and
stores ice in a storage bin, with means to automatically interrupt
the harvesting operation when the ice storage bin is filled to a
pre-determined level.
1.7 ``Cycle'' means the period of 24 hours for which the energy
use of an electric refrigerator or electric refrigerator-freezer is
calculated as though the consumer activated compartment temperature
controls were set to maintain the standardized temperatures (see
section 3.2).
1.8 ``Cycle type'' means the set of test conditions having the
calculated effect of operating an electric refrigerator or electric
refrigerator-freezer for a period of 24 hours, with the consumer
activated controls other than those that control compartment
temperatures set to establish various operating characteristics.
1.9 ``Defrost cycle type'' means a distinct sequence of control
whose function is to remove frost and/or ice from a refrigerated
surface. There may be variations in the defrost control sequence
such as the number of defrost heaters energized. Each such variation
establishes a separate distinct defrost cycle type. However, defrost
achieved regularly during the compressor off-cycles by warming of
the evaporator without active heat addition is not a defrost cycle
type.
1.10 ``Externally vented refrigerator or refrigerator-freezer''
means an electric refrigerator or electric refrigerator-freezer that
has an enclosed condenser or an enclosed condenser/compressor
compartment and a set of air ducts for transferring the exterior air
from outside the building envelope into, through, and out of the
refrigerator or refrigerator-freezer cabinet; is capable of mixing
exterior air with the room air before discharging into, through, and
out of the condenser or condenser/compressor compartment; may
include thermostatically controlled dampers or controls that mix the
exterior and room air at low outdoor
[[Page 78852]]
temperatures and exclude exterior air when the outdoor air
temperature is above 80 [deg]F (26.7 [deg]C) or the room air
temperature; and may have a thermostatically actuated exterior air
fan.
1.11 ``HRF-1-2008'' means AHAM Standard HRF-1-2008, Association
of Home Appliance Manufacturers, Energy and Internal Volume of
Refrigerating Appliances (2008), including Errata to Energy and
Internal Volume of Refrigerating Appliances, Correction Sheet issued
November 17, 2009. Only sections of HRF-1-2008 (incorporated by
reference; see Sec. 430.3) specifically referenced in this test
procedure are part of this test procedure. In cases where there is a
conflict, the language of the test procedure in this appendix takes
precedence over HRF-1-2008.
1.12 ``Long-time automatic defrost'' means an automatic defrost
system whose successive defrost cycles are separated by 14 hours or
more of compressor operating time.
1.13 ``Separate auxiliary compartment'' means a freezer
compartment or a fresh food compartment of a refrigerator or
refrigerator-freezer having more than two compartments that is not
the first freezer compartment or the first fresh food compartment.
Access to a separate auxiliary compartment is through a separate
exterior door or doors rather than through the door or doors of
another compartment. Separate auxiliary compartments may be
convertible (e.g., from fresh food to freezer). Separate auxiliary
freezer compartments may not be larger than the first freezer
compartment and separate auxiliary fresh food compartments may not
be larger than the first fresh food compartment, but such size
restrictions do not apply to separate auxiliary convertible
compartments.
1.14 ``Special compartment'' means any compartment other than a
butter conditioner, without doors directly accessible from the
exterior, and with separate temperature control (such as crispers
convertible to meat keepers) that is not convertible from fresh food
temperature range to freezer temperature range.
1.15 ``Stabilization period'' means the total period of time
during which steady-state conditions are being attained or
evaluated.
1.16 ``Standard cycle'' means the cycle type in which the anti-
sweat heater control, when provided, is set in the highest energy-
consuming position.
1.17 ``Variable anti-sweat heater control'' means an anti-sweat
heater control that varies the average power input of the anti-sweat
heater(s) based on operating condition variable(s) and/or ambient
condition variable(s).
1.18 ``Variable defrost control'' means an automatic defrost
system in which successive defrost cycles are determined by an
operating condition variable or variables other than solely
compressor operating time. This includes any electrical or
mechanical device performing this function. A control scheme that
changes the defrost interval from a fixed length to an extended
length (without any intermediate steps) is not considered a variable
defrost control. A variable defrost control feature should predict
the accumulation of frost on the evaporator and react accordingly.
Therefore, the times between defrost should vary with different
usage patterns and include a continuum of lengths of time between
defrosts as inputs vary.
2. Test Conditions
2.1 Ambient Temperature. The ambient temperature shall be 90.0
1 [deg]F (32.2 0.6 [deg]C) during the
stabilization period and the test period.
2.2 Operational Conditions. The electric refrigerator or
electric refrigerator-freezer shall be installed and its operating
conditions maintained in accordance with HRF-1-2008, (incorporated
by reference; see Sec. 430.3), section 5.3 through section 5.5.5.5
(excluding section 5.5.5.4). Exceptions and clarifications to the
cited sections of HRF-1-2008 are noted in sections 2.3 through 2.8,
and 5.1 of this test procedure.
2.3 Anti-Sweat Heaters. The anti-sweat heater switch is to be on
during one test and off during a second test. In the case of an
electric refrigerator-freezer equipped with variable anti-sweat
heater control, the standard cycle energy use shall be the result of
the calculation described in 6.2.3.
2.4 Conditions for Automatic Defrost Refrigerator-Freezers. For
automatic defrost refrigerator-freezers, the freezer compartments
shall not be loaded with any frozen food packages during testing.
Cylindrical metallic masses of dimensions 1.12 0.25
inches (2.9 0.6 cm) in diameter and height shall be
attached in good thermal contact with each temperature sensor within
the refrigerated compartments. All temperature measuring sensor
masses shall be supported by low-thermal-conductivity supports in
such a manner to ensure that there will be at least 1 inch (2.5 cm)
of air space separating the thermal mass from contact with any
interior surface or hardware inside the cabinet. In case of
interference with hardware at the sensor locations specified in
section 5.1, the sensors shall be placed at the nearest adjacent
location such that there will be a 1-inch air space separating the
sensor mass from the hardware.
2.5 Conditions for All-Refrigerators. There shall be no load in
the freezer compartment during the test.
2.6 The cabinet and its refrigerating mechanism shall be
assembled and set up in accordance with the printed consumer
instructions supplied with the cabinet. Set-up of the refrigerator
or refrigerator-freezer shall not deviate from these instructions,
unless explicitly required or allowed by this test procedure.
Specific required or allowed deviations from such set-up include the
following:
(a) Connection of water lines and installation of water filters
are not required;
(b) Clearance requirements from surfaces of the product shall be
as described in section 2.8 of this appendix;
(c) The electric power supply shall be as described in HRF-1-
2008 (incorporated by reference; see Sec. 430.3), section 5.5.1;
(d) Temperature control settings for testing shall be as
described in section 3 below. Settings for convertible compartments
and other temperature-controllable or special compartments shall be
as described in section 2.7 of this appendix;
(e) The product does not need to be anchored or otherwise
secured to prevent tipping during energy testing;
(f) All the product's chutes and throats required for the
delivery of ice shall be free of packing, covers, or other blockages
that may be fitted for shipping or when the icemaker is not in use;
and
(g) Ice storage bins shall be emptied of ice.
For cases in which set-up is not clearly defined by this test
procedure, manufacturers must submit a petition for a waiver (see
section 7).
2.7 Compartments that are convertible (e.g., from fresh food to
freezer) shall be operated in the highest energy use position. For the
special case of convertible separate auxiliary compartments, this means
that the compartment shall be treated as a freezer compartment or a
fresh food compartment, depending on which of these represents higher
energy use. Special compartments shall be tested with controls set to
provide the coldest temperature. However, for special compartments in
which temperature control is achieved using the addition of heat
(including resistive electric heating, refrigeration system waste heat,
or heat from any other source, but excluding the transfer of air from
another part of the interior of the product) for any part of the
controllable temperature range of that compartment, the product energy
use shall be determined by averaging two sets of tests. The first set
of tests shall be conducted with such special compartments at their
coldest settings, and the second set of tests shall be conducted with
such special compartments at their warmest settings. The requirements
for the warmest or coldest temperature settings of this section do not
apply to features or functions associated with temperature control
(such as fast chill compartments) that are initiated manually and
terminated automatically within 168 hours.
2.8 The space between the back of the cabinet and a vertical
surface (the test room wall or simulated wall) shall be the minimum
distance in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions. However,
the clearance shall not be greater than 2 inches (51 mm) from the plane
of the cabinet's back panel to the vertical surface. If permanent rear
spacers extend further than this distance, the appliance shall be
located with the spacers in contact with the vertical surface.
2.9 Steady-State Condition. Steady-state conditions exist if the
temperature measurements in all measured
[[Page 78853]]
compartments taken at 4-minute intervals or less during a stabilization
period are not changing at a rate greater than 0.042 [deg]F (0.023
[deg]C) per hour as determined by the applicable condition of A or B,
described below.
A. The average of the measurements during a 2-hour period if no
cycling occurs or during a number of complete repetitive compressor
cycles occurring through a period of no less than 2 hours is compared
to the average over an equivalent time period with 3 hours elapsing
between the two measurement periods.
B. If A above cannot be used, the average of the measurements
during a number of complete repetitive compressor cycles occurring
through a period of no less than 2 hours and including the last
complete cycle before a defrost period (or if no cycling occurs, the
average of the measurements during the last 2 hours before a defrost
period) are compared to the same averaging period before the following
defrost period.
2.10 Exterior Air for Externally Vented Refrigerator or
Refrigerator-Freezer. An exterior air source shall be provided with
adjustable temperature and pressure capabilities. The exterior air
temperature shall be adjustable from 30 1 [deg]F (1.7
0.6 [deg]C) to 90 1 [deg]F (32.2
0.6 [deg]C).
2.10.1 Air Duct. The exterior air shall pass from the exterior air
source to the test unit through an insulated air duct.
2.10.2 Air Temperature Measurement. The air temperature entering
the condenser or condenser/compressor compartment shall be maintained
to 3 [deg]F (1.7 [deg]C) during the stabilization and test
periods and shall be measured at the inlet point of the condenser or
condenser/compressor compartment (``condenser inlet''). Temperature
measurements shall be taken from at least three temperature sensors or
one sensor per 4 square inches (25.8 square cm) of the air duct cross-
sectional area, whichever is greater, and shall be averaged. For a unit
that has a condenser air fan, a minimum of three temperature sensors at
the condenser fan discharge shall be required. Temperature sensors
shall be arranged to be at the centers of equally divided cross-
sectional areas. The exterior air temperature, at its source, shall be
measured and maintained to 1 [deg]F (0.6 [deg]C) during
the test period. The temperature measuring devices shall have an error
no greater than 0.5 [deg]F ( 0.3 [deg]C).
Measurements of the air temperature during the test period shall be
taken at regular intervals not to exceed 4 minutes.
2.10.3 Exterior Air Static Pressure. The exterior air static
pressure at the inlet point of the unit shall be adjusted to maintain a
negative pressure of 0.20[sec] 0.05[sec] water column (62
Pascals 12.5 Pascals) for all air flow rates supplied to
the unit. The pressure sensor shall be located on a straight duct with
a distance of at least 7.5 times the diameter of the duct upstream and
a distance of at least 3 times the diameter of the duct downstream.
There shall be four static pressure taps at 90[deg] angles apart. The
four pressures shall be averaged by interconnecting the four pressure
taps. The air pressure measuring instrument shall have an error no
greater than 0.01'' water column (2.5 Pascals).
3. Test Control Settings
3.1 Model with no User Operable Temperature Control. A test shall
be performed to measure the compartment temperatures and energy use. A
second test shall be performed with the temperature control
electrically short circuited to cause the compressor to run
continuously.
3.2 Models with User Operable Temperature Control. Testing shall be
performed in accordance with one of the following sections using the
following standardized temperatures:
All-Refrigerator: 39 [deg]F (3.9 [deg]C) fresh food compartment
temperature;
Refrigerator: 15 [deg]F (-9.4 [deg]C) freezer compartment
temperature, 39 [deg]F (3.9 [deg]C) fresh food compartment temperature;
Refrigerator-Freezer: 0 [deg]F (-17.8 [deg]C) freezer compartment
temperature, 39 [deg]F (3.9 [deg]C) fresh food compartment temperature.
For the purposes of comparing compartment temperatures with
standardized temperatures, as described in sections 3.2.1 and 3.2.2,
the freezer compartment temperature shall be as specified in section
5.1.4, and the fresh food compartment temperature shall be as specified
in section 5.1.3.
3.2.1 A first test shall be performed with all compartment
temperature controls set at their median position midway between their
warmest and coldest settings. For mechanical control systems, knob
detents shall be mechanically defeated if necessary to attain a median
setting. For electronic control systems, the test shall be performed
with all compartment temperature controls set at the average of the
coldest and warmest settings--if there is no setting equal to this
average, the setting closest to the average shall be used. If there are
two such settings equally close to the average, the higher of these
temperature control settings shall be used. A second test shall be
performed with all controls set at their warmest setting or all
controls set at their coldest setting (not electrically or mechanically
bypassed). For all-refrigerators, this setting shall be the appropriate
setting that attempts to achieve compartment temperatures measured
during the two tests which bound (i.e., one is above and one is below)
the standardized temperature for all-refrigerators. For refrigerators
and refrigerator-freezers, the second test shall be conducted with all
controls at their coldest setting, unless all compartment temperatures
measured during the first part of the test are lower than the
standardized temperatures, in which case the second test shall be
conducted with all controls at their warmest setting. Refer to Table 1
for all-refrigerators or Table 2 for refrigerators with freezer
compartments and refrigerator-freezers to determine which test results
to use in the energy consumption calculation. If any compartment is
warmer than its standardized temperature for a test with all controls
at their coldest position, the tested unit fails the test and cannot be
rated.
Table 1--Temperature Settings for All-Refrigerators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First test Second test
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Energy calculation
Settings Results Settings Results based on:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mid............................. Low............... Warm.............. Low............... Second Test Only.
High.............. First and Second
Tests.
High.............. Cold.............. Low............... First and Second
Tests.
High.............. No Energy Use
Rating.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 78854]]
Table 2--Temperature Settings for Refrigerators With Freezer Compartments and Refrigerator-Freezers
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First test Second test
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Energy calculation
Settings Results Settings Results based on:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fzr Mid FF Mid.................. Fzr Low FF Low.... Fzr Warm FF Warm.. Fzr Low FF Low.... Second Test Only.
Fzr Low FF High... First and Second
Tests.
Fzr High FF Low... First and Second
Tests.
Fzr High FF High.. First and Second
Tests.
Fzr Low FF High... Fzr Cold FF Cold.. Fzr Low FF High... No Energy Use
Rating.
Fzr Low FF Low.... First and Second
Tests.
Fzr High FF Low... Fzr Cold FF Cold.. Fzr High FF Low... No Energy Use
Rating.
Fzr Low FF Low.... First and Second
Tests.
Fzr High FF High.. Fzr Cold FF Cold.. Fzr Low FF Low.... First and Second
Tests.
Fzr Low FF High... No Energy Use
Rating.
Fzr High FF Low... No Energy Use
Rating.
Fzr High FF High.. No Energy Use
Rating.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: Fzr = Freezer Compartment, FF = Fresh Food Compartment.
3.2.2 Alternatively, a first test may be performed with all
temperature controls set at their warmest setting. If all compartment
temperatures are below the appropriate standardized temperatures, then
the result of this test alone will be used to determine energy
consumption. If this condition is not met, then the unit shall be
tested in accordance with 3.2.1.
3.2.3 Temperature Settings for Separate Auxiliary Convertible
Compartments. For separate auxiliary convertible compartments tested as
freezer compartments, the median setting shall be within 2 [deg]F (1.1
[deg]C) of the standardized temperature, and the warmest setting shall
be above 5 [deg]F (-15 [deg]C). For separate auxiliary convertible
compartments tested as fresh food compartments, the median setting
shall be within 2 [deg]F (1.1 [deg]C) of the standardized temperature,
and the coldest setting shall be below 34 [deg]F (1.1 [deg]C). For
compartments where control settings are not expressed as particular
temperatures, the measured temperature of the convertible compartment
rather than the settings shall meet the specified criteria.
4. Test Period
Tests shall be performed by establishing the conditions set forth
in section 2, and using the control settings set forth in section 3.
4.1 Nonautomatic Defrost. If the model being tested has no
automatic defrost system, the test time period shall start after
steady-state conditions have been achieved and be no less than 3 hours
in duration. During the test period, the compressor motor shall
complete two or more whole compressor cycles. (A compressor cycle is a
complete ``on'' and a complete ``off'' period of the motor). If no
``off'' cycling will occur, as determined during the stabilization
period, the test period shall be 3 hours. If incomplete cycling occurs
(i.e. less than two compressor cycles during a 24-hour period), the
results of the 24-hour period shall be used.
4.2 Automatic Defrost. If the model being tested has an automatic
defrost system, the test time period shall start after steady-state
conditions have been achieved and be from one point during a defrost
period to the same point during the next defrost period. If the model
being tested has a long-time automatic defrost system, the alternative
provisions of 4.2.1 may be used. If the model being tested has a
variable defrost control, the provisions of section 4.2.2 shall apply.
If the model has a dual compressor system with automatic defrost for
both systems, the provisions of 4.2.3 shall apply. If the model being
tested has long-time automatic or variable defrost control involving
multiple defrost cycle types, such as for a product with a single
compressor and two or more evaporators in which the evaporators are
defrosted at different frequencies, the provisions of section 4.2.4
shall apply. If the model being tested has multiple defrost cycle types
for which compressor run time between defrosts is a fixed time of less
than 14 hours for all such cycle types, and for which the compressor
run time between defrosts for different defrost cycle types are equal
to or multiples of each other, the test time period shall be from one
point of the defrost cycle type with the longest compressor run time
between defrosts to the same point during the next occurrence of this
defrost cycle type. For such products not using the section 4.2.4
procedures, energy consumption shall be calculated as described in
section 5.2.1.1.
4.2.1 Long-time Automatic Defrost. If the model being tested has a
long-time automatic defrost system, the two-part test described in this
section may be used. The first part is a stable period of compressor
operation that includes no portions of the defrost cycle, such as
precooling or recovery, that is otherwise the same as the test for a
unit having no defrost provisions (section 4.1). The second part is
designed to capture the energy consumed during all of the events
occurring with the defrost control sequence that are outside of stable
operation.
4.2.1.1 Cycling Compressor System. For a system with a cycling
compressor, the second part starts at the termination of the last
regular compressor ``on'' cycle. The average temperature of the
compartment measured from the termination of the previous compressor
``on'' cycle to the termination of the last regular compressor ``on''
cycle must be within 0.5 [deg]F (0.3 [deg]C) of the average temperature
of the compartment measured for the first part of the test. If any
compressor cycles occur prior to the defrost heater being energized
that cause the average temperature in the compartment to deviate from
the first part temperature by more than 0.5 [deg]F (0.3 [deg]C), these
compressor cycles are not considered regular compressor cycles and must
be included in the second part of the test. As an example, a
``precool'' cycle, which is an extended compressor cycle that lowers
the compartment temperature prior to energizing the defrost heater,
must be included in the second part of the test. The test period for
the second part of the test ends at the initiation of the first regular
compressor cycle after the compartment temperatures have fully
recovered to their stable conditions. The average temperature of the
compartment measured from this initiation of the first regular
compressor ``on'' cycle until the initiation of the next regular
compressor ``on'' cycle must be within 0.5 [deg]F (0.3 [deg]C) of the
average temperature of the compartment measured for the first part of
the test. The second part of the test
[[Page 78855]]
may be terminated after 4 hours if the above conditions cannot be met.
See Figure 1.
Figure 1
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16DE10.005
4.2.1.2 Non-cycling Compressor System. For a system with a non-
cycling compressor, the second part starts at a time before defrost
during stable operation when the compartment temperature is within 0.5
[deg]F (0.3 [deg]C) of the average temperature of the compartment
measured for the first part of the test. The second part stops at a
time after defrost during stable operation when the compartment
temperature is within 0.5 [deg]F (0.3 [deg]C) of the average
temperature of the compartment measured for the first part of the test.
The second part of the test may be terminated after 4 hours if the
above conditions cannot be met. See Figure 2.
[[Page 78856]]
Figure 2
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16DE10.006
4.2.2 Variable Defrost Control. If the model being tested has a
variable defrost control system, the test shall consist of the same two
parts as the test for long-time automatic defrost (section 4.2.1).
4.2.3 Dual Compressor Systems with Automatic Defrost. If the model
being tested has separate compressor systems for the refrigerator and
freezer sections, each with its own automatic defrost system, then the
two-part method in 4.2.1 shall be used. The second part of the method
will be conducted separately for each automatic defrost system. The
components (compressor, fan motors, defrost heaters, anti-sweat
heaters, etc.) associated with each system will be identified and their
energy consumption will be separately measured during each test.
4.2.4 Systems with Multiple Defrost Frequencies. This section
applies to models with long-time automatic or variable defrost control
with multiple defrost cycle types, such as models with single
compressors and multiple evaporators in which the evaporators have
different defrost frequencies. The two-part method in 4.2.1 shall be
used. The second part of the method will be conducted separately for
each distinct defrost cycle type. For defrost cycle types involving the
defrosting of both fresh food and freezer compartments, the freezer
compartment temperature shall be used to determine test period start
and stop times.
5. Test Measurements
5.1 Temperature Measurements. Temperature measurements shall be
made at the locations prescribed in Figures 5.1 and 5.2 of HRF-1-2008
(incorporated by reference; see Sec. 430.3) and shall be accurate to
within 0.5 [deg]F (0.3 [deg]C). No freezer temperature
measurements need be taken in an all-refrigerator model.
If the interior arrangements of the cabinet do not conform with
those shown in Figure 5.1 and 5.2 of HRF-1-2008, the product may be
tested by relocating the temperature sensors from the locations
specified in the figures to avoid interference with hardware or
components within the cabinet, in which case the specific locations
used for the temperature sensors shall be noted in the test data
records maintained by the manufacturer, and the certification report
shall indicate that non-standard sensor locations were used.
5.1.1 Measured Temperature. The measured temperature of a
compartment is to be the average of all sensor
[[Page 78857]]
temperature readings taken in that compartment at a particular point in
time. Measurements shall be taken at regular intervals not to exceed 4
minutes.
5.1.2 Compartment Temperature. The compartment temperature for each
test period shall be an average of the measured temperatures taken in a
compartment during the test period as defined in section 4. For long-
time automatic defrost models, compartment temperatures shall be those
measured in the first part of the test period specified in section
4.2.1. For models with variable defrost controls, compartment
temperatures shall be those measured in the first part of the test
period specified in section 4.2.2.
5.1.3 Fresh Food Compartment Temperature. The fresh food
compartment temperature shall be calculated as:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16DE10.007
Where:
R is the total number of applicable fresh food compartments, which
include the first fresh food compartment and any number of separate
auxiliary fresh food compartments (including separate auxiliary
convertible compartments tested as fresh food compartments in
accordance with section 2.7);
TRi is the compartment temperature of fresh food
compartment ``i'' determined in accordance with section 5.1.2; and
VRi is the volume of fresh food compartment ``i''.
5.1.4 Freezer Compartment Temperature. The freezer compartment
temperature shall be calculated as:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16DE10.008
Where:
F is the total number of applicable freezer compartments, which
include the first freezer compartment and any number of separate
auxiliary freezer compartments (including separate auxiliary
convertible compartments tested as freezer compartments in
accordance with section 2.7);
TFi is the compartment temperature of freezer compartment
``i'' determined in accordance with section 5.1.2; and
VFi is the volume of freezer compartment ``i''.
5.2 Energy Measurements
5.2.1 Per-Day Energy Consumption. The energy consumption in
kilowatt-hours per day, ET, for each test period shall be the energy
expended during the test period as specified in section 4 adjusted to a
24-hour period. The adjustment shall be determined as follows.
5.2.1.1 Nonautomatic and Automatic Defrost Models. The energy
consumption in kilowatt-hours per day shall be calculated equivalent
to:
ET = EP x 1440/T
Where:
ET = test cycle energy expended in kilowatt-hours per day;
EP = energy expended in kilowatt-hours during the test period;
T = length of time of the test period in minutes; and
1440 = conversion factor to adjust to a 24-hour period in minutes
per day.
5.2.1.2 Long-time Automatic Defrost. If the two-part test method is
used, the energy consumption in kilowatt-hours per day shall be
calculated equivalent to:
ET = (1440 x EP1/T1) + (EP2 - (EP1 x T2/T1)) x (12/CT)
Where:
ET and 1440 are defined in 5.2.1.1;
EP1 = energy expended in kilowatt-hours during the first part of the
test;
EP2 = energy expended in kilowatt-hours during the second part of
the test;
T1 and T2 = length of time in minutes of the first and second test
parts respectively;
CT = defrost timer run time or compressor run time between defrosts
in hours required to cause it to go through a complete cycle,
rounded to the nearest tenth of an hour; and
12 = factor to adjust for a 50-percent run time of the compressor in
hours per day.
5.2.1.3 Variable Defrost Control. The energy consumption in
kilowatt-hours per day shall be calculated equivalent to:
ET = (1440 x EP1/T1) + (EP2 - (EP1 x T2/T1)) x (12/CT),
Where:
1440 is defined in 5.2.1.1 and EP1, EP2, T1, T2, and 12 are defined
in 5.2.1.2;
CT = (CTL x CTM)/(F x (CTM -
CTL) + CTL);
CTL = least or shortest compressor run time between
defrosts in hours rounded to the nearest tenth of an hour (greater
than or equal to 6 but less than or equal to 12 hours);
CTM = maximum compressor run time between defrosts in
hours rounded to the nearest tenth of an hour (greater than
CTL but not more than 96 hours);
F = ratio of per day energy consumption in excess of the least
energy and the maximum difference in per-day energy consumption and
is equal to 0.20
For variable defrost models with no values for CT L and
CTM in the algorithm, the default values of 12 and 84
shall be used, respectively.
5.2.1.4 Dual Compressor Systems with Dual Automatic Defrost. The
two-part test method in section 4.2.4 must be used, and the energy
consumption in kilowatt-hours per day shall be calculated equivalent
to:
ET = (1440 x EP1/T1) + (EP2F - (EPF x T2/T1)) x
(12/CTF) + (EP2R - (EPR x T3/T1)) x
(12/CTR)
Where:
1440, EP1, T1, EP2, 12, and CT are defined in 5.2.1.2;
EPF = freezer system energy in kilowatt-hours expended
during the first part of the test;
EP2F = freezer system energy in kilowatt-hours expended
during the second part of the test for the freezer system;
EPR = refrigerator system energy in kilowatt-hours
expended during the first part of the test;
EP2R = refrigerator system energy in kilowatt-hours
expended during the second part of the test for the refrigerator
system;
T2 and T3 = length of time in minutes of the second test part for
the freezer and refrigerator systems respectively;
CTF = compressor run time between freezer defrosts (in
hours rounded to the nearest tenth of an hour); and
CTR = compressor run time between refrigerator defrosts
(in hours rounded to the nearest tenth of an hour).
5.2.1.5 Long-time or Variable Defrost Control for Systems with
Multiple Defrost cycle Types. The energy consumption in kilowatt-hours
per day shall be calculated equivalent to:
[[Page 78858]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16DE10.009
Where:
1440 is defined in 5.2.1.1 and EP1, T1, and 12 are defined in
5.2.1.2;
i is a variable that can equal 1, 2, or more that identifies the
distinct defrost cycle types applicable for the refrigerator or
refrigerator-freezer;
EP2i = energy expended in kilowatt-hours during the
second part of the test for defrost cycle type i;
T2i = length of time in minutes of the second part of the
test for defrost cycle type i;
CTi is the compressor run time between instances of
defrost cycle type i, for long-time automatic defrost control equal
to a fixed time in hours rounded to the nearest tenth of an hour,
and for variable defrost control equal to (CTLi x
CTMi)/(F x (CTMi - CTLi) +
CTLi);
CTLi = least or shortest compressor run time between
instances of defrost cycle type i in hours rounded to the nearest
tenth of an hour (CTL for the defrost cycle type with the
longest compressor run time between defrosts must be greater than or
equal to 6 but less than or equal to 12 hours);
CTMi = maximum compressor run time between instances of
defrost cycle type i in hours rounded to the nearest tenth of an
hour (greater than CTLi but not more than 96 hours);
For cases in which there are more than one fixed CT value (for long-
time defrost models) or more than one CTM and/or
CTL value (for variable defrost models) for a given
defrost cycle type, an average fixed CT value or average
CTM and CTL values shall be selected for this
cycle type so that 12 divided by this value or values is the
frequency of occurrence of the defrost cycle type in a 24-hour
period, assuming 50% compressor run time.
F = default defrost energy consumption factor, equal to 0.20.
For variable defrost models with no values for CTLi and
CTMi in the algorithm, the default values of 12 and 84
shall be used, respectively.
D is the total number of distinct defrost cycle types.
5.3 Volume Measurements. The electric refrigerator or electric
refrigerator-freezer total refrigerated volume, VT, shall be measured
in accordance with HRF-1-2008, (incorporated by reference; see Sec.
430.3), section 3.30 and sections 4.2 through 4.3, and be calculated
equivalent to:
VT = VF + VFF
Where:
VT = total refrigerated volume in cubic feet,
VF = freezer compartment volume in cubic feet, and
VFF = fresh food compartment volume in cubic feet.
In the case of refrigerators or refrigerator-freezers with
automatic icemakers, the volume occupied by the automatic icemaker,
including its ice storage bin, is to be included in the volume
measurement.
5.4 Externally Vented Refrigerator or Refrigerator-Freezer Units.
All test measurements for the externally vented refrigerator or
refrigerator-freezer shall be made in accordance with the requirements
of other sections of this Appendix, except as modified in this section
or other sections expressly applicable to externally vented
refrigerators or refrigerator-freezers.
5.4.1 Operability of ``Thermostatic'' and ``Mixing of Air''
Controls. Before conducting energy consumption tests, the operability
of thermostatic controls that permit the mixing of exterior and ambient
air when exterior air temperatures are less than 60 [deg]F (15.6
[deg]C) must be verified. The operability of such controls shall be
verified by operating the unit under ambient air temperature of 90
[deg]F (32.2 [deg]C) and exterior air temperature of 45 [deg]F (7.2
[deg]C). If the inlet air entering the condenser or condenser/
compressor compartment is maintained at 60 3 [deg]F (15.6
1.7 [deg]C), energy consumption of the unit shall be
measured under 5.4.2.2 and 5.4.2.3. If the inlet air entering the
condenser or condenser/compressor compartment is not maintained at 60
3 [deg]F (15.6 1.7 [deg]C), energy
consumption of the unit shall also be measured under 5.4.2.4.
5.4.2 Energy Consumption Tests.
5.4.2.1 Correction Factor Test. To enable calculation of a
correction factor, K, two full cycle tests shall be conducted to
measure energy consumption of the unit with air mixing controls
disabled and the condenser inlet air temperatures set at 90 [deg]F
(32.2 [deg]C) and 80 [deg]F (26.7 [deg]C). Both tests shall be
conducted with all compartment temperature controls set at the position
midway between their warmest and coldest settings and the anti-sweat
heater switch off. Record the energy consumptions ec90 and
ec80, in kWh/day.
5.4.2.2 Energy Consumption at 90 [deg]F. The unit shall be tested
at 90 [deg]F (32.2 [deg]C) exterior air temperature to record the
energy consumptions (e90)i in kWh/day. For a
given setting of the anti-sweat heater, the value i corresponds to each
of the two states of the compartment temperature control positions.
5.4.2.3 Energy Consumption at 60 [deg]F. The unit shall be tested
at 60 [deg]F (26.7 [deg]C) exterior air temperature to record the
energy consumptions (e60)i in kWh/day. For a
given setting of the anti-sweat heater, the value i corresponds to each
of the two states of the compartment temperature control positions.
5.4.2.4 Energy Consumption if Mixing Controls do not Operate
Properly. If the operability of temperature and mixing controls has not
been verified as required under 5.4.1, the unit shall be tested at 50
[deg]F (10.0 [deg]C) and 30 [deg]F (-1.1 [deg]C) exterior air
temperatures to record the energy consumptions
(e50)i and (e30)i. For a
given setting of the anti-sweat heater, the value i corresponds to each
of the two states of the compartment temperature control positions.
6. Calculation of Derived Results From Test Measurements
6.1 Adjusted Total Volume.
6.1.1 Electric Refrigerators. The adjusted total volume, VA, for
electric refrigerators under test shall be defined as:
VA = (VF x CR) + VFF
Where:
VA = adjusted total volume in cubic feet;
VF and VFF are defined in 5.3; and
CR = dimensionless adjustment factor of 1.47 for refrigerators other
than all-refrigerators, or 1.0 for all-refrigerators.
6.1.2 Electric Refrigerator-Freezers. The adjusted total volume,
VA, for electric refrigerator-freezers under test shall be calculated
as follows:
VA = (VF x CRF) + VFF
Where:
VF and VFF are defined in 5.3 and VA is defined in 6.1.1, and
CRF = dimensionless adjustment factor of 1.76.
6.2 Average Per-Cycle Energy Consumption.
6.2.1 All-Refrigerator Models. The average per-cycle energy
consumption for a cycle type, E, is expressed in kilowatt-hours per
cycle to the nearest one hundredth (0.01) kilowatt-hour and shall
depend upon the temperature attainable in the fresh food compartment as
shown below.
6.2.1.1 If the fresh food compartment temperature is always below
39.0 [deg]F (3.9 [deg]C), the average per-cycle energy consumption
shall be equivalent to:
E = ET1
Where:
ET is defined in 5.2.1; and
[[Page 78859]]
The number 1 indicates the test period during which the highest
fresh food compartment temperature is measured.
6.2.1.2 If one of the fresh food compartment temperatures measured
for a test period is greater than 39.0 [deg]F (3.9 [deg]C), the average
per-cycle energy consumption shall be equivalent to:
E = ET1 + ((ET2 - ET1) x (39.0 - TR1)/(TR2 - TR1))
Where:
ET is defined in 5.2.1;
TR = fresh food compartment temperature determined according to
5.1.3 in degrees F;
The numbers 1 and 2 indicate measurements taken during the first and
second test period as appropriate; and
39.0 = standardized fresh food compartment temperature in degrees F.
6.2.2 Refrigerators and Refrigerator-Freezers. The average per-
cycle energy consumption for a cycle type, E, is expressed in kilowatt-
hours per-cycle to the nearest one hundredth (0.01) kilowatt-hour and
shall be defined in one of the following ways as applicable.
6.2.2.1 If the fresh food compartment temperature is at or below 39
[deg]F (3.9 [deg]C) in both tests and the freezer compartment
temperature is at or below 15 [deg]F (-9.4 [deg]C) in both tests of a
refrigerator or at or below 0 [deg]F (-17.8 [deg]C) in both tests of a
refrigerator-freezer, the per-cycle energy consumption shall be:
E = ET1 + IET
Where:
ET is defined in 5.2.1;
IET, expressed in kilowatt-hours per cycle, equals 0.23 for a
product with an automatic icemaker and otherwise equals 0 (zero);
and
The number 1 indicates the test period during which the highest
freezer compartment temperature was measured.
6.2.2.2 If the conditions of 6.2.2.1 do not exist, the per-cycle
energy consumption shall be defined by the higher of the two values
calculated by the following two formulas:
E = ET1 + ((ET2 - ET1) x (39.0 - TR1)/(TR2 - TR1)) + IET
and
E = ET1 + ((ET2 - ET1) x (k - TF1)/(TF2 - TF1)) + IET
Where:
E is defined in 6.2.1.1;
ET is defined in 5.2.1;
IET is defined in 6.2.2.1;
TR and the numbers 1 and 2 are defined in 6.2.1.2;
TF = freezer compartment temperature determined according to 5.1.4
in degrees F;
39.0 is a specified fresh food compartment temperature in degrees F;
and
k is a constant 15.0 for refrigerators or 0.0 for refrigerator-
freezers, each being standardized freezer compartment temperatures
in degrees F.
6.2.3 Variable Anti-Sweat Heater Models. The standard cycle energy
consumption of an electric refrigerator-freezer with a variable anti-
sweat heater control (Estd), expressed in kilowatt-hours per
day, shall be calculated equivalent to:
Estd = E + (Correction Factor) where E is determined by
6.2.1.1, 6.2.1.2, 6.2.2.1, or 6.2.2.2, whichever is appropriate, with
the anti-sweat heater switch in the ``off'' position or, for a product
without an anti-sweat heater switch, the anti-sweat heater in its
lowest energy use state.
Correction Factor = (Anti-sweat Heater Power x System-loss Factor) x
(24 hrs/1 day) x (1 kW/1000 W)
Where:
Anti-sweat Heater Power = 0.034 * (Heater Watts at 5%RH)
+ 0.211 * (Heater Watts at 15%RH)
+ 0.204 * (Heater Watts at 25%RH)
+ 0.166 * (Heater Watts at 35%RH)
+ 0.126 * (Heater Watts at 45%RH)
+ 0.119 * (Heater Watts at 55%RH)
+ 0.069 * (Heater Watts at 65%RH)
+ 0.047 * (Heater Watts at 75%RH)
+ 0.008 * (Heater Watts at 85%RH)
+ 0.015 * (Heater Watts at 95%RH)
Heater Watts at a specific relative humidity = the nominal watts
used by all heaters at that specific relative humidity, 72 [deg]F
(22.2 [deg]C) ambient, and DOE reference temperatures of fresh food
(FF) average temperature of 39 [deg]F (3.9 [deg]C) and freezer (FZ)
average temperature of 0 [deg]F (-17.8 [deg]C).
System-loss Factor = 1.3.
6.3 Externally vented refrigerator or refrigerator-freezers. Per-
cycle energy consumption measurements for an externally vented
refrigerator or refrigerator-freezer shall be calculated in accordance
with the requirements of this Appendix, as modified in sections 6.3.1-
6.3.7.
6.3.1 Correction Factor. The correction factor, K, shall be
calculated as:
K = ec90/ec80
Where:
ec90 and ec80 are measured in section 5.4.2.1.
6.3.2 Combining Test Results of Different Settings of Compartment
Temperature Controls. For a given setting of the anti-sweat heater,
follow the calculation procedures of 6.2 to combine the test results
for energy consumption of the unit at different temperature control
settings for each condenser inlet air temperature tested under 5.4.2.2,
5.4.2.3, and 5.4.2.4, where applicable, (e90)i,
(e60)i, (e50)i, and
(e30)i. The combined values,
[b.egr]90, [b.egr]60, [b.egr]50, and
[b.egr]30, where applicable, are expressed in kWh/day.
6.3.3 Energy Consumption Corrections. For a given setting of the
anti-sweat heater, adjust the energy consumptions [b.egr]90,
[b.egr]60, [b.egr]50, and [b.egr]30
calculated in 6.3.2 by multiplying the correction factor K to obtain
the corrected energy consumptions per day in kWh/day:
E90 = K x [b.egr]90,
E60 = K x [b.egr]60,
E50 = K x [b.egr]50, and
E30 = K x [b.egr]30
Where:
K is determined under section 6.3.1; and [b.egr]90,
[b.egr]60, [b.egr]50, and [b.egr]30
are determined under section 6.3.2.
6.3.4 Energy Profile Equation. For a given setting of the anti-
sweat heater, calculate the energy consumption EX, in kWh/
day, at a specific exterior air temperature between 80 [deg]F (26.7
[deg]C) and 60 [deg]F (26.7 [deg]C) using the following equation:
EX = E60 + (E90 - E60) x
(TX - 60)/30
Where:
TX is the exterior air temperature in [deg]F;
60 is the exterior air temperature in [deg]F for the test of section
5.4.2.3;
30 is the difference between 90 and 60;
E60 and E90 are determined in section 6.3.3.
6.3.5 Energy Consumption at 80 [deg]F (26.7 [deg]C), 75 [deg]F
(23.9 [deg]C) and 65 [deg]F (18.3 [deg]C). For a given setting of the
anti-sweat heater, calculate the energy consumptions at 80 [deg]F (26.7
[deg]C), 75 [deg]F (23.9 [deg]C) and 65 [deg]F (18.3 [deg]C) exterior
air temperatures, E80, E75 and E65,
respectively, in kWh/day, using the equation in 6.3.4.
6.3.6 National Average Per-Cycle Energy Consumption. For a given
setting of the anti-sweat heater, calculate the national average energy
consumption, EN, in kWh/day, using one of the following
equations:
EN = 0.523 x E60 + 0.165 x E65 + 0.181
x E75 + 0.131 x E80, for units not tested under
section 5.4.2.4; and
EN = 0.257 x E30 + 0.266 x E50 + 0.165
x E65 + 0.181 x E75 + 0.131 x E80, for
units tested under section 5.4.2.4
Where:
E30, E50, and E60 are defined in
6.3.3;
E65, E75, and E80 are defined in
6.3.5;
and
the coefficients 0.523, 0.165, 0.181, 0.131, 0.257 and 0.266 are
weather-associated weighting factors.
6.3.7 Regional Average Per-Cycle Energy Consumption. If regional
average per-cycle energy consumption is required to be calculated for a
given
[[Page 78860]]
setting of the anti-sweat heater, calculate the regional average per-
cycle energy consumption, ER, in kWh/day, for the regions in
Figure 3. Use one of the following equations and the coefficients in
Table A:
ER = a1 x E60 + c x E65 + d
x E75 + e x E80, for a unit that is not required
to be tested under section 5.4.2.4; or
ER = a x E30 + b x E50 + c x
E65 + d x E75 + e x E80, for a unit
tested under section 5.4.2.4
Where:
E30, E50, and E60 are defined in
section 6.3.3;
E65, E75, and E80 are defined in
section 6.3.5; and
a1, a, b, c, d, and e are weather-associated weighting
factors for the regions, as specified in Table A.
Table A--Coefficients for Calculating Regional Average per-Cycle Energy Consumption
[Weighting factors]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regions a1 a b c d e
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I....................................... 0.282 0.039 0.244 0.194 0.326 0.198
II...................................... 0.486 0.194 0.293 0.191 0.193 0.129
III..................................... 0.584 0.302 0.282 0.178 0.159 0.079
IV...................................... 0.664 0.420 0.244 0.161 0.121 0.055
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16DE10.010
7. Test Procedure Waivers
To the extent that the procedures contained in this appendix do not
provide a means for determining the energy consumption of a
refrigerator or refrigerator-freezer, a manufacturer must obtain a
waiver under 10 CFR 430.27 to establish an acceptable test procedure
for each such product. Such instances could, for example, include
situations where the test set-up for a particular refrigerator or
refrigerator-freezer basic model is not clearly defined by the
provisions of section 2. For details regarding the criteria and
procedures for obtaining a waiver, please refer to 10 CFR 430.27.
0
6. Appendix A1 to subpart B of part 430 is amended by:
0
a. Adding an introductory note after the appendix heading;
0
b. Revising section 1. Definitions;
0
c. Revising section 2. Test Conditions;
0
d. In section 3. Test Control Settings, by:
0
1. Revising sections 3.2 and 3.2.1 through 3.2.3;
0
2. Adding new section 3.2.4;
0
3. Removing section 3.3;
0
e. Revising section 4. Test Period;
0
f. In section 5. Test Measurements, by:
0
1. Revising sections 5.1, 5.1.2, 5.1.2.1, 5.1.2.2, 5.1.2.3, 5.2.1,
5.2.1.1, 5.2.1.2, and 5.2.1.3;
[[Page 78861]]
0
2. Adding new sections 5.1.3 and 5.1.4;
0
2. Removing section 5.2.1.4;
0
3. Redesignating section 5.2.1.5 as 5.2.1.4 and revising redesignated
5.2.1.4;
0
g. In section 6. Calculation of Derived Results from Test Measurements,
by:
0
1. Revising sections 6.2.1.2 and 6.2.2.2;
0
2. Adding new section 6.2.3;
0
3. Revise the Figure at the end of section 6;
0
h. Adding a new section 7. Test Procedure Waivers.
The additions and revisions read as follows:
Appendix A1 to Subpart B of Part 430--Uniform Test Method for Measuring
the Energy Consumption of Electric Refrigerators and Electric
Refrigerator-Freezers
The provisions of Appendix A1 shall apply to all products
manufactured prior to the effective date of any amended standards
promulgated by DOE pursuant to Section 325(b)(4) of the Energy Policy
and Conservation Act of 1975, as amended by the Energy Independence and
Security Act of 2007 (to be codified at 42 U.S.C. 6295(b)(4)).
1. Definitions
Section 3, Definitions, of HRF-1-1979 (incorporated by reference;
see Sec. 430.3) applies to this test procedure.
1.1 ``Adjusted total volume'' means the sum of (i) the fresh food
compartment volume as defined in HRF-1-1979 in cubic feet, and (ii) the
product of an adjustment factor and the net freezer compartment volume
as defined in HRF-1-1979, in cubic feet.
1.2 ``All-refrigerator'' means an electric refrigerator which does
not include a compartment for the freezing and long time storage of
food at temperatures below 32 [deg]F (0.0 [deg]C). It may include a
compartment of 0.50 cubic feet capacity (14.2 liters) or less for the
freezing and storage of ice.
1.3 ``Anti-sweat heater'' means a device incorporated into the
design of a refrigerator or refrigerator-freezer to prevent the
accumulation of moisture on exterior or interior surfaces of the
cabinet.
1.4 ``Anti-sweat heater switch'' means a user-controllable switch
or user interface which modifies the activation or control of anti-
sweat heaters.
1.5 ``Automatic defrost'' means a system in which the defrost cycle
is automatically initiated and terminated, with resumption of normal
refrigeration at the conclusion of the defrost operation. The system
automatically prevents the permanent formation of frost on all
refrigerated surfaces. Nominal refrigerated food temperatures are
maintained during the operation of the automatic defrost system.
1.6 ``Automatic icemaker'' means a device that can be supplied with
water without user intervention, either from a pressurized water supply
system or by transfer from a water reservoir located inside the
cabinet, that automatically produces, harvests, and stores ice in a
storage bin, with means to automatically interrupt the harvesting
operation when the ice storage bin is filled to a pre-determined level.
1.7 ``Cycle'' means the period of 24 hours for which the energy use
of an electric refrigerator or electric refrigerator-freezer is
calculated as though the consumer activated compartment temperature
controls were set to maintain the standardized temperatures (see
section 3.2).
1.8 ``Cycle type'' means the set of test conditions having the
calculated effect of operating an electric refrigerator or electric
refrigerator-freezer for a period of 24 hours, with the consumer
activated controls other than those that control compartment
temperatures set to establish various operating characteristics.
1.9 ``Defrost cycle type'' means a distinct sequence of control
whose function is to remove frost and/or ice from a refrigerated
surface. There may be variations in the defrost control sequence such
as the number of defrost heaters energized. Each such variation
establishes a separate distinct defrost cycle type. However, defrost
achieved regularly during the compressor off-cycles by warming of the
evaporator without active heat addition is not a defrost cycle type.
1.10 ``Externally vented refrigerator or refrigerator-freezer''
means an electric refrigerator or electric refrigerator-freezer that
has an enclosed condenser or an enclosed condenser/compressor
compartment and a set of air ducts for transferring the exterior air
from outside the building envelope into, through, and out of the
refrigerator or refrigerator-freezer cabinet; is capable of mixing
exterior air with the room air before discharging into, through, and
out of the condenser or condenser/compressor compartment; may include
thermostatically controlled dampers or controls that mix the exterior
and room air at low outdoor temperatures and exclude exterior air when
the outdoor air temperature is above 80 [deg]F (26.7 [deg]C) or the
room air temperature; and may have a thermostatically actuated exterior
air fan.
1.11 ``HRF-1-1979'' means the Association of Home Appliance
Manufacturers standard for household refrigerators, combination
refrigerator-freezers, and household freezers, also approved as an
American National Standard as a revision of ANSI B 38.1-1970. Only
sections of HRF-1-1979 (incorporated by reference; see Sec. 430.3)
specifically referenced in this test procedure are part of this test
procedure. In cases where there is a conflict, the language of the test
procedure in this appendix takes precedence over HRF-1-1979.
1.12 ``Long-time Automatic Defrost'' means an automatic defrost
system where successive defrost cycles are separated by 14 hours or
more of compressor-operating time.
1.13 ``Separate auxiliary compartment'' means a freezer compartment
or a fresh food compartment of a refrigerator or refrigerator-freezer
having more than two compartments that is not the first freezer
compartment or the first fresh food compartment. Access to a separate
auxiliary compartment is through a separate exterior door or doors
rather than through the door or doors of another compartment. Separate
auxiliary compartments may be convertible (e.g., from fresh food to
freezer). Separate auxiliary freezer compartments may not be larger
than the first freezer compartment and separate auxiliary fresh food
compartments may not be larger than the first fresh food compartment,
but such size restrictions do not apply to separate auxiliary
convertible compartments.
1.14 ``Special compartment'' means any compartment other than a
butter conditioner, without doors directly accessible from the
exterior, and with separate temperature control (such as crispers
convertible to meat keepers) that is not convertible from fresh food
temperature range to freezer temperature range.
1.15 ``Stabilization Period'' means the total period of time during
which steady-state conditions are being attained or evaluated.
1.16 ``Standard cycle'' means the cycle type in which the anti-
sweat heater control, when provided, is set in the highest energy
consuming position.
1.17 ``Variable anti-sweat heater control'' means an anti-sweat
heater control that varies the average power input of the anti-sweat
heater(s) based on operating condition variable(s) and/or ambient
condition variable(s).
1.18 ``Variable defrost control'' means an automatic defrost system
in which successive defrost cycles are determined by an operating
condition variable or variables other than solely
[[Page 78862]]
compressor operating time. This includes any electrical or mechanical
device performing this function. A control scheme that changes the
defrost interval from a fixed length to an extended length (without any
intermediate steps) is not considered a variable defrost control. A
variable defrost control feature should predict the accumulation of
frost on the evaporator and react accordingly. Therefore, the times
between defrost should vary with different usage patterns and include a
continuum of lengths of time between defrosts as inputs vary.
2. Test Conditions
2.1 Ambient Temperature. The ambient temperature shall be 90.0
1 [deg]F (32.2 0.6 [deg]C) during the
stabilization period and the test period.
2.2 Operational Conditions. The electric refrigerator or electric
refrigerator-freezer shall be installed and its operating conditions
maintained in accordance with HRF-1-1979, (incorporated by reference;
see Sec. 430.3), section 7.2 through section 7.4.3.3, except that the
vertical ambient temperature gradient at locations 10 inches (25.4 cm)
out from the centers of the two sides of the unit being tested is to be
maintained during the test. Unless the area is obstructed by shields or
baffles, the gradient is to be maintained from 2 inches (5.1 cm) above
the floor or supporting platform to a height 1 foot (30.5 cm) above the
unit under test. Defrost controls are to be operative. Other exceptions
and provisions to the cited sections of HRF-1-1979 are noted in
sections 2.3 through 2.8, and 5.1 of this appendix.
2.3 Anti-Sweat Heaters.
The anti-sweat heater switch is to be on during one test and off
during a second test. In the case of an electric refrigerator-freezer
with variable anti-sweat heater control, the standard cycle energy use
shall be the result of the calculation described in 6.2.3.
2.4 Conditions for Automatic Defrost Refrigerator-Freezers. For
automatic defrost refrigerator-freezers, the freezer compartments shall
not be loaded with any frozen food packages during testing. Cylindrical
metallic masses of dimensions 1.12 0.25 inches (2.9 0.6 cm) in diameter and height shall be attached in good thermal
contact with each temperature sensor within the refrigerated
compartments. All temperature measuring sensor masses shall be
supported by low-thermal-conductivity supports in such a manner to
ensure that there will be at least 1 inch (2.5 cm) of air space
separating the thermal mass from contact with any interior surface or
hardware inside the cabinet. In case of interference with hardware at
the sensor locations specified in section 5.1, the sensors shall be
placed at the nearest adjacent location such that there will be a 1-
inch air space separating the sensor mass from the hardware.
2.5 Conditions for all-refrigerators. There shall be no load in the
freezer compartment during the test.
2.6 The cabinet and its refrigerating mechanism shall be assembled
and set up in accordance with the printed consumer instructions
supplied with the cabinet. Set-up of the refrigerator or refrigerator-
freezer shall not deviate from these instructions, unless explicitly
required or allowed by this test procedure. Specific required or
allowed deviations from such set-up include the following:
(a) Connection of water lines and installation of water filters are
not required;
(b) Clearance requirements from surfaces of the product shall be as
described in section 2.8 below;
(c) The electric power supply shall be as described in HRF-1-1979
(incorporated by reference; see Sec. 430.3) section 7.4.1;
(d) Temperature control settings for testing shall be as described
in section 3 below. Settings for convertible compartments and other
temperature-controllable or special compartments shall be as described
in section 2.7 of this appendix;
(e) The product does not need to be anchored or otherwise secured
to prevent tipping during energy testing; and
(f) All the product's chutes and throats required for the delivery
of ice shall be free of packing, covers, or other blockages that may be
fitted for shipping or when the icemaker is not in use.
For cases in which set-up is not clearly defined by this test
procedure, manufacturers must submit a petition for a waiver (see
section 7).
2.7 Compartments that are convertible (e.g., from fresh food to
freezer) shall be operated in the highest energy use position. For the
special case of convertible separate auxiliary compartments, this means
that the compartment shall be treated as a freezer compartment or a
fresh food compartment, depending on which of these represents higher
energy use. Special compartments shall be tested with controls set to
provide the coldest temperature. This requirement for the coldest
temperature does not apply to features or functions associated with
temperature control (such as fast chill compartments) that are
initiated manually and terminated automatically within 168 hours.
2.8 The space between the back of the cabinet and a vertical
surface (the test room wall or simulated wall) shall be the minimum
distance in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions.
2.9 Steady State Condition. Steady state conditions exist if the
temperature measurements in all measured compartments taken at four
minute intervals or less during a stabilization period are not changing
at a rate greater than 0.042 [deg]F. (0.023 [deg]C.) per hour as
determined by the applicable condition of A or B.
A. The average of the measurements during a two hour period if no
cycling occurs or during a number of complete repetitive compressor
cycles through a period of no less than two hours is compared to the
average over an equivalent time period with three hours elapsed between
the two measurement periods.
B. If A above cannot be used, the average of the measurements
during a number of complete repetitive compressor cycles through a
period of no less than two hours and including the last complete cycle
prior to a defrost period, or if no cycling occurs, the average of the
measurements during the last two hours prior to a defrost period; are
compared to the same averaging period prior to the following defrost
period.
2.10 Exterior air for externally vented refrigerator or
refrigerator-freezer. An exterior air source shall be provided with
adjustable temperature and pressure capabilities. The exterior air
temperature shall be adjustable from 35 1 [deg]F (1.7
0.6 [deg]C) to 90 1 [deg]F (32.2
0.6 [deg]C).
2.10.1 Air duct. The exterior air shall pass from the exterior air
source to the test unit through an insulated air duct.
2.10.2 Air temperature measurement. The air temperature entering
the condenser or condenser/compressor compartment shall be maintained
to 3 [deg]F (1.7 [deg]C) during the stabilization and test
periods and shall be measured at the inlet point of the condenser or
condenser/compressor compartment (``condenser inlet''). Temperature
measurements shall be taken from at least three temperature sensors or
one sensor per 4 square inches of the air duct cross sectional area,
whichever is greater, and shall be averaged. For a unit that has a
condenser air fan, a minimum of three temperature sensors at the
condenser fan discharge shall be required. Temperature sensors shall be
arranged
[[Page 78863]]
to be at the centers of equally divided cross sectional areas. The
exterior air temperature, at its source, shall be measured and
maintained to 1 [deg]F (0.6 [deg]C) during the test
period. The temperature measuring devices shall have an error not
greater than 0.5 [deg]F ( 0.3 [deg]C).
Measurements of the air temperature during the test period shall be
taken at regular intervals not to exceed four minutes.
2.10.3 Exterior air static pressure. The exterior air static
pressure at the inlet point of the unit shall be adjusted to maintain a
negative pressure of 0.20 0.05 water
column (62 Pa 12.5 Pa) for all air flow rates supplied to
the unit. The pressure sensor shall be located on a straight duct with
a distance of at least 7.5 times the diameter of the duct upstream and
a distance of at least 3 times the diameter of the duct downstream.
There shall be four static pressure taps at 90[deg]angles apart. The
four pressures shall be averaged by interconnecting the four pressure
taps. The air pressure measuring instrument shall have an error not
greater than 0.01 water column (2.5 Pa).
3. Test Control Settings
* * * * *
3.2 Model with User Operable Temperature Control. Testing shall be
performed in accordance with one of the following sections using the
standardized temperatures of:
All-Refrigerator: 38 [deg]F (3.3 [deg]C) fresh food compartment
temperature;
Refrigerator: 15 [deg]F (-9.4 [deg]C) freezer compartment
temperature, 45 [deg]F (7.2 [deg]C) fresh food compartment temperature;
Refrigerator-Freezer: 5 [deg]F (-15 [deg]C) freezer compartment
temperature, 45 [deg]F (7.2 [deg]C) fresh food compartment temperature.
For the purposes of comparing compartment temperatures with
standardized temperatures, as described in sections 3.2.1 through
3.2.3, the freezer compartment temperature shall be as specified in
section 5.1.4, and the fresh food compartment temperature shall be as
specified in section 5.1.3.
3.2.1 A first test shall be performed with all compartment
temperature controls set at their median position midway between their
warmest and coldest settings. For mechanical control systems, knob
detents shall be mechanically defeated if necessary to attain a median
setting. For electronic control systems, the test shall be performed
with all compartment temperature controls set at the average of the
coldest and warmest settings--if there is no setting equal to this
average, the setting closest to the average shall be used. If there are
two such settings equally close to the average, the higher of these
temperature control settings shall be used. A second test shall be
performed with all controls set at their warmest setting or all
controls set at their coldest setting (not electrically or mechanically
bypassed). For all-refrigerators, this setting shall be the appropriate
setting that attempts to achieve compartment temperatures measured
during the two tests which bound (i.e., one is above and one is below)
the standardized temperature for all-refrigerators. For refrigerators
and refrigerator-freezers, the second test shall be conducted with all
controls at their coldest setting, unless all compartment temperatures
measured during the first part of the test are lower than the
standardized temperatures, in which case the second test shall be
conducted with all controls at their warmest setting. If (a) the
measured temperature of any compartment with all controls set at their
coldest settings is above its standardized temperature, a third test
shall be performed with all controls set at their warmest settings and
the result of this test shall be used with the result of the test
performed with all controls set at their coldest settings to determine
energy consumption. If (b) the measured temperatures of all
compartments with all controls set at their warmest settings are below
their standardized temperatures then the result of this test alone will
be used to determine energy consumption. If neither (a) nor (b) occur,
then the results of the first two tests shall be used to determine
energy consumption.
3.2.2 Alternatively, a first test may be performed with all
temperature controls set at their warmest setting. If the measured
temperatures of all compartments for this test are below their
standardized temperatures then the result of this test alone will be
used to determine energy consumption. If this condition is not met,
then the unit shall be tested in accordance with 3.2.1 of this
appendix.
3.2.3 Alternatively, a first test may be performed with all
temperature controls set at their coldest setting. If the measured
temperature of any compartment for this test is above its standardized
temperature, a second test shall be performed with all controls set at
their warmest settings and the result of this test shall be used with
the result of the test performed with all controls set at their coldest
settings to determine energy consumption. If this condition is not met,
then the unit shall be tested in accordance with 3.2.1 of this
appendix.
3.2.4 Temperature Settings for Separate Auxiliary Convertible
Compartments. For separate auxiliary convertible compartments tested as
freezer compartments, the median setting shall be within 2 [deg]F (1.1
[deg]C) of the standardized temperature, and the warmest setting shall
be above 10 [deg]F (-12.2 [deg]C). For separate auxiliary convertible
compartments tested as fresh food compartments, the median setting
shall be within 2 [deg]F (1.1 [deg]C) of the standardized temperature,
and the coldest setting shall be below 40 [deg]F (4.4 [deg]C). For
compartments where control settings are not expressed as particular
temperatures, the measured temperature of the convertible compartment
rather than the settings shall meet the specified criteria.
* * * * *
4. Test Period
Tests shall be performed by establishing the conditions set forth
in section 2, and using the control settings set forth in section 3.
4.1 Nonautomatic Defrost. If the model being tested has no
automatic defrost system, the test time period shall start after
steady-state conditions have been achieved and be no less than 3 hours
in duration. During the test period, the compressor motor shall
complete two or more whole compressor cycles. (A compressor cycle is a
complete ``on'' and a complete ``off'' period of the motor). If no
``off'' cycling will occur, as determined during the stabilization
period, the test period shall be 3 hours. If incomplete cycling occurs
(i.e. less than two compressor cycles during a 24-hour period), the
results of the 24-hour period shall be used.
4.2 Automatic Defrost. If the model being tested has an automatic
defrost system, the test time period shall start after steady-state
conditions have been achieved and be from one point during a defrost
period to the same point during the next defrost period. If the model
being tested has a long-time automatic defrost system, the alternative
provisions of 4.2.1 may be used. If the model being tested has a
variable defrost control, the provisions of section 4.2.2 shall apply.
If the model has a dual compressor system with automatic defrost for
both systems, the provisions of 4.2.3 shall apply.
4.2.1 Long-time Automatic Defrost. If the model being tested has a
long-time automatic defrost system, the test time period may consist of
two parts. The first part would be the same as the test for a unit
having no defrost provisions (section 4.1). The second part would start
when a defrost cycle is initiated when the compressor ``on'' cycle is
terminated prior to start of the defrost heater and terminates at the
second turn
[[Page 78864]]
``on'' of the compressor or 4 hours from the initiation of the defrost
heater, whichever comes first. See diagram in Figure 1 to this section.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16DE10.011
4.2.2 Variable Defrost Control. If the model being tested has a
variable defrost control system, the test shall consist of the same two
parts as the test for long-time automatic defrost (section 4.2.1).
4.2.3 Dual Compressor Systems with Automatic Defrost. If the model
being tested has separate compressor systems for the refrigerator and
freezer sections, each with its own automatic defrost system, then the
two-part method in 4.2.1 shall be used. The second part of the method
will be conducted separately for each automatic defrost system. The
components (compressor, fan motors, defrost heaters, anti-sweat
heaters, etc.) associated with each system will be identified and their
energy consumption will be separately measured during each test.
5. Test Measurements
5.1 Temperature Measurements. Temperature measurements shall be
made at the locations prescribed in Figures 7.1 and 7.2 of HRF-1-1979
(incorporated by reference; see Sec. 430.3) and shall be accurate to
within 0.5 [deg]F (0.3 [deg]C). No freezer temperature
measurements need be taken in an all-refrigerator model.
If the interior arrangements of the cabinet do not conform with
those shown in Figure 7.1 and 7.2 of HRF-1-1979, the product may be
tested by relocating the temperature sensors from the locations
specified in the figures to avoid interference with hardware or
components within the cabinet, in which case the specific locations
used for the temperature sensors shall be noted in the test data
records maintained by the manufacturer, and the certification report
shall indicate that non-standard sensor locations were used.
* * * * *
5.1.2 Compartment Temperature. The compartment temperature for each
test period shall be an average of the measured temperatures taken in a
compartment during one or more complete compressor cycles. One
compressor cycle is one complete motor ``on'' and one complete motor
``off'' period. For long-time automatic defrost models, compartment
temperatures shall be those measured in the first part of the test
period specified in section 4.2.1. For models with variable defrost
controls, compartment temperatures shall be those measured in the first
part of the test period specified in section 4.2.2.
5.1.2.1 The number of complete compressor cycles over which the
measured temperatures in a compartment are to be averaged to determine
compartment temperature shall be equal to the number of minutes between
measured temperature readings, rounded up to the next whole minute or a
number of complete compressor cycles over a time period exceeding 1
hour, whichever is greater. One of the compressor cycles shall be the
last complete compressor cycle during the test period.
5.1.2.2 If no compressor cycling occurs, the compartment
temperature shall be the average of the measured temperatures taken
during the last 32 minutes of the test period.
5.1.2.3 If incomplete compressor cycling occurs, the compartment
temperatures shall be the average of the measured temperatures taken
during the
[[Page 78865]]
last three hours of the last complete compressor ``on'' period.
5.1.3 Fresh Food Compartment Temperature. The fresh food
compartment temperature shall be calculated as:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16DE10.012
Where:
R is the total number of applicable fresh food compartments, which
include the first fresh food compartment and any number of separate
auxiliary fresh food compartments (including separate auxiliary
convertible compartments tested as fresh food compartments in
accordance with section 2.7);
TRi is the compartment temperature of fresh food compartment
``i'' determined in accordance with section 5.1.2; and
VRi is the volume of fresh food compartment ``i''.
5.1.4 Freezer Compartment Temperature. The freezer compartment
temperature shall be calculated as:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16DE10.013
Where:
F is the total number of applicable freezer compartments, which
include the first freezer compartment and any number of separate
auxiliary freezer compartments (including separate auxiliary
convertible compartments tested as freezer compartments in
accordance with section 2.7);
TFi is the compartment temperature of freezer compartment
``i'' determined in accordance with section 5.1.2; and
VFi is the volume of freezer compartment ``i''.
* * * * *
5.2.1 Per-day Energy Consumption. The energy consumption in
kilowatt-hours per day for each test period shall be the energy
expended during the test period as specified in section 4 adjusted to a
24-hour period. The adjustment shall be determined as follows:
5.2.1.1 Nonautomatic and Automatic Defrost Models. The energy
consumption in kilowatt-hours per day shall be calculated equivalent
to:
ET = EP x 1440/T
Where:
ET = test cycle energy expended in kilowatt-hours per day;
EP = energy expended in kilowatt-hours during the test period;
T = length of time of the test period in minutes; and
1440 = conversion factor to adjust to a 24-hour period in minutes
per day.
5.2.1.2 Long-time Automatic Defrost. If the two-part test method is
used, the energy consumption in kilowatt-hours per day shall be
calculated equivalent to:
ET = (1440 x EP1/T1) + (EP2 - (EP1 x T2/T1)) x (12/CT)
Where:
ET and 1440 are defined in 5.2.1.1;
EP1 = energy expended in kilowatt-hours during the first part of the
test;
EP2 = energy expended in kilowatt-hours during the second part of
the test;
T1 and T2 = length of time in minutes of the first and second test
parts respectively;
CT = defrost timer run time or compressor run time between defrosts
in hours required to cause it to go through a complete cycle,
rounded to the nearest tenth of an hour; and
12 = factor to adjust for a 50-percent run time of the compressor in
hours per day.
5.2.1.3 Variable Defrost Control. The energy consumption in
kilowatt-hours per day shall be calculated equivalent to:
ET = (1440 x EP1/T1) + (EP2 - (EP1 x T2/T1)) x (12/CT),
Where:
1440 is defined in 5.2.1.1 and EP1, EP2, T1, T2, and 12 are defined
in 5.2.1.2;
CT = (CTL x CTM)/(F x (CTM -
CTL) + CTL);
CTL = least or shortest compressor run time between
defrosts in hours rounded to the nearest tenth of an hour (greater
than or equal to 6 but less than or equal to 12 hours);
CTM = maximum compressor run time between defrosts in
hours rounded to the nearest tenth of an hour (greater than
CTL but not more than 96 hours);
F = ratio of per day energy consumption in excess of the least
energy and the maximum difference in per-day energy consumption and
is equal to 0.20;
For variable defrost models with no values for CTL and
CTM in the algorithm, the default values of 12 and 84
shall be used, respectively.
5.2.1.4 Dual Compressor Systems with Dual Automatic Defrost. The
two-part test method in section 4.1.2.4 must be used, and the energy
consumption in kilowatt-hours per day shall be calculated equivalent
to:
ET = (1440 x EP1/T1) + (EP2F - (EPF x T2/T1)) x
(12/CTF) + (EP2R - (EPR x T3/T1)) x
(12/CTR)
Where:
1440, EP1, T1, EP2, 12, and CT are defined in 5.2.1.2;
EPF = freezer system energy in kilowatt-hours expended
during the first part of the test;
EP2F = freezer system energy in kilowatt-hours expended
during the second part of the test for the freezer system;
EPR= refrigerator system energy in kilowatt-hours
expended during the first part of the test;
EP2R = refrigerator system energy in kilowatt-hours
expended during the second part of the test for the refrigerator
system;
T2 and T3 = length of time in minutes of the second test part for
the freezer and refrigerator systems respectively;
CTF = compressor run time between freezer defrosts (in
hours rounded to the nearest tenth of an hour); and
CTR = compressor run time between refrigerator defrosts
(in hours rounded to the nearest tenth of an hour).
* * * * *
6. Calculation of Derived Results From Test Measurements
* * * * *
6.2.1.2 If one of the fresh food compartment temperatures measured
for a test period is greater than 38.0 [deg]F (3.3 [deg]C), the average
per-cycle energy consumption shall be equivalent to:
E = ET1 + ((ET2-ET1) x (38.0 - TR1)/(TR2 - TR1))
Where:
E is defined in 6.2.1.1;
ET is defined in 5.2.1;
TR = Fresh food compartment temperature determined according to
5.1.3 in degrees F;
The numbers 1 and 2 indicate measurements taken during the first and
second test period as appropriate; and
38.0 = Standardized fresh food compartment temperature in degrees F.
* * * * *
6.2.2.2 If the conditions of 6.2.2.1 do not exist, the per-cycle
energy consumption shall be defined by the higher of the two values
calculated by the following two formulas:
E = ET1 + ((ET2-ET1) x (45.0 - TR1)/(TR2 - TR1))
and
E = ET1 + ((ET2 - ET1) x (k - TF1)/(TF2 - TF1))
Where:
E is defined in 6.2.1.1;
ET is defined in 5.2.1;
TR and numbers 1 and 2 are defined in 6.2.1.2;
TF = Freezer compartment temperature determined according to 5.1.4
in degrees F;
45.0 is a specified fresh food compartment temperature in degrees F;
and
k is a constant 15.0 for refrigerators or 5.0 for refrigerator-
freezers each being standardized freezer compartment temperature in
degrees F.
* * * * *
6.2.3 Variable Anti-Sweat Heater Models. The standard cycle energy
consumption of an electric refrigerator-freezer with a variable anti-
sweat heater control (Estd), expressed in kilowatt-hours per
day, shall be calculated equivalent to:
Estd = E + (Correction Factor) where E is determined by
6.2.1.1, 6.2.1.2, 6.2.2.1, or 6.2.2.2, whichever is appropriate, with
the anti-sweat
[[Page 78866]]
heater switch in the ``off'' position or, for products without anti-
sweat heater switches, the anti-sweat heater in its lowest energy use
state.
Correction Factor = (Anti-sweat Heater Power x System-loss Factor) x
(24 hrs/1 day) x (1 kW/1000 W)
Where:
Anti-sweat Heater Power = 0.034 * (Heater Watts at 5%RH)
+ 0.211 * (Heater Watts at 15%RH)
+ 0.204 * (Heater Watts at 25%RH)
+ 0.166 * (Heater Watts at 35%RH)
+ 0.126 * (Heater Watts at 45%RH)
+ 0.119 * (Heater Watts at 55%RH)
+ 0.069 * (Heater Watts at 65%RH)
+ 0.047 * (Heater Watts at 75%RH)
+ 0.008 * (Heater Watts at 85%RH)
+ 0.015 * (Heater Watts at 95%RH)
Heater Watts at a specific relative humidity = the nominal watts
used by all heaters at that specific relative humidity, 72 [deg]F
(22.2 [deg]C) ambient, and DOE reference temperatures of fresh food
(FF) average temperature of 45 [deg]F (7.2 [deg]C) and freezer (FZ)
average temperature of 5 [deg]F (-15 [deg]C).
System-loss Factor = 1.3
* * * * *
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16DE10.014
7. Test Procedure Waivers
To the extent that the procedures contained in this appendix do not
provide a means for determining the energy consumption of a
refrigerator or refrigerator-freezer, a manufacturer must obtain a
waiver under 10 CFR 430.27 to establish an acceptable test procedure
for each such product. Such instances could, for example, include
situations where the test set-up for a particular refrigerator or
refrigerator-freezer basic model is not clearly defined by the
provisions of section 2. For details regarding the criteria and
procedures for obtaining a waiver, please refer to 10 CFR 430.27.
0
7. Add a new Appendix B to subpart B of part 430 to read as follows:
Appendix B to Subpart B of Part 430--Uniform Test Method for Measuring
the Energy Consumption of Freezers
The provisions of Appendix B shall apply to all products
manufactured on or after the effective date of any amended standards
promulgated by DOE pursuant to Section 325(b)(4) of the Energy
Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, as amended by the Energy
Independence and Security Act of 2007 (to be codified at 42 U.S.C.
6295(b)(4)).
1. Definitions
Section 3, Definitions, of HRF-1-2008 (incorporated by
reference; see Sec. 430.3) applies to this test procedure.
1.1 ``Adjusted total volume'' means the product of the freezer
volume as defined in HRF-1-2008 (incorporated by reference; see
Sec. 430.3) in cubic feet multiplied by an adjustment factor.
1.2 ``Anti-sweat heater'' means a device incorporated into the
design of a freezer to prevent the accumulation of moisture on
exterior or interior surfaces of the cabinet.
1.3 ``Anti-sweat heater switch'' means a user-controllable
switch or user interface which modifies the activation or control of
anti-sweat heaters.
[[Page 78867]]
1.4 ``Automatic defrost'' means a system in which the defrost
cycle is automatically initiated and terminated, with resumption of
normal refrigeration at the conclusion of defrost operation. The
system automatically prevents the permanent formation of frost on
all refrigerated surfaces. Nominal refrigerated food temperatures
are maintained during the operation of the automatic defrost system.
1.5 ``Automatic icemaker'' means a device that can be supplied
with water without user intervention, either from a pressurized
water supply system or by transfer from a water reservoir, that
automatically produces, harvests, and stores ice in a storage bin,
with means to automatically interrupt the harvesting operation when
the ice storage bin is filled to a pre-determined level.
1.6 ``Cycle'' means the period of 24 hours for which the energy
use of a freezer is calculated as though the consumer-activated
compartment temperature controls were set to maintain the
standardized temperature (see section 3.2).
1.7 ``Cycle type'' means the set of test conditions having the
calculated effect of operating a freezer for a period of 24 hours
with the consumer-activated controls other than the compartment
temperature control set to establish various operating
characteristics.
1.8 ``HRF-1-2008'' means AHAM Standard HRF-1-2008, Association
of Home Appliance Manufacturers, Energy and Internal Volume of
Refrigerating Appliances (2008), including Errata to Energy and
Internal Volume of Refrigerating Appliances, Correction Sheet issued
November 17, 2009. Only sections of HRF-1-2008 (incorporated by
reference; see Sec. 430.3) specifically referenced in this test
procedure are part of this test procedure. In cases where there is a
conflict, the language of the test procedure in this appendix takes
precedence over HRF-1-2008.
1.9 ``Long-time automatic defrost'' means an automatic defrost
system where successive defrost cycles are separated by 14 hours or
more of compressor operating time.
1.10 ``Quick freeze'' means an optional feature on freezers that
is initiated manually. It bypasses the thermostat control and
operates continually until the feature is terminated either manually
or automatically.
1.11 ``Separate auxiliary compartment'' means a freezer
compartment other than the first freezer compartment of a freezer
having more than one compartment. Access to a separate auxiliary
compartment is through a separate exterior door or doors rather than
through the door or doors of another compartment. Separate auxiliary
freezer compartments may not be larger than the first freezer
compartment.
1.12 ``Special compartment'' means any compartment without doors
directly accessible from the exterior, and with separate temperature
control that is not convertible from fresh food temperature range to
freezer temperature range.
1.13 ``Stabilization period'' means the total period of time
during which steady-state conditions are being attained or
evaluated.
1.14 ``Standard cycle'' means the cycle type in which the anti-
sweat heater switch, when provided, is set in the highest energy-
consuming position.
1.15 ``Variable defrost control'' means an automatic defrost
system in which successive defrost cycles are determined by an
operating condition variable or variables other than solely
compressor operating time. This includes any electrical or
mechanical device performing this function. A control scheme that
changes the defrost interval from a fixed length to an extended
length (without any intermediate steps) is not considered a variable
defrost control. A variable defrost control feature should predict
the accumulation of frost on the evaporator and react accordingly.
Therefore, the times between defrost should vary with different
usage patterns and include a continuum of lengths of time between
defrosts as inputs vary.
2. Test Conditions
2.1 Ambient Temperature. The ambient temperature shall be 90.0
1.0 [deg]F (32.2 0.6 [deg]C) during the
stabilization period and the test period.
2.2 Operational Conditions. The freezer shall be installed and
its operating conditions maintained in accordance with HRF-1-2008,
(incorporated by reference; see Sec. 430.3), sections 5.3 through
section 5.5.5.5 (but excluding sections 5.5.5.2 and 5.5.5.4). The
quick freeze option shall be switched off except as specified in
section 3.1. Additional clarifications are noted in sections 2.3
through 2.6.
2.3 Anti-Sweat Heaters. The anti-sweat heater switch is to be on
during one test and off during a second test. In the case of an
electric freezer with variable anti-sweat heater control, the
standard cycle energy use shall be the result of the calculation
described in 6.2.2.
2.4 The cabinet and its refrigerating mechanism shall be
assembled and set up in accordance with the printed consumer
instructions supplied with the cabinet. Set-up of the freezer shall
not deviate from these instructions, unless explicitly required or
allowed by this test procedure. Specific required or allowed
deviations from such set-up include the following:
(a) Connection of water lines and installation of water filters
are not required;
(b) Clearance requirements from surfaces of the product shall be
as described in section 2.6 below;
(c) The electric power supply shall be as described in HRF-1-
2008 (incorporated by reference; see Sec. 430.3) section 5.5.1;
(d) Temperature control settings for testing shall be as
described in section 3 of this appendix. Settings for special
compartments shall be as described in section 2.5 of this appendix;
(e) The product does not need to be anchored or otherwise
secured to prevent tipping during energy testing;
(f) All the product's chutes and throats required for the
delivery of ice shall be free of packing, covers, or other blockages
that may be fitted for shipping or when the icemaker is not in use;
and
(g) Ice storage bins shall be emptied of ice.
For cases in which set-up is not clearly defined by this test
procedure, manufacturers must submit a petition for a waiver (see
section 7).
2.5 Special compartments shall be tested with controls set to
provide the coldest temperature. However, for special compartments
in which temperature control is achieved using the addition of heat
(including resistive electric heating, refrigeration system waste
heat, or heat from any other source, but excluding the transfer of
air from another part of the interior of the product) for any part
of the controllable temperature range of that compartment, the
product energy use shall be determined by averaging two sets of
tests. The first set of tests shall be conducted with such special
compartments at their coldest settings, and the second set of tests
shall be conducted with such special compartments at their warmest
settings. The requirements for the warmest or coldest temperature
settings of this section do not apply to features or functions
associated with temperature control (such as quick freeze) that are
initiated manually and terminated automatically within 168 hours.
2.6 The space between the back of the cabinet and a vertical
surface (the test room wall or simulated wall) shall be the minimum
distance in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions.
However, the clearance shall not be greater than 2 inches (51 mm)
from the plane of the cabinet's back panel to the vertical surface.
If permanent rear spacers extend further than this distance, the
appliance shall be located with the spacers in contact with the
vertical surface.
2.7 Steady State Condition. Steady-state conditions exist if the
temperature measurements taken at 4-minute intervals or less during
a stabilization period are not changing at a rate greater than 0.042
[deg]F (0.023 [deg]C) per hour as determined by the applicable
condition of A or B described below.
A--The average of the measurements during a 2-hour period if no
cycling occurs or during a number of complete repetitive compressor
cycles occurring through a period of no less than 2 hours is
compared to the average over an equivalent time period with 3 hours
elapsing between the two measurement periods.
B--If A above cannot be used, the average of the measurements
during a number of complete repetitive compressor cycles occurring
through a period of no less than 2 hours and including the last
complete cycle before a defrost period (or if no cycling occurs, the
average of the measurements during the last 2 hours before a defrost
period) are compared to the same averaging period before the
following defrost period.
3. Test Control Settings
3.1 Model with No User Operable Temperature Control. A test
shall be performed during which the compartment temperature and
energy use shall be measured. A second test shall be performed with
the temperature control electrically short circuited to cause the
compressor to run continuously. If the model has the quick freeze
option, this option must be used to bypass the temperature control.
3.2 Model with User Operable Temperature Control. Testing shall
be performed in accordance with one of the following sections using
the standardized temperature of 0.0 [deg]F (-17.8 [deg]C).
[[Page 78868]]
For the purposes of comparing compartment temperatures with
standardized temperatures, as described in sections 3.2.1 and 3.2.2,
the freezer compartment temperature shall be as specified in section
5.1.3.
3.2.1 A first test shall be performed with all temperature
controls set at their median position midway between their warmest
and coldest settings. For mechanical control systems, knob detents
shall be mechanically defeated if necessary to attain a median
setting. For electronic control systems, the test shall be performed
with all compartment temperature controls set at the average of the
coldest and warmest settings--if there is no setting equal to this
average, the setting closest to the average shall be used. If there
are two such settings equally close to the average, the higher of
these temperature control settings shall be used. A second test
shall be performed with all controls set at either their warmest or
their coldest setting (not electrically or mechanically bypassed),
whichever is appropriate, to attempt to achieve compartment
temperatures measured during the two tests which bound (i.e., one is
above and one is below) the standardized temperature. If the
compartment temperatures measured during these two tests bound the
standardized temperature, then these test results shall be used to
determine energy consumption. If the compartment temperature
measured with all controls set at their coldest setting is above the
standardized temperature, the tested unit fails the test and cannot
be rated. If the compartment temperature measured with all controls
set at their warmest setting is below the standardized temperature,
then the result of this test alone will be used to determine energy
consumption. Also see Table 1 below, which summarizes these
requirements.
Table 1--Temperature Settings for Freezers
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First test Second test
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Energy calculation
Settings Results Settings Results based on:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mid............................ Low.............. Warm............. Low.............. Second Test Only.
................. ................. High............. First and Second
Tests.
High............. Cold............. Low.............. First and Second
Tests.
................. ................. High............. No Energy Use Rating.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3.2.2 Alternatively, a first test may be performed with all
temperature controls set at their warmest setting. If the
compartment temperature is below the standardized temperature, then
the result of this test alone will be used to determine energy
consumption. If this condition is not met, then the unit shall be
tested in accordance with section 3.2.1.
4. Test Period
Tests shall be performed by establishing the conditions set
forth in section 2 and using the control settings as set forth in
section 3 above.
4.1 Nonautomatic Defrost. If the model being tested has no
automatic defrost system, the test time period shall start after
steady-state conditions have been achieved and be no less than 3
hours in duration. During the test period, the compressor motor
shall complete two or more whole compressor cycles. (A compressor
cycle is a complete ``on'' and a complete ``off'' period of the
motor.) If no ``off'' cycling will occur, as determined during the
stabilization period, the test period shall be 3 hours. If
incomplete cycling occurs (less than two compressor cycles during a
24-hour period), the results of the 24-hour period shall be used.
4.2 Automatic Defrost. If the model being tested has an
automatic defrost system, the test time period shall start after
steady-state conditions have been achieved and be from one point
during a defrost period to the same point during the next defrost
period. If the model being tested has a long-time automatic defrost
system, the alternate provisions of 4.2.1 may be used. If the model
being tested has a variable defrost control, the provisions of 4.2.2
shall apply.
4.2.1 Long-time Automatic Defrost. If the model being tested has
a long-time automatic defrost system, the two-part test described in
this section may be used. The first part is a stable period of
compressor operation that includes no portions of the defrost cycle,
such as precooling or recovery, that is otherwise the same as the
test for a unit having no defrost provisions (section 4.1). The
second part is designed to capture the energy consumed during all of
the events occurring with the defrost control sequence that are
outside of stable operation.
4.2.1.1 Cycling Compressor System. For a system with a cycling
compressor, the second part starts at the termination of the last
regular compressor ``on'' cycle. The average temperature of the
compartment measured from the termination of the previous compressor
``on'' cycle to the termination of the last regular compressor
``on'' cycle must be within 0.5 [deg]F (0.3 [deg]C) of the average
temperature of the compartment measured for the first part of the
test. If any compressor cycles occur prior to the defrost heater
being energized that cause the average temperature in the
compartment to deviate from the first part temperature by more than
0.5 [deg]F (0.3 [deg]C), these compressor cycles are not considered
regular compressor cycles and must be included in the second part of
the test. As an example, a ``precool'' cycle, which is an extended
compressor cycle that lowers the compartment temperature prior to
energizing the defrost heater, must be included in the second part
of the test. The test period for the second part of the test ends at
the initiation of the first regular compressor cycle after the
compartment temperatures have fully recovered to their stable
conditions. The average temperature of the compartment measured from
this initiation of the first regular compressor ``on'' cycle until
the initiation of the next regular compressor ``on'' cycle must be
within 0.5 [deg]F (0.3 [deg]C) of the average temperature of the
compartment measured for the first part of the test. The second part
of the test may be terminated after 4 hours if the above conditions
cannot be met. See Figure 1.
[[Page 78869]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16DE10.015
4.2.1.2 Non-cycling Compressor System. For a system with a non-
cycling compressor, the second part starts at a time before defrost
during stable operation when the compartment temperature is within
0.5 [deg]F (0.3 [deg]C) of the average temperature of the
compartment measured for the first part of the test. The second part
stops at a time after defrost during stable operation when the
compartment temperature is within 0.5 [deg]F (0.3 [deg]C) of the
average temperature of the compartment measured for the first part
of the test. The second part of the test may be terminated after 4
hours if the above conditions cannot be met. See Figure 2.
[[Page 78870]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16DE10.016
4.2.2 Variable Defrost Control. If the model being tested has a
variable defrost control system, the test shall consist of the same
two parts as the test for long-time automatic defrost (section
4.2.1).
5. Test Measurements
5.1 Temperature Measurements. Temperature measurements shall be
made at the locations prescribed in Figure 5-2 of HRF-1-2008
(incorporated by reference; see Sec. 430.3) and shall be accurate
to within 0.5 [deg]F (0.3[deg]C).
If the interior arrangements of the cabinet do not conform with
those shown in Figure 5.2 of HRF-1-2008, the product may be tested
by relocating the temperature sensors from the locations specified
in the figures to avoid interference with hardware or components
within the cabinet, in which case the specific locations used for
the temperature sensors shall be noted in the test data records
maintained by the manufacturer, and the certification report shall
indicate that non-standard sensor locations were used.
5.1.1 Measured Temperature. The measured temperature is to be
the average of all sensor temperature readings taken at a particular
point in time. Measurements shall be taken at regular intervals not
to exceed 4 minutes.
5.1.2 Compartment Temperature. The compartment temperature for
each test period shall be an average of the measured temperatures
taken during the test period as defined in section 4. For long-time
automatic defrost models, compartment temperature shall be that
measured in the first part of the test period specified in section
4.2.1. For models with variable defrost controls, compartment
temperatures shall be those measured in the first part of the test
period specified in section 4.2.2.
5.1.3 Freezer Compartment Temperature. The freezer compartment
temperature shall be calculated as:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16DE10.017
Where:
F is the total number of applicable freezer compartments, which
include the first freezer compartment and any number of separate
auxiliary freezer compartments;
TFi is the compartment temperature of freezer compartment
``i'' determined in accordance with section 5.1.2; and
VFi is the volume of freezer compartment ``i''.
5.2 Energy Measurements:
5.2.1 Per-Day Energy Consumption. The energy consumption in
kilowatt-hours per day for each test period shall be the energy
expended during the test period as specified in section 4 adjusted
to a 24-hour period. The adjustment shall be determined as follows:
5.2.1.1 Nonautomatic and Automatic Defrost Models. The energy
consumption in kilowatt-hours per day shall be calculated equivalent
to:
[[Page 78871]]
ET = (EP x 1440 x K)/T
Where:
ET = test cycle energy expended in kilowatt-hours per day;
EP = energy expended in kilowatt-hours during the test period;
T = length of time of the test period in minutes;
1440 = conversion factor to adjust to a 24-hour period in minutes
per day; and
K = dimensionless correction factor of 0.7 for chest freezers and
0.85 for upright freezers to adjust for average household usage.
5.2.1.2 Long-time Automatic Defrost. If the two-part test method
is used, the energy consumption in kilowatt-hours per day shall be
calculated equivalent to:
ET = (1440 x K x EP1/T1) + (EP2-(EP1 x T2/T1)) x K x (12/CT)
Where:
ET, 1440, and K are defined in section 5.2.1.1;
EP1 = energy expended in kilowatt-hours during the first part of the
test;
EP2 = energy expended in kilowatt-hours during the second part of
the test;
CT = defrost timer run time or compressor run time between defrosts
in hours required to cause it to go through a complete cycle,
rounded to the nearest tenth of an hour;
12 = conversion factor to adjust for a 50 percent run time of the
compressor in hours per day; and
T1 and T2 = length of time in minutes of the first and second test
parts respectively.
5.2.1.3 Variable Defrost Control. The energy consumption in
kilowatt-hours per day shall be calculated equivalent to:
ET = (1440 x K x EP1/T1) + (EP2 - (EP1 x T2/T1)) x K x (12/CT),
Where:
ET, K, and 1440 are defined in section 5.2.1.1;
EP1, EP2, T1, T2, and 12 are defined in section 5.2.1.2;
CT = (CTL x CTM)/(F x (CTM-
CTL) + CTL)
Where:
CTL = least or shortest compressor run time between
defrosts in hours rounded to the nearest tenth of an hour (greater
than or equal to 6 hours but less than or equal to 12 hours);
CTM = maximum compressor run time between defrosts in
hours rounded to the nearest tenth of an hour (greater than
CTL but not more than 96 hours);
F = ratio of per day energy consumption in excess of the least
energy and the maximum difference in per-day energy consumption and
is equal to 0.20.
For variable defrost models with no values for CTL and
CTM in the algorithm, the default values of 12 and 84
shall be used, respectively.
5.3 Volume Measurements. The total refrigerated volume, VT,
shall be measured in accordance with HRF-1-2008, (incorporated by
reference; see Sec. 430.3), section 3.30 and sections 4.2 through
4.3.
In the case of freezers with automatic icemakers, the volume
occupied by the automatic icemaker, including its ice storage bin,
is to be included in the volume measurement.
6. Calculation of Derived Results From Test Measurements
6.1 Adjusted Total Volume. The adjusted total volume, VA, for
freezers under test shall be defined as:
VA = VT x CF
Where:
VA = adjusted total volume in cubic feet;
VT = total refrigerated volume in cubic feet; and
CF = dimensionless correction factor of 1.76.
6.2 Average Per-Cycle Energy Consumption
6.2.1 The average per-cycle energy consumption for a cycle type
is expressed in kilowatt-hours per cycle to the nearest one
hundredth (0.01) kilowatt-hour and shall depend on the compartment
temperature attainable as shown below.
6.2.1.1 If the compartment temperature is always below 0.0
[deg]F (-17.8 [deg]C), the average per-cycle energy consumption
shall be equivalent to:
E = ET1 + IET
Where:
E = total per-cycle energy consumption in kilowatt-hours per day;
ET is defined in 5.2.1;
The number 1 indicates the test period during which the highest
compartment temperature is measured; and
IET, expressed in kilowatt-hours per cycle, equals 0.23 for a
product with an automatic icemaker and otherwise equals 0 (zero).
6.2.1.2 If one of the compartment temperatures measured for a
test period is greater than 0.0 [deg]F (17.8 [deg]C), the average
per-cycle energy consumption shall be equivalent to:
E = ET1 + ((ET2 - ET1) x (0.0 - TF1)/(TF2 - TF1)) + IET
Where:
E and IET are defined in 6.2.1.1 and ET is defined in 5.2.1;
TF = freezer compartment temperature determined according to 5.1.3
in degrees F;
The numbers 1 and 2 indicate measurements taken during the first and
second test period as appropriate; and
0.0 = standardized compartment temperature in degrees F.
6.2.2 Variable Anti-Sweat Heater Models. The standard cycle
energy consumption of an electric freezer with a variable anti-sweat
heater control (Estd), expressed in kilowatt-hours per
day, shall be calculated equivalent to:
Estd = E + (Correction Factor) where E is determined by
6.2.1.1, or 6.2.1.2, whichever is appropriate, with the anti-sweat
heater switch in the ``off'' position or, for a product without an
anti-sweat heater switch, the anti-sweat heater in its lowest energy
use state.
Correction Factor = (Anti-sweat Heater Power x System-loss Factor) x
(24 hrs/1 day) x (1 kW/1000 W)
Where:
Anti-sweat Heater Power = 0.034 * (Heater Watts at 5%RH)
+ 0.211 * (Heater Watts at 15%RH)
+ 0.204 * (Heater Watts at 25%RH)
+ 0.166 * (Heater Watts at 35%RH)
+ 0.126 * (Heater Watts at 45%RH)
+ 0.119 * (Heater Watts at 55%RH)
+ 0.069 * (Heater Watts at 65%RH)
+ 0.047 * (Heater Watts at 75%RH)
+ 0.008 * (Heater Watts at 85%RH)
+ 0.015 * (Heater Watts at 95%RH)
Heater Watts at a specific relative humidity = the nominal watts
used by all heaters at that specific relative humidity, 72 [deg]F
ambient (22.2 [deg]C), and DOE reference freezer (FZ) average
temperature of 0 [deg]F (-17.8 [deg]C).
System-loss Factor = 1.3
7. Test Procedure Waivers
To the extent that the procedures contained in this appendix do
not provide a means for determining the energy consumption of a
freezer, a manufacturer must obtain a waiver under 10 CFR 430.27 to
establish an acceptable test procedure for each such product. Such
instances could, for example, include situations where the test set-
up for a particular freezer basic model is not clearly defined by
the provisions of section 2. For details regarding the criteria and
procedures for obtaining a waiver, please refer to 10 CFR 430.27.
0
8. Appendix B1 to subpart B of part 430 is amended by:
0
a. Adding an introductory paragraph after the appendix heading;
0
b. Revising section 1. Definitions;
0
c. In section 2. Test Conditions, by:
0
1. Revising sections 2.1 and 2.2;
0
2. Redesignating section 2.3 as 2.7;
0
3. Adding new sections 2.3 through 2.6;
0
d. In section 3. Test Control Settings, by:
0
1. Revising sections 3.1, 3.2, and 3.2.1;
0
2. Removing section 3.3;
0
e. Revising section 4, Test Period;
0
f. In section 5, Test Measurements, by:
0
1. Revising sections 5.1, 5.1.2, 5.1.2.1, 5.1.2.2, 5.1.2.3, 5.2.1.2,
and 5.2.1.3;
0
2. Adding new section 5.1.3;
0
3. Removing section 5.2.1.4;
0
g. In section 6. Calculation of Derived Results From Test Measurements,
by:
0
1. Revising section 6.2.1.2;
0
2. Adding a new section 6.2.2
0
h. Adding new section 7, Waivers.
The additions and revisions read as follows:
Appendix B1 to Subpart B of Part 430--Uniform Test Method for Measuring
the Energy Consumption of Freezers
The provisions of Appendix B1 shall apply to all products
manufactured prior to the effective date of any amended standards
promulgated by DOE pursuant to Section
[[Page 78872]]
325(b)(4) of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, as
amended by the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (to be
codified at 42 U.S.C. 6295(b)(4)).
1. Definitions
Section 3, Definitions, of HRF-1-1979 (incorporated by
reference; see Sec. 430.3) applies to this test procedure.
1.1 Adjusted total volume'' means the product of, (1) the
freezer volume as defined in HRF-1-1979 in cubic feet, times (2) an
adjustment factor.
1.2 ``Anti-sweat heater'' means a device incorporated into the
design of a freezer to prevent the accumulation of moisture on
exterior or interior surfaces of the cabinet.
1.3 ``Anti-sweat heater switch'' means a user-controllable
switch or user interface which modifies the activation or control of
anti-sweat heaters.
1.4 ``Automatic Defrost'' means a system in which the defrost
cycle is automatically initiated and terminated, with resumption of
normal refrigeration at the conclusion of defrost operation. The
system automatically prevents the permanent formation of frost on
all refrigerated surfaces. Nominal refrigerated food temperatures
are maintained during the operation of the automatic defrost system.
1.5 ``Cycle'' means the period of 24 hours for which the energy
use of a freezer is calculated as though the consumer-activated
compartment temperature controls were set to maintain the
standardized temperature (see section 3.2).
1.6 ``Cycle type'' means the set of test conditions having the
calculated effect of operating a freezer for a period of 24 hours
with the consumer-activated controls other than the compartment
temperature control set to establish various operating
characteristics.
1.7 ``HRF-1-1979'' means the Association of Home Appliance
Manufacturers standard for household refrigerators, combination
refrigerator-freezers, and household freezers, also approved as an
American National Standard as a revision of ANSI B 38.1-1970. Only
sections of HRF-1-1979 (incorporated by reference; see Sec. 430.3)
specifically referenced in this test procedure are part of this test
procedure. In cases where there is a conflict, the language of the
test procedure in this appendix takes precedence over HRF-1-1979.
1.8 ``Long-time Automatic Defrost'' means an automatic defrost
system where successive defrost cycles are separated by 14 hours or
more of compressor-operating time.
1.9 ``Quick freeze'' means an optional feature on freezers that
is initiated manually. It bypasses the thermostat control and
operates continually until the feature is terminated either manually
or automatically.
1.10 ``Separate auxiliary compartment'' means a freezer
compartment other than the first freezer compartment of a freezer
having more than one compartment. Access to a separate auxiliary
compartment is through a separate exterior door or doors rather than
through the door or doors of another compartment. Separate auxiliary
freezer compartments may not be larger than the first freezer
compartment.
1.11 ``Special compartment'' means any compartment without doors
directly accessible from the exterior, and with separate temperature
control that is not convertible from fresh food temperature range to
freezer temperature range.
1.12 ``Stabilization Period'' means the total period of time
during which steady-state conditions are being attained or
evaluated.
1.13 ``Standard cycle'' means the cycle type in which the anti-
sweat heater switch, when provided, is set in the highest energy
consuming position.
1.14 ``Variable defrost control'' means an automatic defrost
system in which successive defrost cycles are determined by an
operating condition variable or variables other than solely
compressor operating time. This includes any electrical or
mechanical device performing this function. A control scheme that
changes the defrost interval from a fixed length to an extended
length (without any intermediate steps) is not considered a variable
defrost control. A variable defrost control feature should predict
the accumulation of frost on the evaporator and react accordingly.
Therefore, the times between defrost should vary with different
usage patterns and include a continuum of lengths of time between
defrosts as inputs vary.
* * * * *
2. Test Conditions
2.1 Ambient Temperature. The ambient temperature shall be 90.0
1.0 [deg]F (32.2 0.6 [deg]C) during the
stabilization period and the test period.
2.2 Operational Conditions. The freezer shall be installed and
its operating conditions maintained in accordance with HRF-1-1979,
(incorporated by reference; see Sec. 430.3), section 7.2 through
section 7.4.3.3 (but excluding section 7.4.3.2), except that the
vertical ambient gradient at locations 10 inches (25.4 cm) out from
the centers of the two sides of the unit being tested is to be
maintained during the test. Unless the area is obstructed by shields
or baffles, the gradient is to be maintained from 2 inches (5.1 cm)
above the floor or supporting platform to a height 1 foot (30.5 cm)
above the unit under test. Defrost controls are to be operative. The
quick freeze option shall be switched off except as specified in
section 3.1. Additional clarifications are noted in sections 2.3
through 2.6.
2.3 Anti-Sweat Heaters. The anti-sweat heater switch is to be on
during one test and off during a second test. In the case of an
electric freezer equipped with variable anti-sweat heater control,
the standard cycle energy use shall be the result of the calculation
described in 6.2.2.
2.4 The cabinet and its refrigerating mechanism shall be
assembled and set up in accordance with the printed consumer
instructions supplied with the cabinet. Set-up of the freezer shall
not deviate from these instructions, unless explicitly required or
allowed by this test procedure. Specific required or allowed
deviations from such set-up include the following:
(a) Connection of water lines and installation of water filters
are not required;
(b) Clearance requirements from surfaces of the product shall be
as specified in section 2.6 below;
(c) The electric power supply shall be as described in HRF-1-
1979 (incorporated by reference; see Sec. 430.3) section 7.4.1;
(d) Temperature control settings for testing shall be as
described in section 3 of this appendix. Settings for special
compartments shall be as described in section 2.5 of this appendix;
(e) The product does not need to be anchored or otherwise
secured to prevent tipping during energy testing; and
(f) All the product's chutes and throats required for the
delivery of ice shall be free of packing, covers, or other blockages
that may be fitted for shipping or when the icemaker is not in use.
For cases in which set-up is not clearly defined by this test
procedure, manufacturers must submit a petition for a waiver (see
section 7).
2.5 Special compartments shall be tested with controls set to
provide the coldest temperature. This requirement for the coldest
temperature does not apply to features or functions (such as quick
freeze) that are initiated manually and terminated automatically
within 168 hours.
2.6 The space between the back of the cabinet and a vertical
surface (the test room wall or simulated wall) shall be the minimum
distance in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions.
* * * * *
3. Test Control Settings
3.1 Model with No User Operable Temperature Control. A test
shall be performed during which the compartment temperature and
energy use shall be measured. A second test shall be performed with
the temperature control electrically short circuited to cause the
compressor to run continuously. If the model has the quick freeze
option, this option must be used to bypass the temperature control.
3.2 Model with User Operable Temperature Control. Testing shall
be performed in accordance with one of the following sections using
the standardized temperature of 0.0 [deg]F (-17.8 [deg]C).
For the purposes of comparing compartment temperatures with
standardized temperatures, as described in sections 3.2.1 through
3.2.3, the freezer compartment temperature shall be as specified in
section 5.1.3.
3.2.1 A first test shall be performed with all temperature
controls set at their median position midway between their warmest
and coldest settings. For mechanical control systems, knob detents
shall be mechanically defeated if necessary to attain a median
setting. For electronic control systems, the test shall be performed
with all compartment temperature controls set at the average of the
coldest and warmest settings--if there is no setting equal to this
average, the setting closest to the average shall be used. If there
are two such settings equally close to the average, the higher of
these temperature control settings shall be used. If the compartment
temperature measured during the first test is higher than the
standardized temperature, the second test shall be conducted with
the controls set at the coldest settings. If the compartment
temperature
[[Page 78873]]
measured during the first test is lower than the standardized
temperature, the second test shall be conducted with the controls
set at the warmest settings. If the compartment temperatures
measured during these two tests bound the standardized temperature,
then these test results shall be used to determine energy
consumption. If the compartment temperature measured with all
controls set at their coldest settings is above the standardized
temperature, a third test shall be performed with all controls set
at their warmest settings and the result of this test shall be used
with the result of the test performed with all controls set at their
coldest settings to determine energy consumption. If the compartment
temperature measured with all controls set at their warmest settings
is below the standardized temperature, then the result of this test
alone will be used to determine energy consumption.
* * * * *
4. Test Period
Tests shall be performed by establishing the conditions set
forth in section 2 and using the control settings as set forth in
section 3 of this appendix.
4.1 Nonautomatic Defrost. If the model being tested has no
automatic defrost system, the test time period shall start after
steady-state conditions have been achieved and be no less than 3
hours in duration. During the test period, the compressor motor
shall complete two or more whole compressor cycles. A compressor
cycle is a complete ``on'' and a complete ``off'' period of the
motor. If no ``off'' cycling will occur, as determined during the
stabilization period, the test period shall be 3 hours. If
incomplete cycling occurs (less than two compressor cycles during a
24-hour period), the results of the 24-hour period shall be used.
4.2 Automatic Defrost. If the model being tested has an
automatic defrost system, the test time period shall start after
steady-state conditions have been achieved and be from one point
during a defrost period to the same point during the next defrost
period. If the model being tested has a long-time automatic defrost
system, the alternate provisions of 4.2.1 may be used. If the model
being tested has a variable defrost control, the provisions of 4.2.2
shall apply.
4.2.1 Long-time Automatic Defrost. If the model being tested has
a long-time automatic defrost system, the two-part test described in
this section may be used. The first part is the same as the test for
a unit having no defrost provisions (section 4.1). The second part
would start when a defrost is initiated when the compressor ``on''
cycle is terminated prior to start of the defrost heater and
terminates at the second turn ``on'' of the compressor or 4 hours
from the initiation of the defrost heater, whichever comes first.
4.2.2 Variable Defrost Control. If the model being tested has a
variable defrost control system, the test shall consist of the same
two parts as the test for long-time automatic defrost (section
4.2.1).
5. Test Measurements
5.1 Temperature Measurements. Temperature measurements shall be
made at the locations prescribed in Figure 7.2 of HRF-1-1979
(incorporated by reference; see Sec. 430.3) and shall be accurate
to within 0.5 [deg]F (0.3 [deg]C).
If the interior arrangements of the cabinet do not conform with
those shown in Figure 7.2 of HRF-1-1979, the product may be tested
by relocating the temperature sensors from the locations specified
in the figures to avoid interference with hardware or components
within the cabinet, in which case the specific locations used for
the temperature sensors shall be noted in the test data records
maintained by the manufacturer, and the certification report shall
indicate that non-standard sensor locations were used.
* * * * *
5.1.2 Compartment Temperature. The compartment temperature for
each test period shall be an average of the measured temperatures
taken during one or more complete compressor cycles. One compressor
cycle is one complete motor ``on'' and one complete motor ``off''
period. For long-time automatic defrost models, compartment
temperature shall be that measured in the first part of the test
period specified in section 4.2.1. For models equipped with variable
defrost controls, compartment temperatures shall be those measured
in the first part of the test period specified in section 4.2.2.
5.1.2.1 The number of complete compressor cycles over which the
measured temperatures in a compartment are to be averaged to
determine compartment temperature shall be equal to the number of
minutes between measured temperature readings rounded up to the next
whole minute or a number of complete compressor cycles over a time
period exceeding 1 hour. One of the compressor cycles shall be the
last complete compressor cycle during the test period before start
of the defrost control sequence for products with automatic defrost.
5.1.2.2 If no compressor cycling occurs, the compartment
temperature shall be the average of the measured temperatures taken
during the last 32 minutes of the test period.
5.1.2.3 If incomplete compressor cycling occurs (less than one
compressor cycle), the compartment temperature shall be the average
of all readings taken during the last 3 hours of the last complete
compressor ``on'' period.
5.1.3 Freezer Compartment Temperature. The freezer compartment
temperature shall be calculated as:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16DE10.018
Where:
F is the total number of applicable freezer compartments, which
include the first freezer compartment and any number of separate
auxiliary freezer compartments;
TFi is the compartment temperature of freezer compartment
``i'' determined in accordance with section 5.1.2; and
VFi is the volume of freezer compartment ``i''.
* * * * *
5.2.1.2 Long-time Automatic Defrost. If the two part test method
is used, the energy consumption in kilowatt-hours per day shall be
calculated equivalent to:
ET = (1440 x K x EP1/T1) + (EP2-EP1 x T2/T1)) x K x (12/CT)
Where:
ET, 1440, and K are defined in section 5.2.1.1;
EP1 = energy expended in kilowatt-hours during the first part of the
test;
EP2 = energy expended in kilowatt-hours during the second part of
the test;
CT = defrost timer run time or compressor run time between defrosts
in hours required to cause it to go through a complete cycle,
rounded to the nearest tenth of an hour;
12 = conversion factor to adjust for a 50 percent run time of the
compressor in hours per day; and
T1 and T2 = length of time in minutes of the first and second test
parts respectively.
5.2.1.3 Variable Defrost Control. The energy consumption in
kilowatt-hours per day shall be calculated equivalent to:
ET = (1440 x K x EP1/T1) + (EP2-(EP1 x T2/T1)) x K x (12/CT),
Where:
ET, K, and 1440 are defined in section 5.2.1.1 and EP1, EP2, T1, T2,
and 12 are defined in section 5.2.1.2.
CT = (CTL x CTM)/(Fx (CTM-
CTL) + CTL)
Where:
CTL = least or shortest compressor run time between
defrosts in hours rounded to the nearest tenth of an hour (greater
than or equal to 6 hours but less than or equal to 12 hours);
CTM = maximum compressor run time between defrosts in
hours rounded to the nearest tenth of an hour (greater than
CTL but not more than 96 hours);
F = ratio of per day energy consumption in excess of the least
energy and the maximum difference in per-day energy consumption and
is equal to 0.20.
For variable defrost models with no values for CTL and
CTM in the algorithm, the default values of 12 and 84
shall be used, respectively.
* * * * *
6. Calculation of Derived Results From Test Measurements
* * * * *
6.2.1.2 If one of the compartment temperatures measured for a
test period is greater than 0.0 [deg]F (17.8 [deg]C), the average
per-cycle energy consumption shall be equivalent to:
E = ET1 + ((ET2 - ET1) x (0.0 - TF1)/(TF2 - TF1))
Where:
E is defined in 6.2.1.1;
ET is defined in 5.2.1;
TF = freezer compartment temperature determined according to 5.1.3
in degrees F;
The numbers 1 and 2 indicate measurements taken during the first and
second test period as appropriate; and
[[Page 78874]]
0.0 = Standardized compartment temperature in degrees F.
* * * * *
6.2.2 Variable Anti-Sweat Heater Models. The standard cycle
energy consumption of an electric freezer with a variable anti-sweat
heater control (Estd), expressed in kilowatt-hours per
day, shall be calculated equivalent to:
Estd = E + (Correction Factor) where E is determined by
6.2.1.1, or 6.2.1.2, whichever is appropriate, with the anti-sweat
heater switch in the ``off'' position or, for a product without an
anti-sweat heater switch, the anti-sweat heater in its lowest energy
use state.
Correction Factor = (Anti-sweat Heater Power x System-loss Factor) x
(24 hrs/1 day) x (1 kW/1000 W)
Where:
Anti-sweat Heater Power = 0.034 * (Heater Watts at 5%RH)
+ 0.211 * (Heater Watts at 15%RH)
+ 0.204 * (Heater Watts at 25%RH)
+ 0.166 * (Heater Watts at 35%RH)
+ 0.126 * (Heater Watts at 45%RH)
+ 0.119 * (Heater Watts at 55%RH)
+ 0.069 * (Heater Watts at 65%RH)
+ 0.047 * (Heater Watts at 75%RH)
+ 0.008 * (Heater Watts at 85%RH)
+ 0.015 * (Heater Watts at 95%RH)
Heater Watts at a specific relative humidity = the nominal watts
used by all heaters at that specific relative humidity, 72 [deg]F
(22.2 [deg]C) ambient, and DOE reference freezer (FZ) average
temperature of 0 [deg]F (-17.8 [deg]C).
System-loss Factor = 1.3.
* * * * *
7. Test Procedure Waivers
To the extent that the procedures contained in this appendix do
not provide a means for determining the energy consumption of a
freezer, a manufacturer must obtain a waiver under 10 CFR 430.27 to
establish an acceptable test procedure for each such product. Such
instances could, for example, include situations where the test set-
up for a particular freezer basic model is not clearly defined by
the provisions of section 2. For details regarding the criteria and
procedures for obtaining a waiver, please refer to 10 CFR 430.27.
0
9. In Sec. 430.32, revise paragraph (a) introductory text to read as
follows:
Sec. 430.32 Energy and water conservation standards and their
effective dates.
* * *
(a) Refrigerators/refrigerator-freezers/freezers. These standards
do not apply to refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers with total
refrigerated volume exceeding 39 cubic foot (1104 liters) or freezers
with total refrigerated volume exceeding 30 cubic foot (850 liters).
The energy standards as determined by the equations of the following
table shall be rounded off to the nearest kWh per year. If the equation
calculation is halfway between the nearest two kWh per year values, the
standard shall be rounded up to the higher of these values.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2010-30071 Filed 12-15-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P